Why Pakistan chose Urdu over Persian as it's National Language ?

Feb 2019
88
Mumbai
#51
Urdu is the Muslim variant of Hindi, Hindus have their own linguistic traditions with Hindi. Urdu is an Indian heritage and Indians should oppose Pakistanis from stealing Indian heritage either its Urdu or cuisine that origin from Indian cities like Delhi, Lucknow or Hyderabad. If common religion give them right to claim Urdu, then Albanian or Azeri language can also become Pakistan's national language.
Interestingly, even 'Mughlai' cuisine is almost 100% native, a lot of what is passed of as 'Foreign' isnt foreign at all, just like biryani.
 

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,206
India
#52
Interestingly, even 'Mughlai' cuisine is almost 100% native, a lot of what is passed of as 'Foreign' isnt foreign at all, just like biryani.
Biryani is only a Persian word but no such ancestral dish of Biryani ever existed in Iran. Beside this, Mughal cuisine was not all known in Pakistan until Urdu speaking migrants from North India took them to Pakistan.
 
Likes: Kamayani
#54
the debate that mughlai cuisine is central asian/persian influenced is only shoved by eurocentric scholars who clearly seem to have an agenda to declare indian cuisine as ''western influenced'', they dont believe that such a cuisine can be developed by indians themselves so they needed a helping hand of the western people.

nearly every debate about india post islamic follows european centred views with minimum research and bing in denial, you can observe the same trend through out indian history.

gulab jamun has been declared ''persian'' just because it has the word ''gulab'' in it, jalebi is delcared as arabic since europeans argue the word seems to resemble zulabiya of western asia. there has been no effort to dig the actual ingredients of the dish from historic sources and compare them together.

the standard operating procedure is to read if the dish appears in indo islamic cook book, must be persian/arabic, dishes such as jalebi which dont apper are declared persian any how based on assumption that it is derived from the word ''zulabiya''.

i was debating the same with european wikipedia users, that if this is the norm, why is pulao which is a sanskrit word not declared indian based on the name, and the answer is, ''pulao'' recipe is first mentioned in arab and persian books, but funny thing is, the name ''pulao'' is never mentioned and it is assumed that its a pulao recipe.

so its just a eurocentric scholarship founded on biased europeans who probably have indophobia and nothing else.

if you go to the article ''curry'' you will see a deliberate mischief of inserting roman black pepper seasoning in its history, some eurocentric people even try claiming curry as ''roman'' invention. i think eurocentrism is much worse than even afrocentrism.

regards
 
Last edited:
Likes: Kamayani

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,206
India
#55
the debate that mughlai cuisine is central asian/persian influenced is only shoved by eurocentric scholars who clearly seem to have an agenda to declare indian cuisine as ''western influenced'', they dont believe that such a cuisine can be developed by indians themselves so they needed a helping hand of the western people.

nearly every debate about india post islamic follows european centred views with minimum research and bing in denial, you can observe the same trend through out indian history.

gulab jamun has been declared ''persian'' just because it has the word ''gulab'' in it, jalebi is delcared as arabic since europeans argue the word seems to resemble zulabiya of western asia. there has been no effort to dig the actual ingredients of the dish from historic sources and compare them together.

the standard operating procedure is to read if the dish appears in indo islamic cook book, must be persian/arabic, dishes such as jalebi which dont apper are declared persian any how based on assumption that it is derived from the word ''zulabiya''.

i was debating the same with european wikipedia users, that if this is the norm, why is pulao which is a sanskrit word not declared indian based on the name, and the answer is, ''pulao'' recipe is first mentioned in arab and persian books, but funny thing is, the name ''pulao'' is never mentioned and it is assumed that its a pulao recipe.

so its just a eurocentric scholarship founded on biased europeans who probably have indophobia and nothing else.

if you go to the article ''curry'' you will see a deliberate mischief of inserting roman black pepper seasoning in its history, some eurocentric people even try claiming curry as ''roman'' invention. i think eurocentrism is much worse than even afrocentrism.

regards
interesting thing, they can't name the ancestral dish to gulab jamun. Gulab Jamun can be traced to Bengali-Oriya cuisine instead. Even Paneer is claimed of foreign origin but Paneer is popular in Indian cuisine only.
 
Apr 2019
79
India
#56
it is not much different than lets say subhash kak claiming that the yazidis are ancient hindus or should i say infact far worse, seeing how a hindu yogi CM of UP stopped the maintenance of taj mahal and claiming that the monument had nothing to do with the indian culture and how all india's islamic history ruthlessly discarded, i would rather say that the identity crises of the indians is far worse than pakistanis, atleast pakistanis are owning their pre islamic scholars, will hindus ever own lets say amir khusrow etc while they keep owning total strangers like yazidhis, mayans as ''vedic people'' etc.

regards
Wait. You need to make better comparisons next time. How many people in India take Subhash Kak seriously? How big is his following?
Is he in anyway responsible for writing the narrative of Indian history?

Wait. Facepalm.
Don't Hindu like to own every Indian muslim who has contributed to it's culture? I read likes of Malik Mohammed Jayasi and Abdul Raheem Khan-e-khana in my school. Nobody doubts contribution of Ameer Khusrau. How many of us love to delight in the poetry of Mirza Ghalib.
You have very skewed idea about psyche of Indian people.
But if you ask us to sing praises of mauraders who took great pride in cutting heads of the 'infidels' then I'm sorry we can't do that.

Don't worry about Taj. It'll always be maintained because it brings revenue for the government and it has a fake love story attached to it. Islamic architecture is always given better preference by Indian governments even though there maybe be possibility of having an Indian temple/educational center beneath it. Meanwhile they steal the money from the temples and so most of them are in dilapidated state.

Indian history books give unfairly large coverage to foreign invaders while white-washing their crimes. No self respecting country does it.

because hindus are living with millions of muslims, who have ruled india for hundreds of years and have left their permanent foot print on indian culture, now deal with it.

regards
You are wrong muslims living in India are not foreigners and nobody is stopping them to take pride in the Islmic contribution of India. Pride is an intrinsic value and Indian people somehow still manages to maintain it even though they were living like second class citizens under successive foreign rulers. Why can't Indian muslim have it while living in secular and democratic India?
But it can't be shoved under throat of other people who are not intreseted?

Doesn't matter how ugly your mother is you will always like her better than beautiful mother of your friends. You have to deal with it !