Thread by @Pashz7

Manzoor Ahmad Pashteen enlightening himself by reading Pata Khazana, a forgery.

— a thread

Muhammad Hotak, the compiler of Pata Khazana, writes, "I started to write the book on 16-Jamadi-al-Sani, 1141 H, and it was "Friday".

Qalandar Mohmand pointed out that on 16-Jamadi-al-Sani, 1141 H, it was "Monday" not "Friday, so the book has been created by a forgerer.

The fact that on 16-Jamadi-al-Sani, 1141 H, it was Monday, can be verified on this website : islamicity.org/hijri-gregoria…

The 12th century poet "Khkaronday" of Pata Khazana, a courtier of Shahabuddin of Ghor, has used the word Attock in his poetry for the river Indus.

Qalandar Mohmand writes that there is no historical proof that river Indus has ever been referred to as Attock in 12th century

It was Akbar who first coined the term Attock. He built and named the fort Attock Banaras to rhyme it with Katak Banaras (a fort on extreme east of his empire)

Georg Morgenstierne, a specialist of Indo-Iranian languages, and author of "An Etymological Vocabulary of Pashto", was doubtful of the authenticity of Pata Khazana. He noticed grave linguistic and historical problems in it. He shared his views about Pata Khazana as follow :

The facsimile of Pata Khazana has letter "ځ" which came into being after the creation of Pata Khazana. Qalandar Mohmand refers to Abdul Shakoor Rashad who wrote "The present shape of the letter "ځ" of Pashto Alphabets , has been created by Wazir Muhammad Gul Khan Momand ". It

proves Pata Khazana to be forged document. It also proves "Tazkirat-ul-awlia" of Sulieman Mako to be a forged document which also has "ځ" letter. ["The Rowshnites and Pashto Literature", by Yar Muhammad Maghmoom Khattak]

Tarikh-i-Farishta, a 17th century source, says that Multan was ruled by an Afghan "Shaikh Hamid Lodi" in 10th century . The forgerer of Pata Khazana has utilized Tarikh-i-Farishta and has turned nephew of Shaikh Hamid "Lodi" into a Pashto-speaker & Pashto poet.

It has been demonstrated by H.G.Raverty long ago that Lodi was miswriting and Qasim Farihsta mistook Lawi (لوي) for Lodi (لودي) . The 10th century writers Masudi, Istakhari and Iban-i-Hawkal all says that the rulers of Multan were Arabs and they

were descended from Usman bin Lawi bin Ghalib, an Arab of the tribe of Quresh.

Masudi visited Multan in 912-913 AD and informs us that it was ruled by Qureshi Arabs, descendants of Usman, bin Lawi, bin Ghalib.

Ibn-i-Hawkal completed his work in 977 AD, writes that Emir of Multan was a Qureshi :-

Hudud-i-Alam of 982 A.D, also informs us that Multan was ruled by a Qureshi :-

Al-Madqisi visited Multan in 985 A.D and reported that ruler of Multan acknowledged Fatmid rulers of Egypt as their Caliphs (i.e they were Qaramites).

Amir Kror Suri , son of Amir Pulad Suri, is an 8th century Pashto poet from Ghor according to Pata Khazana. As per the creator of Pata Khazana, Suri was family name of the ruling dynasty of Ghor.

Suri was not the family name of the ruling clan of Ghor. The best authority on

lineage of rulers of Ghor, is Tabaqat-i-Nasiri written by al-Siraj Juzjani who spent his childhood in the harem of a Ghurid princess. He informs us that the ruling family of Ghor was called Shansabanian with reference to their paternal ancestor Shansab.

Tabakat-i-Nasiri does not refer to Amir Pulad as Suri. He is referred to as Shansabani and Ghuri.

"Suri" was a Malik of Ghor in 10th century. His son was Muhammad ibn Suri (Muhammad son of Suri), who was contemporary of Mahmud of Ghazni [Tabaqat-i-Nasiri]

Al-Utbi, secretary of Mahmud Ghaznavi, mentions him as "Ibn-i-Suri" (son of Suri).

The only other person in the family tree of the Shansabanis who had name of Suri besides Amir Suri, was Saif al-Din Suri. The ruling family is never referred to as Suri in Tabakat-i-Nasiri