,
5 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Regarding Ashraf, Ajlaf, and Arzal, the distinction is clear. Arab racist like Ibn Taiymaiya even went to the extent of invoking Arab superiority. You can see it among the Shi’a as well. An Ayatollah has to be an Arab, and wear a black turban. Lesser clerics wear white (1/n)
Ashraf category is basically related to Arab descent, but in India, it is loftily claimed by Persian descent and Central Asian descent as well. There is a lot of fraud in this too, as false claims have been made through centuries (2/n)
(3/n) For example, the Indian Quraishi has nothing to do with Quraish, the ruling tribe of Mecca. No Siddiqui has any connection with Abu Bakr, the first Caliph, and no Ansari has any connection with the Ansar of Medina. These are all treated as Ajlaf by the Sheikhs and Syeds
(4/n) The Ajlaf are the bulk, nearly 70% of Ms, all converted. Ashraf <5%. Arzal are those converted from lowest castes, and are treated as untouchables by Ashraf. These are about 20-25%, and are treated with contempt by the upper two. Recently, an SC IAS officer converted
(5/5) He took the surname Khan, but was denied. Was told that only high class converts could take the title of Khan as it was the title of ruling classes. He continues to write his original name, and nobody is sure of his status today. Lower two are collectively termed Pasmanda
