What's new

Failure of India to Resist the Turkic Conquests

hinduism was born after scythians annihilated the ganges people who followed the now dead vedic religion . The survivors left vedism to save themselves and adopted local aboriginal pagan practices which are also part of your hinduism today...initially it was brahmanism, it changed over time later turned into early forms of hinduism..Contemporary hinduism practiced today was totally different from vedism
You are telling this to hindu , i know about bhakti movement and other ways to keep the religion alive , it's called accommodating .And it was not so simple .
Infact , vedic religion died after Buddhism came into being .
By the time Huns came it was already a major force.
Who told you , that we don't follow vedic practices ?
Vedic rituals are still followed today .
hinduism was born after scythians annihilated the ganges people who followed the now dead vedic religion . The survivors left vedism to save themselves and adopted local aboriginal pagan practices which are also part of your hinduism today...initially it was brahmanism, it changed over time later turned into early forms of hinduism..Contemporary hinduism practiced today was totally different from vedism
No Scythians didn't annihilate people in the gangetic region , again wrong argument.
Gods we worship have been same for last 3000 years , anyways Scythians worhsippd Greek gods , Hindus don't worship Greek gods , do they ?Choose your words wisely , next time when you use words like annihalated.
 
You are telling this to hindu , i know about bhakti movement and other ways to keep the religion alive , it's called accommodating .And it was not so simple .
Infact , vedic religion died after Buddhism came into being .
By the time Huns came it was already a major force.
Who told you , that we don't follow vedic practices ?
Vedic rituals are still followed today .

No Scythians didn't annihilate people in the gangetic region , again wrong argument.
Gods we worship have been same for last 3000 years , anyways Scythians worhsippd Greek gods , Hindus don't worship Greek gods , do they ?Choose your words wisely , next time when you use words like annihalated.
who was god of vedic? what was its name?
hindus dont worship vedic god/s. shiva ram ganesh are not vedic gods.
 
who was god of vedic? what was its name?
hindus dont worship vedic god/s. shiva ram ganesh are not vedic gods.
Ah , sure comrade
Some vedic gods like Indra yama , rudra agni vayu , the ashwins are all worshipped today.
Every evening , we light a diya as an offer to agni .
Then there are various havans or houma , sometimes with sacrifices to goat or Buffalo etc .
Many Vedic gods are not worshipped like indra , he is an arrogant god according to me .
In section 7.99 of Rig-Veda , vishnu is the god which separates heaven and earth

Shiva is non other than rudra, ram is not worshipped generally anywhere .
Rammandir is a political movement although he is avatar of vishnu.
Regards .
 
I said they have ancestry, do you have a basic understanding how its different from known family lineage/tree.. But many pashtuns confuse it with origin place of their tribe( like you just now) , often for political reasons.They also have ancestry from south indians so whats your point and of course the bigger chunk of ancestry is Baloch + Ancestral south indian which can be used to determine a different conclusion.. So regardless how you circle around the events of last 600 years Im talking about pashtuns from a perspective of last 3000 years where they may have moved east west north and south back and forth and we all still say the origin of pashtuns are obscure but you your fellows are bent on proving that origin was from across the border with absolutely no material evidence eventhough it directly conflicts with your qais abdur rasheed theory ..We can keep talking about Duranis on Pakistan side claim toba achakzai(Pakistan) as the birth place of their tribe while Afghan duranis on other side considerring afghan side birthplace ..this war will go on till people like you exist..... ..funny you omit peshawar out of the budhist region considering it was always khowar people city.
And yes FATA is now kpk so you are wrong and thanks for accepting it.. Meanwhile I will wait for any khatak here on the forum to come and reply you regarding the trash scholarly debate that has been used to usurp each others land over hundreds of years.Khhattaks are mentioned by greeks as satragadiye and I'm sure greeks weren't bribed by khataks to be declared pactiyan and they were living aroundindus as per records. AL BERUNI was not a gora.. as per him pakhtun were living all the way upto sindh and even in mainland sindh and punjab around late 900s thats also why your scholars are biased , proves the point that anything coming out from locals has to be judged from neutral spectator..And british excavated most of the sites for you during 1800s , you granted them right to do so and accepted their neutrality. It's not me but your idealogues who accepted the goras to work on your heritage, but because history was not as sweet they rather considered to burry it.

So if ur current location is abc and ur ancestory is xyz, how can ur origin place be abc?? Doesnt tracking ancestory means tracking place of origin. Since u have backtracked on ur KPK claim, now let me tell u why i disnt mention Peshawar, its because Peshawar historically have been part of Afghanistan (not too far back). I am telling u pashtuns moved to the northen KPK around 600 years ago and u go 3000 years back and talk of southern KPK and ghor and sulaiman mountain lolz. The whole human history is full of migration, why is that hard for u? We arw not hell bent on proving anything but some things are straight forward. Why does it offend u to find pashtuns are not indigenous to the current areas? Why would it benefit us if we prove we r not indigenous? If anything, in cureent times, Pakistani pashtuns hate Afghanistan pashtuns. What u think we try to prove? Have u even studied anything? Do u know the yousafzai pashtuns fought with Afghanistan emir and have been enemies for long, ever wondered why all these northern pashtuns stood with Pakistan and jinnah instead of Afghanistan. You lack the knowledge and are biased as well, u are suspicious there is a political agenda behind it and u can never think clearly with suspicion. Among all the south asian nations, pashtuns are the ones that give great importance to lineage and ancestory. And while the average punjabi or central or south indian may not even know the name of their great grand father, pashtuns have a culture of keeping their lineage up untill a thousand years. So its not difficult to research and find things. Yes beyond that it gets murkier.
I also dont understand what u mean by political reasons? I also dont believe the qais abir rasheed story, since i cant find anything about it in hadees. You see the problem with u is u look at history with a bias and maybe a jealousy factor, while i look at it objectively. The oldest pashtun text is 10,000 years old, the stories and songs mention one God. Pashtuns could have been anywhere in 900, whats ur point? Naturally pashtuns are a migrating nation, they love to take over new places, its something all humans do to some degree. FATA recently became KPK and historically was part of Afghanistan, how does it prove me wrong? You are going around in cricles bro, without any point to prove.
If u dont know the recent gora history then i guess how ud know anything beyond. We allowed them to excavate? And then burried it? Lolz what r u even talking abt?? Gora ruling Hindustan did what he wanted, if anything, the only fair resistance was given by pashtuns and then they left, who burried it? All the archeological sites are there for ppl to visit. This is not something u hide, there are open seminars every year, scholars provide their point of view. While talking abt a group's history, its imperative to take the local versions into consideration, especially written stuff. Id argue the same, outsiders are more biased. Historically, turks, persians and brits been beaten by pashtuns, if anything, one shouldn't believe their biased versions.
 
History is not a fact, its a narrative. I am not one of those who portray fairytales but i am also not one of those who blindly believed what goras wrote. They were outsiders and recorded what they thought, without input of local knowledge. My point in this theead is singular and that is that pashtuns are not indigenous to KPK. This theory is widely accepted by pashtun scholars and historians. I attended a conference on it in Peshawar university pashto deppt. It was about how yousafzais migrated from Afghanistan and managed to build a yousafzai empire in current northern KPK. The famous personalities were discussed. But gora sahab has written that yousafzais were indigenous to the north KPK which is totally wrong. The main enemy of yousafzai were the mughals, and the famous mughal general beerbal was killed in a war with yousafzais.

You are right to some extent and wrong in other. Vast majority of Khorasan/Afghanistan isn't pashtun and neither is Kabul so you are right, KP and north eastern Afghanistan was not pashtun till 15th century but tajik, hindu, turk etc. Pashtuns originated from Suleiman mountains in north of Balochistan and maybe some parts of south KP. They didn't come from Israel or Ghor/Khorasan/Afghanistan. There is also mention of people living in sulaiman moutains in history books, Bruni described them as some sort of hindus. So pashtuns were not Abrahamic but converted to Islam after Turkic conquests.
 
You are right to some extent and wrong in other. Vast majority of Khorasan/Afghanistan isn't pashtun and neither is Kabul so you are right, KP and north eastern Afghanistan was not pashtun till 15th century but tajik, hindu, turk etc. Pashtuns originated from Suleiman mountains in north of Balochistan and maybe some parts of south KP. They didn't come from Israel or Ghor/Khorasan/Afghanistan. There is also mention of people living in sulaiman moutains in history books, Bruni described them as some sort of hindus. So pashtuns were not Abrahamic but converted to Islam after Turkic conquests.

They could have been anyone living there. Ghor/khurasan is not far from sulaiman mountains. There were also pashtuns in western Afghanistan and even in persia. The reason why i say pashtuns were monotheists because thousands of years old tapay or poetry. They talk of believing in one God. The reason pashtuns converted to Islam as a whole nation is because they found Islam exactly the same as their beliefs of the time. If pashtuns were hindus or budhists, its not possible that all of them would have converted and there would have been non Muslim pashtuns. It doesn't affect anything since we are muslim but even our folk tales of ancestors are about believing in ome God.
 
So if ur current location is abc and ur ancestory is xyz, how can ur origin place be abc?? Doesnt tracking ancestory means tracking place of origin. Since u have backtracked on ur KPK claim, now let me tell u why i disnt mention Peshawar, its because Peshawar historically have been part of Afghanistan (not too far back). I am telling u pashtuns moved to the northen KPK around 600 years ago and u go 3000 years back and talk of southern KPK and ghor and sulaiman mountain lolz. The whole human history is full of migration, why is that hard for u? We arw not hell bent on proving anything but some things are straight forward. Why does it offend u to find pashtuns are not indigenous to the current areas? Why would it benefit us if we prove we r not indigenous? If anything, in cureent times, Pakistani pashtuns hate Afghanistan pashtuns. What u think we try to prove? Have u even studied anything? Do u know the yousafzai pashtuns fought with Afghanistan emir and have been enemies for long, ever wondered why all these northern pashtuns stood with Pakistan and jinnah instead of Afghanistan. You lack the knowledge and are biased as well, u are suspicious there is a political agenda behind it and u can never think clearly with suspicion. Among all the south asian nations, pashtuns are the ones that give great importance to lineage and ancestory. And while the average punjabi or central or south indian may not even know the name of their great grand father, pashtuns have a culture of keeping their lineage up untill a thousand years. So its not difficult to research and find things. Yes beyond that it gets murkier.
I also dont understand what u mean by political reasons? I also dont believe the qais abir rasheed story, since i cant find anything about it in hadees. You see the problem with u is u look at history with a bias and maybe a jealousy factor, while i look at it objectively. The oldest pashtun text is 10,000 years old, the stories and songs mention one God. Pashtuns could have been anywhere in 900, whats ur point? Naturally pashtuns are a migrating nation, they love to take over new places, its something all humans do to some degree. FATA recently became KPK and historically was part of Afghanistan, how does it prove me wrong? You are going around in cricles bro, without any point to prove.
If u dont know the recent gora history then i guess how ud know anything beyond. We allowed them to excavate? And then burried it? Lolz what r u even talking abt?? Gora ruling Hindustan did what he wanted, if anything, the only fair resistance was given by pashtuns and then they left, who burried it? All the archeological sites are there for ppl to visit. This is not something u hide, there are open seminars every year, scholars provide their point of view. While talking abt a group's history, its imperative to take the local versions into consideration, especially written stuff. Id argue the same, outsiders are more biased. Historically, turks, persians and brits been beaten by pashtuns, if anything, one shouldn't believe their biased versions.
No its not the same..ancestry is based on DNA. different components take you to different origins.( that may later converge at africa). What we have been talking about is heritage based on culture , family trees and migrations..Pashtun heritage origins are obscure we are not sure if its present day Pakistan afghanistan or somewhere else.And the reason we are discussing this is because many afghanistan nationals claim their country to be the origin of pashtuns and this was the wild card used in pashtunistan movement and it will continue to be misused in fiuture for greater Afghanistan. . And these Afghans from across the border as local muhajirs lay claim on Peshawar under the same pretext. So when you move to your last resort 'it was part of Afghanistan' lets clarify there was no state/kingdom called Afghansitan till 1820s and within some years Peshawar was under control of Sikhs, and later on under British..so how does afghanistan claim peshawar?...Before 1820s it was part of Durrani kingdom lead by Abdali who never claimed to be an afghan. Its old name was Kabulistan..It was fragmented.. with other regional names like zabulistan. Afgan was name of one of the major peoples living there in south..It was never used to identify the whole regions esp. partial aryana which had its own identity in past and today comes under afghanistan( ironically). I have another source for you..Ibne Batuta..he was not a GORA he also confirmed presence of afghan/pashtuns towns in present day Pakistan thats quite before your supposed tribal migrations.Another non gora Masud saad salman the first urdu poet from ghanzavid capital lahore in 100wrote a poem called 'kishwar e afghan'(afghan lands) for a region from ghazni to indus. Lol whats do you have that i should be jealous of, how do you even conclude im not pashtun and whats that got to do here. Im pretty free of the biases some of you have woven around yoursleves to hide 'shame'..It takes quite an effort and self reflection to achieve that ..Considering your oneself exalted and the others weak has caused suffering within pashtuns, this has to end. I would definitely like to see the objectivity. Where is that 10000 year old pashtun text.why would you even call it pashtun text when its some old dead language from which you probably borrowed a word ..whats the difference between you and those indians making tall claims like this..Goras couldnt rule afghanistan?..bro they ruled afghansitan with their puppet kings..Afghasnitan was a british protectorate..Pashtun unfortunately lost wars and gave up their land and sovereignty.it was made a buffer state left by tsar russians and british to fight via triabals so two powers dont border each other and start the 'great war'...Afghanistan only got independence from british due to global events like world war 1. What was afghanistan doing during the mutiny of 1857..helping the british by not harboring the punjabi rebels. and helping brits attack persia.Always read history without a frame of mind to gain a superficial outcomes like never conquered never defeated. I dont want to further talk on this issue.Readers can very well judge history with their own eyes and not a particular lens.
 
Last edited:
No its not the same..ancestry is based on DNA. different components take you to different origins.( that may later converge at africa). What we have been talking about is heritage based on culture , family trees and migrations..Pashtun heritage origins are obscure we are not sure if its present day Pakistan afghanistan or somewhere else.And the reason we are discussing this is because many afghanistan nationals claim their country to be the origin of pashtuns and this was the wild card used in pashtunistan movement and it will continue to be misused in fiuture for greater Afghanistan. . And these Afghans from across the border as local muhajirs lay claim on Peshawar under the same pretext. So when you move to your last resort 'it was part of Afghanistan' lets clarify there was no state/kingdom called Afghansitan till 1820s and within some years Peshawar was under control of Sikhs, and later on under British..so how does afghanistan claim peshawar?...Before 1820s it was part of Durrani kingdom lead by Abdali who never claimed to be an afghan. Its old name was Kabulistan..It was fragmented.. with other regional names like zabulistan. Afgan was name of one of the major peoples living there in south..It was never used to identify the whole regions esp. partial aryana which had its own identity in past and today comes under afghanistan( ironically). I have another source for you..Ibne Batuta..he was not a GORA he also confirmed presence of afghan/pashtuns towns in present day Pakistan thats quite before your supposed tribal migrations.Another non gora Masud saad salman the first urdu poet from ghanzavid capital lahore in 100wrote a poem called 'kishwar e afghan'(afghan lands) for a region from ghazni to indus. Lol whats do you have that i should be jealous of, how do you even conclude im not pashtun and whats that got to do here. Im pretty free of the biases pashtuns have woven around themsleves to hide 'shame'..It takes quite an effort and self reflection to achieve that ..Considering your oneself exalted and the others weak has caused suffering within pashtuns, this has to end. I would definitely like to see the objectivity. Where is that 10000 year old pashtun text.why would you even call it pashtun text when its some old dead language from which you probably borrowed a word ..whats the difference between you and those indians making tall claims like this..Goras couldnt rule afghanistan?..bro they ruled afghansitan with their puppet kings..Afghasnitan was a british protectorate..Pashtun unfortunately lost wars and gave up their land and sovereignty.it was made a buffer state left by tsar russians and british to fight via triabals so two powers dont border each other and start the 'great war'...Afghanistan only got independence from british due to global events like world war 1. What was afghanistan doing during the mutiny of 1857..helping the british by not harboring the punjabi rebels. and helping brits attack persia.Always read history without a frame of mind to gain a superficial outcomes like never conquered never defeated. I dont want to further talk on this issue.Readers can very well judge history with their own eyes and not a particular lens.

I was right, u do have jealousy or mental bias. The whole discussion has been around the concept of place of origin of pashtuns, where did i talk about pashtuns being exalted?? How does evwn this discussion lead to one being superior? Ur hatred and jealousy is the reason u cant understand, u have this concept in u and thus u base the discussion by having this bias in ur heart. Even if pashtuns originated from Afghanistan, how does it help them claim KPK? Or greater Afghanistan? If anything, it negates their claim on KPK because pashtuns are not indigenous to KPK. You think im not aware of history? I was the one to tell u abt wars between yousafzai pashtuns and Afghanistan pashtuns. It were Afghanistan kings that betrayed their own pashtun brothers east of durandline by becoming paid puppets of brits. The pashtuns resisting brits were not supported by Afghanistan emirs. You have weird and dumb ideas and in fear of that u try to find excuses to change history. I have also never claimed pashtuns to be unbeatable or anything. Having place of origin or place from where we migrated doznt make them own us or doznt make us own them. Today we r Pakistanis and more so than other races. U r insecure and that has made u blind to reality and facts. Have a nice day.
 
They could have been anyone living there. Ghor/khurasan is not far from sulaiman mountains. There were also pashtuns in western Afghanistan and even in persia. The reason why i say pashtuns were monotheists because thousands of years old tapay or poetry. They talk of believing in one God. The reason pashtuns converted to Islam as a whole nation is because they found Islam exactly the same as their beliefs of the time. If pashtuns were hindus or budhists, its not possible that all of them would have converted and there would have been non Muslim pashtuns. It doesn't affect anything since we are muslim but even our folk tales of ancestors are about believing in ome God.

Again this is typical Pakistani trait, always looking for some mythical origins outside of this land without any proof genetically or otherwise. Sulaiman moutains was barren and not many people lived there. So small number of tribes converted to Islam at once after Turkic conquests. Ghoris were bhudists originally but converted to Islam, they were likely some sort of Tajiks.
 
They simply didn't have the know how in warfare and also they couldn't match the invaders in organistation and progression. They know about empire building and warfare better then the Indians who were newbies compared to them. Besides the superior Pathans and Punjabis were allied with the Turkics because they were muslims at that point for centuries including the tajiks hence they were outmatched from the get go.. A globalistation happened before their invasion but had the Pathans, Tajiks and Punjabis not converted none of this would have occured
 
Last edited:
The Turks actually showed a superior success in settling in India.
 
The Turks actually showed a superior success in settling in India.

Becasue they had a network of globalistation in order already hence it was very advanced and recruit talent pool from around the world in that period which extended their stay nearly to 1000 years
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom