RR, I actually respect the fact that you want to look beyond just the religious identity which is a welcome change for Pakistan as well as the the Islamic world as a whole.
I hope this discussion will be able to remain impersonal, objective, civilized and dispassionate and we will be able to discuss without getting personal or abusive towards each other or the respective countries and people. If you feel that is impossible, we better not have this discussion.
Now, obviously I don't agree with most of your views because I get the feeling that you tend to mix your personal opinions and theories too much with what ought to be an impersonal quest for knowledge. I don't see it as a competition to prove my point or to denigrate the other person or country or people.
I am engaging in this discussion in the spirit of sharing my views and learning from other's views if they carry merit and are not abusive and racist.
A lot of wind and accusations of racism.
Now if just because Indians thinking so doesn't make them Aryans, your thinking so would not make you or Pakistanis Aryans too.
I'm not basing any of my evidence on what Pakistanis think or what Indians think as you are. I'm basing it on proven genetic and anthropological evidence.
We have the weight of universally acknowledged history with thousands of years old scriptures behind us. What do you have? Your personal theories and opinions! You may have your opinions but it doesn't obligate me or anyone to accept them without solid proof.
"Your" scripture, the Rig Veda, is actually an ancient Pakistani scripture, as pointed out on another thread. Go find it and discuss it there if you want to. It was pointed out by a Harvard University professor that the Rig Veda was written somewhere in Pakistan (obvious by the geography of the surroundings).
At the cost of repeating myself, I will again say.
If you have a shred of evidence about the parts I made bold in your quote except "imo", pl. do share.
I hope it is not another "There are more hate crimes against Indians" type claim in another thread which you made and never proved in spite of being challenged repeatedly.
Wind
Now, I am not sure even you wrote that without winking and grimacing! Anyway I can't see it as anything beyond your personal thinking with a racist tinge, so hardly worthy of response. It will be like saying that Quran is not a Shia or a Sunni book, after the Shia-Sunni split or some such weird argument.
It wouldn't be like that at all. Shias believe in the Qu'ran, as do Sunnis..the same Qu'ran in fact. Hindus go round worshipping cows, follow a caste system etc,, all these things go against the basic tenets of the Rig Veda.
The (Pakistani-written) Rig Veda
If the brahmin, kshatriya, etc. initiated into my holy order of equality still subscribe to castes and exult therein, they behave like unregenerate beings.
Rig Veda 8.51.9
I am a poet, my father is a doctor, my mother a grinder of corn.
Rig Veda 9.112.3
The Gangetic/Bharat-written Manu Smrti (the first law of reference)
"The very birth of Brahman is the eternal incarnation of dharma. For he is born of the sake of dharma, and tends towards becoming one with Brahman".
Manu Smrti
Now I am going to predict something. You will quote something along the lines of Rig Veda 10 ("The Brahmin was his mouth, of both his arms was the Kshatriya made. His thighs became the Vaisya, and his feet the Shudra"), and say, the Rig Veda supports casteism. Nonsense, my caste-supporting friend. Even your own Hindu websites see this as a "Latter-day addition"
"Historians quote the purusha sukta of the RigVeda (10/90) as the earliest reference to the existence of caste system in vedic society. This verse must be definitely a latter day addition to the Rig Veda, for otherwise in the scripture we do not find much obsession about caste"
http://www.hinduwebsite.com/history/caste.asp
Therefore Hindus do not believe in the Rig Veda. I'll give you a more easier to understand example. If I invent a religion that says you must believe the moon is made out of cow meat, and someone else invents a religion that says you must believe the moon is made out of crab meat, these cannot be the same religion, because they have a different set of belief systems. You can only have continuity in religion if all the beliefs are the same from one continuation to the next. This does not happen in Hinduism. Rig Vedism is the complete opposite of the Bhadgavitic beliefs, and more recent Hindu scriptures. The caste example I showed above, where Pakistani Rig Vedic society did not have a caste system or belief in a caste system, whereas Hindu Manu Smritic society DID have a belief in the caste system is just one example to show that the Rig Veda is not a "Hindu book".
And I didn't say anything with a grimace. Stop assuming. The Rig Veda is a piece of Pakistan's history, and it was the Holy book of the people of Islam in pre-Islamic times. Of this there is little doubt. The Rig Veda has nothing to do with India/Bharat or Hinduism.
Let me know a Single respected scholar in the whole wide world with proof (even Pakistani) who has made this claim that Rigveda is not Indian but Pakistani! Pl. do not expect to be taken at face value when making such ridiculous claims which run contrary to the collective wisdom of the world. Or first get published and accepted in the academic world of history with such claims.
Just let me know, how many Pakistanis will agree with you!
Well, read up on Michael Witzel's research (Harvard University Professor). He's pretty adamant it was written in the Indus Valley. The geographical setting is almost uniquely set in the Indus Valley, the 5 rivers, this is why it was written in that same area..Pakistan.
You are trying to change the very basis on which Pakistan was formed without being explicit about it, which was that Indian Muslims (This included Bangladeshis and the Dravidian South Indian Muslims in your Qaid's definition) are a separate people and nation with a shared Islamic history with Arabs. Do you think you know more than your Qaid and other Pakistani leaders?
Pakistan was formed as a refuge for Muslims of the subcontinent from being the potential victims of a mass genocide at the hands of Hindu mobs.
This of course has nothing to do with the history of Pakistan, just on the immediate problem Muslims were facing at the hands of Hindu fanatics. Now that there is no problem, we can talk pre-Islamic history
Let me point you to a link by a respected Pakistani writer about the genetics part:
Capital suggestion
This claims clearly that Indians and Pakistanis share the same genes (haplogroup R2 characterized by genetic marker M124). And a quote from that article for easy reference:
His article is just the mark of an incompetent geneticist. I replied to this on another thread. Here's the replies again disproving what he said using clear scientific arguments.
"The actual "Indian chromsome" he's referring to here is not actually of the genetic type but just some sort of broad generalization that Indians are great people capable of buying up the whole of Pakistan.
Onto the genetics.
the first paragraph
Quote:
Twenty-five thousand years ago, haplogroup R2 characterized by genetic marker M124 arose in southern Central Asia.
True
Quote:
Then began a major wave of human migration whereby members migrated southward to present-day India and Pakistan (Genographic Project by the National Geographic Society; National Geographic - Inspiring People to Care About the Planet).
Incorrect. There was a migration of R2, but it was not major. In fact R2 is found at frequencies of 10% in some south/central asian populations. In some, it is non existent.
Quote:
Indians and Pakistanis have the same ancestry and share the same DNA sequence. Here's what is happening in India:
This is one of the most ludicrous claims ever spoken in the annals of genetics history! It is utter Lunacy. Claiming Indians and Pakistanis have the same ancestry and share the same sequence based on the common incidence of a single haplogroup is utter LUNACY. For example we all have certain African haplogroups, be you Chinese, white, brown, black, Africans, or wherever. So if Indians and Pakistanis share one haplogroup that diverged 25,000 years ago, his statement is like saying blacks and whites have the same ancestry and share the same DNA sequence. Whilst a very small minority of Indians and Pakistanis do have R2, the claim that they are the same people from this is nonsense. R1a1 is around 60% in Pashtuns, and R1a1 is around 60% in Slavs, but even this sort of correlation does not give any indication of mixing based on maternal contributions. I could go on, but it should be pretty obvious this was a very silly statement by a very science illiterate journalist.
Quote:
Indians and Pakistanis have the same Y-chromosome haplogroup.
Which proves nothing. Almost every population has some genetic marker in common with the other.
Quote:
We have the same genetic sequence and the same genetic marker (namely: M124).
Good grief.
Quote:
We have the same DNA molecule, the same DNA sequence.
LOL! "We have the same DNA sequence" LOL! What he should be saying is that for Chromosome Y, out of millions of units, a very small number of Indians have the same 4 (and it really is only 4!) units as a very small number of Pakistanis.
Quote:
Our culture, our traditions and our cuisine are all the same. We watch the same movies and sing the same songs. What is it that Indians do and we don't: Indians elect their leaders.
Ah, so it's about democracy! Well if this sort of an illiterate wants democracy, then I'll go for dictatorship. Sounds like he would make a good robot. Dear me, What a NUT!
Refer to the above article by a respected and objective Pakistani writer on the genetics part. I believe the National Geogrpahic genetic project is the source for this claim of shared genetics.
National geographic do not make this claim. The genetics of Indians and Pakistanis as a whole are VASTLY different. This is pretty much certain.
Pl. note that I have no interest whatsoever in claiming shared genetics or shared anything with you or Pakistan. I am just being objective.
Then you would be wrong in claiming this. The genetics of Pakistan have been found to be unique, different to India, different to Iran, and different to the North of Afghanistan.
Here you contradict yourself. You have tried many times to claim exclusive monopoly on IVC based on it's supposed non-Dravidian origin!
I never claimed IVC was exclusively Aryan or Dravidian. It was probably a mix of the two (predominantly Aryan I will go for, but it's just a guess).
And the last part is nothing but your personal opinion and fertile imagination. Ramayana and Mahabharata are great ancient Sanskrit epics which were written in Gangetic plains and where the north-western parts of India are peripheral. Sanskrit was used deep in ancient India not just it's north-western corner.
You didn't read what I wrote. Sanskrit was
developed in Pakistan, it had only been adopted in India. But Sanskrit is a Pakistani language. English might be spoken in Canada as a first language, but it developed in England. Therefore it is an English language, just like Sanskrit is a Pakistani language.
If Pakistan were about Sanskrit and Rigveda, the partition would never have taken place! You won't have the taliban and the SWAT Buddha destructions and AQ issues and what not!
Pakistan's history is Sanskrit and Rig Veda. Just because Pakistan has become Islamic, does not mean you are free to try and steal its history, which will always remain Pakistani history.
