A Muslim majority Indus Valley Civilization?

[indian_jigar]

Why can't we have a combination of both? For example, many of us descend from Vedic Indo-Aryans, so we can be proud of our heritage while retaining Islam. We are still their descendants, but we just don't follow their religion. We don't even speak their language Sanskrit, but that does not mean that we have no claim to them.

You sir have very well described the difference between you and us. This is the difference between Pakistanis and Indians regarding IVC.

Indians claim IVC because we are the direct continuity of IVC, we speak Sanskrit and follow Hinduism. We claim IVC because thats our civilization in the present day.

Pakistanis claim IVC because IVC is something that the world admires, and you guys hope that it gives you some respite from the terrorism image you Muslims have built in this world for yourselves.

As for direct descendants, the direct descendants of IVC were Hindus in Pakistan like my ancestors, most of whom moved to Pakistan after Partition.

 

[toxic_pus]

You are the one making the mistake of personifying religion & science. It is you who believes that they are polar opposites. I believe that Islam is in perfect harmony with science. The one thing that I agree with you on is that while obtaining scientific knowledge a person must set aside his or her's beliefs. Failure to do so will result in a lack of interest or desire to study a particular segment in science resulting in the slow down of progress. I never heard of the nuclear scientist that claimed he could generate energy from "djinns" lol. Although admittedly I have heard some extremely foolish things from Muslims in the past.

Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood

Mahmood has published papers concerning djinni, which are described in the Qur'an as beings made of fire. He has proposed that djinni could be tapped to solve the energy crisis. I think that if we develop our souls, we can develop communication with them, Mr. Bashiruddin Mahmood said about djinni in The Wall Street Journal in an interview in 1988. Every new idea has its opponents, he added. But there is no reason for this controversy over Islam and science because there is no conflict between Islam and science​

Just curious: how is the concept of Djinnis 'in perfect harmony with science'.

 

[rockstarIN]

lol @ assumptions.. All we found were some symbols and indian Hindus historians connected it with Hinduism. We dont have any evidence about their belief systems but IVS is as irrelevant to Hinduism as it is to Islam or any other religion

It is all assumptions, there is no scripts to unveil otherwise, thats how the history being evaluated.

 

[INDIC]

Why can't we have a combination of both? For example, many of us descend from Vedic Indo-Aryans, so we can be proud of our heritage while retaining Islam. We are still their descendants, but we just don't follow their religion. We don't even speak their language Sanskrit, but that does not mean that we have no claim to them.

It is more related to your two nation theory and accepting your Pre-Islamic past is seen as a danger for two-nation theory. Egyptians or Iraqis don't have this type of identity crisis. But look at you guys, you guys claim entire history Islamic history of subcontinent even when you don't have any relation with those people either Tipu Sultan of far-flung Dravidian South India, reading about traitors like Mir Qasim of Bengal and Mir Sadiq of Mysore who are no way related to Pakistan but every Pakistanis know about them. Bangladeshis never claim Bin Qasim or Abdali but Pakistanis are front-runner in doing so.

So, here comes the problem if you guys started claiming your pre-Islamic history your notion of being different from India using two-nation theory will create more confusion. LOL you guys claim Islamic history from our land, Urdu language is from our land and telling us you have no claim over IVC even a large part of IVC is falling in Indian territory.

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

Well then stop claiming the IVC if you dont think they were following the right religion or whatever.

No matter how much you say, your civilization is the polar opposite of Sanskrit and Idol Worshipping which were the cornerstones of the great Indian civilization called Indus Valley Civilization.

We will claim the IVC as not only the history of our land, but also because it's the history of some our forefathers. They could worship whatever they want, but their civilization's past belongs to us.

Do modern day Egyptians not have a claim to their history because they don't follow their ancestor's religion?

You sir have very well described the difference between you and us. This is the difference between Pakistanis and Indians regarding IVC.

Indians claim IVC because we are the direct continuity of IVC, we speak Sanskrit and follow Hinduism. We claim IVC because thats our civilization in the present day.

Pakistanis claim IVC because IVC is something that the world admires, and you guys hope that it gives you some respite from the terrorism image you Muslims have built in this world for yourselves.

As for direct descendants, the direct descendants of IVC were Hindus in Pakistan like my ancestors, most of whom moved to Pakistan after Partition.

Did the people of the IVC speak Sanskrit or was it the Indo-Aryans? Not many Indians speak Sanskrit, most people still consider it a dead language don't they? Following a religion or speaking a specific language does not give you a claim over someone else's heritage. The descendants of a particular people may only claim their heritage.

Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood

Mahmood has published papers concerning djinni, which are described in the Qur'an as beings made of fire. He has proposed that djinni could be tapped to solve the energy crisis. I think that if we develop our souls, we can develop communication with them, Mr. Bashiruddin Mahmood said about djinni in The Wall Street Journal in an interview in 1988. Every new idea has its opponents, he added. But there is no reason for this controversy over Islam and science because there is no conflict between Islam and science​

Just curious: how is the concept of Djinnis 'in perfect harmony with science'.

The belief in the existence of angels or jinns refers to the mystical aspect of religion. It can neither be proved or disproved by science. Science has never claimed that God or angels don't exist. Indirectly however, some religions have come in to conflict with science.

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

What the ET blogger cannot fit into their Islam-averse mind, is that the IV might have been Budhhist at a time, much of it did become Hindu eventually, and later, Muslim. So, why is it difficult to accept for them that it is TODAY a muslim-majority region, and why do they have to reason that it isn't because a few thousand years ago it wasn't?

I'm almost convinced the IVC fell doing the same as the author - nitpicking while the Indus ran dry. Foreboding conclusion really - the Ivc is at the end of the line once more.

 

[indian_jigar]

We will claim the IVC as not only the history of our land, but also because it's the history of some our forefathers. They could worship whatever they want, but their civilization's past belongs to us.

Do modern day Egyptians not have a claim to their history because they don't follow their ancestor's religion?



Did the people of the IVC speak Sanskrit or was it the Indo-Aryans? Not many Indians speak Sanskrit, most people still consider it a dead language don't they? Following a religion or speaking a specific language does not give you a claim over someone else's heritage. The descendants of a particular people may only claim their heritage.



The belief in the existence of angels or jinns refers to the mystical aspect of religion. It can neither be proved or disproved by science. Science has never claimed that God or angels don't exist. Indirectly however, some religions have come in to conflict with science.

Two major differences between Egypt and Pakistan:
1) Egyptians did not make a nation on two nation theory.
2) Old Egyptian civilization was completely wiped out by the invasion of Islam, there is no one else left to claim ancient Egyptian civilization. That did not happen in India, we Hindus are still alive and 1 billion strong to rightfully claim our civilization. Yes a part of our great nation was invaded/conquered and converted by Arabs(Pak and BD), but that does not mean you can go claiming our history.

Your bold part is completely wrong. Sanskrit is far from a dead language, it is taught in Indian schools. All Indian languages have Sanskrit roots. Words like "pur" (Kanpur, Lyalpur, etc) are Sanskrit. If I started giving you examples of Sanskrit words in use in modern day India, whether it be language, locations or Bollywood, I would have to write up[ a 300 page report because there are too many. Sanskrit root words make up languages like Hindi, Bengali, Bhojpuri, Punjabi(Indian), Haryanvi, Marathi, etc.

 

[LogiCal]

All Muslims at some point in time had forefathers that were "kafirs". We don't hate our forefathers, we just don't think that their religion was correct. If a Christian has a son that converts to Islam that does not mean that his son hates him. The Christian's son simply disagrees with his religion & will still claim his father's accomplishments as his own.

You accept this....but majority of the Muslims don't.......so many times I've heard arguments in this forum itself that Islam is the Religion from the beginning of the Earth created by Allah....therefore people believing in any other faith are 'kafirs', 'sons of satan' and must be persecuted and killed acc. to the Islamic law for their infidelity.....

Tell me, can you kill your father just because he follows other religion.....you can't....but Islam says you have to.....killing an 'infidel' assures you 72 virgins in Heaven....

This intolerant attitude towards other religions is the main problem......you cannot kill someone and claim his achievements......if you do so....it's called 'SNATCHING' not 'CLAIMING'......

 

[toxic_pus]

The belief in the existence of angels or jinns refers to the mystical aspect of religion. It can neither be proved or disproved by science. Science has never claimed that God or angels don't exist. Indirectly however, some religions have come in to conflict with science.

Every other time my niece complains of a pink, invisible, flying hippopotamus living under her bed. It must be true after all.

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

All Muslims at some point in time had forefathers that were "kafirs". ...

Really? that's what you think of our father Aadam 3alayhissalaam?

Current Muslims' forefathers would be everything - Mumins (believers), Muslims (loosely part of the believing group, or at least not hostile to it), non-Muslims (well, not Muslim!) (and this is what most people might be in today's world, as possibly in yesterday's), and finally, Kaafirs (who cover up innate human nature and turn away after recognizing the truth).

 

[INDIC]

Did the people of the IVC speak Sanskrit or was it the Indo-Aryans? Not many Indians speak Sanskrit, most people still consider it a dead language don't they? Following a religion or speaking a specific language does not give you a claim over someone else's heritage. The descendants of a particular people may only claim their heritage.

Majority of us Indian know Sanskrit as it is taught as a compulsory subjects in all school and we have preserved the Sanskrit language. I also know Sanskrit, if you wish I can write few sentences for you in Sanskrit.

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

Every other time my niece complains of a pink, invisible, flying hippopotamus living under her bed. It must be true after all.

Pink, flying hippo could be true, and i'm not kidding. The experienced world is very, very limited.

 

[manofwar]

I don't know where this muslim IVC thing came from............
The article only suggests that Pakistan developes itself to the status of IVC, with it's perfect roads, planning and being the civilization with best life quality.
Please actually read the article before making silly assumptions.

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

It is more related to your two nation theory and accepting your Pre-Islamic past is seen as a danger for two-nation theory. Egyptians or Iraqis don't have this type of identity crisis. But look at you guys, you guys claim entire history Islamic history of subcontinent even when you don't have any relation with those people either Tipu Sultan of far-flung Dravidian South India, reading about traitors like Mir Qasim of Bengal and Mir Sadiq of Mysore who are no way related to Pakistan but every Pakistanis know about them. Bangladeshis never claim Bin Qasim or Abdali but Pakistanis are front-runner in doing so.

So, here comes the problem if you guys started claiming your pre-Islamic history your notion of being different from India using two-nation theory will create more confusion. LOL you guys claim Islamic history from our land, Urdu language is from our land and telling us you have no claim over IVC even a large part of IVC is falling in Indian territory.

Geographically the IVC mostly revolves around what is today Pakistan. I don't claim Islamic history from your land & I disagree with the Pakistanis who do that. I also disagree with those Pakistanis that claim the Arab or Ottoman caliphates as their own.

Pakistan can easily form an identity unique to itself on the basis of both ethnicity & religion.

What the ET blogger cannot fit into their Islam-averse mind, is that the IV might have been Budhhist at a time, much of it did become Hindu eventually, and later, Muslim. So, why is it difficult to accept for them that it is TODAY a muslim-majority region, and why do they have to reason that it isn't because a few thousand years ago it wasn't?

I'm almost convinced the IVC fell doing the same as the author - nitpicking while the Indus ran dry. Foreboding conclusion really - the Ivc is at the end of the line once more.

Who or what is the "ET blogger"?

Two major differences between Egypt and Pakistan:
1) Egyptians did not make a nation on two nation theory.
2) Old Egyptian civilization was completely wiped out by the invasion of Islam, there is no one else left to claim ancient Egyptian civilization. That did not happen in India, we Hindus are still alive and 1 billion strong to rightfully claim our civilization. Yes a part of our great nation was invaded/conquered and converted by Arabs(Pak and BD), but that does not mean you can go claiming our history.

As for your first point, I don't care. We can form a nation on whatever damn basis we want.

As for your second point; hahahahaha, the ancient Egyptian civilization's descendants are modern Egyptians. Hindus are the followers of a religion, they are not a race. The Sub-Continent consists of a variety of different people.

Your bold part is completely wrong. Sanskrit is far from a dead language, it is taught in Indian schools. All Indian languages have Sanskrit roots. Words like "pur" (Kanpur, Lyalpur, etc) are Sanskrit.

My bold part isn't wrong, the people of the IVC did not speak Sanskrit right? As far as I know, all Indian languages do not have Sanskrit roots, the "tamil" language isn't from Sanskrit, am I correct? I have never heard anyone speak Sanskrit, & even if they did, do they speak it in exactly the same way as the Aryans? Latin is taught in some institutes & schools as well, but it's still a dead language. Sanskrit for the most part is dead, even if a segment of the society does speak it or learn it.

 

[indian_jigar]

What I find amusing is how can Pakistanis claim/be proud of the following if the only criteria to claiming history is supposedly Geographic location. These people had nothing to do with Pakistan geographically:

All Mughal Emperors (Babur, Akbar, Humayun, Shah Jahan, Aurangzeb etc) - Indians by birth, Central Asian by origin
Tipu Sultan - Mysore
Abdali -Afghanistan
Ghauri - Afghanistan
Ghaznavi - Afghanistan
Durrani - Iran
Mir Qasim - Bengal
Mir Sadiq - Mysore
Mohammed Bin Qasim - Syria