Alexander the Great/ Mauryans/ Graeco-Bactrians

[Joe Shearer]

Your state propaganda is furthering lies about Pakistan and Pakistanis. We can’t be expected to correct all the disinformation being peddled by your priests, politicians, and educators.

We keep reading this; who and where did this state propaganda originate? Can you show us an example? Don't correct ALL the disinformation being peddled; correct some, and show it first.

This is a classic straw-man defence; set up an imaginary situation just in order to knock it down and crow over that as a victory. NOBODY is interested in depriving Pakistan of its legitimate pre-Islamic history; the difficulty lies with you, and those like you who claim that the IVC and the Pakistan of today were peculiarly inter-related and nothing of the rest of India has had any connection with this extinct culture.

Manifestly false; we have already seen where the excavated trail goes, and what we know about the probable escape trajectory of the survivors of the fallen cities. That is for the IVC itself and for its survivors; as for the other half of this two-in-one concept set up by wild fantasy, the Pakistani people were partly descended from the IVC survivors (try following the pottery trail within the soil of present-day Pakistan itself, and see the results for yourself) and partly from what @Talwar e Pakistan describes as the resumption of the interrupted migrations, and the constant invasions from the Greeks onwards: the Indo-Aryans, the Persians, the Greeks, the Bactrian Greeks, the Scythian-Parthians, the Kushana, the Ephthalites, and, after a hiatus of a few centuries, the Arabs and the Turks.

You are claiming an origin from a civilization 1,372 km away from the focus of your civilization.

Both ends of your argument are wrong; nobody is claiming an origin from this civilisation, and the focus of our civilisation, that was once your civilisation as well, and still is, is not 1,372 kms. away.

First, there has been no clear cultural legacy of the ruined cities of the IVC. 'We' (whoever that reference is intended for) are not claiming it; if 'you' are claiming it, you are mistaken, as your origins are elsewhere. The people currently living in the Indus Valley may have descended (in part) from the survivors; their culture certainly didn't, and is one that was built up through the following centuries, with a great deal of inter-relationship.

You can claim origin from Aryans, that is part of your history and religion due to migration into your region, but IVC has nothing to do with India.

'Aryan' is not a race, as everybody except a few half-lettered amateur propagandists recognise; 'we' did not descend from the Aryans, we speak, in northern India, languages that belong to the Indo-European family of languages, and 'Aryan' is a term used in two of them, in Sanskrit and in the languages descended from Prakrit, as well as in Iranian.

'We' do not claim origin from 'Aryans', as you seem to think; our origin differs with each of the nine river valleys that form our culture. The Indus also formed our culture; that 'we' do not live there is an accident of politics. The people from the east of our country have a heavy admixture of Tibetan blood.

We share more in common with Afghanistan than we ever will with India as we have united together for most of history.

Here we go again!

 

[Nilgiri]

I do not understand why the over fuss and bother over revisionists here.

It will just go in circles and circles....revisionism comes from another place altogether that cannot be worded out.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Another topic, but Pakistan originally included all of East Punjab as well.

Rajastan, also, was the subject of Ghandi’s own ghar wapsi (which at that time sent alarm bells off in the Muslim League,) and now it is a BJP extremist base due to years of Hindutva propaganda.

That land (East Punjab) was stolen from us. Partition violence made that border permanent. Quaid e Azam wanted it to be part of Pakistan.

What on earth are you talking about? What was Radcliffe doing then? Running an anthropology project?

Both Bengal and Punjab were partitioned on religious lines so that the Dominion of Pakistan could be a Muslim majority state. Pakistan never included East Punjab; please read the India Independence Act. Your reference to Rajasthan is baffling.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

2 The Indus basin
2.1 General

The Indus basin is located in 4 countries, of which the largest part in Pakistan, and substantial upstream parts in India, China and Afghanistan (Fig. 1). More than 40 % is located at an elevation higher than 2000ma.s.l. The total hydrographic basin – as defined by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) – has an area of 1 137819km2. Other authors(Babel and Wahid, 2008; Eastham et al., 2010; Harrington et al., 2009; Hoekstra and Mekonnen, 2011; Jain et al., 2009)indicate an area range from 1080 000 to 1 218 500 km2. Of a total population of about 237million (Fig. 1), Pakistan accounts for 61 % (145 million) and India for 35% (83 million). Another 4% (9 million) live in the Afghani part of the basin, and the Chinese population is very little due to the rough Himalayan landscape character of this part of the basin. Of the irrigated area (228694km2, 21 % of basin area) about60.9% is located in Pakistan, 37.2 % in India, 1.9% in Afghanistan and 0% in China.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...MeeNJ2tri-BCPBbmy2idAIeK_q8SX3y3L-EMdCR5Ockgo

These figures are flawed. Even this articles notes that K-Pk, Punjab, Sindh and part of Balochistan occupy Indus Basin. Below is link to census 2017 with provincial populations. 95% of Pakistan lives on the Indus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Census_of_Pakistan

Even your link places most of Pakistan on the Indus and 95% of the populated regions.

 

[Nilgiri]

Out of interest @Indus Pakistan , what are your thoughts on the three major river basins of China (Yellow, Yangtse and Pearl)?

 

[M. Sarmad]

These figures are flawed. Even this articles notes that K-Pk, Punjab, Sindh and part of Balochistan occupy Indus Basin. Below is link to census 2017 with provincial populations. 95% of Pakistan lives on the Indus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Census_of_Pakistan

Even your link places most of Pakistan on the Indus and 95% of the populated regions.

Karachi and other Southernmost districts of Sindh (Thatta, Badin, Tharparkar etc.) do not fall within the basin.

Those figures are not flawed. However, they are from 2012. You can adjust that to 90 million Indians and 160 million Pakistanis in 2018.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Out of interest @Indus Pakistan , what are your thoughts on the three major river basins of China (Yellow, Yangtse and Pearl)?

I know that Huang He [Yellow River] has played a crucial role in Chinese history but beyond that my knowledge is limited. And @M.Sarmad your stupidiy has me defeated. I can't reason with person with no reason.

 

[Republic]

Only a few Pakistani families have Arab patrilineal origin, many have Turk, Kurd, Persian, Afghan, and local (Aryan/Irani) origins too.
As detailed here in this thread, Greek and Buddhist history had a lasting effect on our culture and society. It also set the stage for the Buddhist-Hindu (Brahmanism) civil war which eventually led to our Islamization.

Although my opinion differs on most of the points, but we are agree on the bold point. So this matter is settled once for all that Pakistanis are not Arabs, hence they have not ruled India for thousand years.
I am saving the screen shot of your post.
Islamic invasion has nothing to do with Buddhist Brahmanical war. (It was not civil war, because Buddhist were local and Brahmins were invaders.) It was finished at the start of Gupta period.
After that, wars were fought between Brahmins and converted Buddhists only.
That too was settled well before Islamic invasion.

Population was majority Buddhist but almost all rulers were Brahmins/Aryans.

There is no defined Indian version of History. We give space to all ideologys and agree to disagree. Other wise I would have never been able to read that material what I am writing here. This is the basic difference between our sources of knowledge.
Yes, we have been ruled by Aryans, Huns, Kushans, Shakas, Arabs, Turks, Afgans, British for many years, but we don't run away from it like you people. Nobody can run away from his past. We accept it as our history and try to preserve it.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Although my opinion differs on most of the points, but we are agree on the bold point. So this matter is settled once for all that Pakistanis are not Arabs, hence they have not ruled India for thousand years.
I am saving the screen shot of your post.

It’s common knowledge in Pakistan and not extraordinary in the least. Arains, Sayyids, and other Pakistanis of Arab patrilineal descent do not make up the majority of Pakistanis, but a portion of the population only.

It is the Turks, mostly, who ruled Hindustan for almost a thousand years, not Arabs.

We don’t want to get into the nitty gritty of Indian history, we are only concerned with our own.

After that, wars were fought between Brahmins and converted Buddhists only.
That too was settled well before Islamic invasion.

It was mass conversion from Buddhism to Islam, which began after Muhammad bin Qasim and the advent of Sufi scholars like Ali Hajweri (Data ji,) which led to Islamization.

In cities like Multan, there are accounts of Buddhist priests who had visions of Prophet Muhammad saws and they pushed their populations to Islam.

If our ancestors (of Pakistan and Afghanistan) had not embraced Buddhism, we would not be Muslims today. It is very much intertwined in our historical narrative.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

but we don't run away from it like you people. Nobody can run away from his past. We accept it as our history and try to preserve it.

Who told you we run from it? Is this another of those "Make India" observations like the one where you think we think we are Arabs or of Arab origin?

 

[Republic]

Your state propaganda is furthering lies about Pakistan and Pakistanis. We can’t be expected to correct all the disinformation being peddled by your priests, politicians, and educators.

You are claiming an origin from a civilization 1,372 km away from the focus of your civilization.

You can claim origin from Aryans, that is part of your history and religion due to migration into your region, but IVC has nothing to do with India.

We share more in common with Afghanistan than we ever will with India as we have united together for most of history.

Only a few Pakistani families have Arab patrilineal origin, many have Turk, Kurd, Persian, Afghan, and local (Aryan/Irani) origins too.

You ask an Arab, Persian, Turk to disassociate from his Pre-Islamic history and you will get only blank stares. Pakistan is the sum of all its parts.

As detailed here in this thread, Greek and Buddhist history had a lasting effect on our culture and society. It also set the stage for the Buddhist-Hindu (Brahmanism) civil war which eventually led to our Islamization.

From around 300 BC to 200 BC. The Mauryan footprint on Pakistan was temporary.

Unlike your state, ours is a secular one. Rulers of different ideology are constantly been changed, and fight and get corrected whenever state tries to change it wrongly. Sadly, you people don't have such liberty.
That's why our version of history is anytime truer than yours.

1372 kilometers ????
If a Russian 2000 kilometers away from Moscow claims that he is a Russian, will you deny his legacy ??? Yes some of us are adjacent to it some are away, but we are same people, same nation.
Regarding lineage, we don't claim like Pakistanis that we are pure Arabian blood, we accept our mixed ancestry, we can't change it. But the matter of the fact is that we are all Indian, and IVC area is spread in India also, not 5%, but a good chunk of it (see the map I posted), so we can proudly claim claim it's legacy.
Regards.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

converted Buddhists only

I am curious are not all Buddhists or followers of other faiths 'converted; at some point. Or are some baked in the oven, hot and prepared?

Most Indians are of dominant Ancestral South Indian stock [aboriginal hunter gatheres] and were prevailed on or conquered by people from Indus Region thus introducing the foundation of Hindusim. Majority of India is the aborginal underclass that become prevailed upon by people from our region. You will find most of your elite [Brahmin etc] display significant genetic influence from western parts of the sub-continent. And as you move east or south into India the AASi influence gets stronger with some of the tribes you have in east and south India as vivid reminder of that.

pure Arabian blood

Boy you sure masturbate over this 'Arab' thing don't you. It's like clod of grass being masticated by a holy cow. Must be satisfying for you.

 

[Republic]

Who told you we run from it? Is this another of those "Make India" observations like the one where you think we think we are Arabs or of Arab origin?

Thousands of Pakistani shouting on this forum day and night. Should I post all those comments here ????

 

[Indus Pakistan]

And before I go yes we do have Iranian/Central Asian influence [not Arab] and I for one take extreme pride in that. Even our forefathers in the IVC were mix of Iranian stock from Zagros who migrated to Indus laying the seeds of IVC.

Maybe I am a closet Hindoo but I kind of see why the minority higher order [Indians with greater Iranian/Central Asian genetic heritage] have the caste system. I mean I would also pronounce 30% of Aboriginal India as fit for being Untouchables given that they are walking exposition of primitive aboriginals. But given that Jinnah gave us perfect caste division via the Durand Line which effectively keeps the ocean sealed off from us - I am apt to even do a puja in sarrow to the doomed Indian upper orders. A drop of milk in a ocean of shyte. I pray that Hindusism holds true to it's division of peoples.

Do I sound like a Hindoo??

 

[Republic]

I am curious are not all Buddhists or followers of other faiths 'converted; at some point. Or are some baked in the oven, hot and prepared?

Most Indians are of dominant Ancestral South Indian stock [aboriginal hunter gatheres] and were prevailed on or conquered by people from Indus Region thus introducing the foundation of Hindusim. Majority of India is the aborginal underclass that become prevailed upon by people from our region. You will find most of your elite [Brahmin etc] display significant genetic influence from western parts of the sub-continent. And as you move east or south into India the AASi influence gets stronger with some of the tribes you have in east and south India as vivid reminder of that.

Boy you sure masturbate over this 'Arab' thing don't you. It's like clod of grass being masticated by a holy cow. Must be satisfying for you.

The people you quoted were never been in Indus civilization at that time. It was the aboriginal underclass you stated present there. DNA analysis of Rakhigadhi skeletons (only available skeletons of IVC era) proved it. This debate is settled every where in the world once for all three months ago.
I am not masturbating, thousands of Pakistani masturbating day and night on this forum, tell them if you can.
And don't use uncivilised language with me, I am not a boy. You can very well ignore me if you want but maintain civility if you want to converse.
Regards.