Ancient History not Appreciated by Pakistanis?

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

My indian colleagues can correct me on this----I have been told by a very well educated bangladeshi friend that hinduism has the flexibility to absorb any religion within itself. If such is the case then I would like some idnian members or other knwledgeable people to participate. Thanks.

 

[UnitedPak]

Remains of one of the largest Kushan cities discovered in Pakistan

11/16/2007
PESHAWAR: A team of archaeologists led by Vice Chancellor of the Hazara University Prof Dr Ihsan Ali has discovered the remains of one of the largest Kushan city sites in Chittar Kot, Mansehra, the NWFP.

The site Chittar Kot is located on a high spur overlooking the Biran River, offering one of the most spectacular views of the river and the surrounding area, a press release stated. The site is located at 34" 22.356' N and 73" 08.214' E at an elevation of 945 meters from mean sea level in a pine forest in the Hamsherian Union Council of district Mansehra.

The site was earlier spotted by Abdul Hameed and Muhammad Ashfaq of the Hazara Cultural Museum during a survey of archaeological sites in Mansehra.

Chittar Kot is believed to have been derived from the word Chittra meaning an umbrella or an elevated place represents a large Kushan settlement site, protected by a similar defensive structure on the west and the exposed structure spreading over a mile on the steep hill.

The strategic location of the site warranted an effective control of the surrounding area from all four directions, and thus could have been of multi-faceted defensive settlement, with far-reaching consequences for the establishment of cultural profile of Mansehra district. It gives an unhindered view of the present settlements of Nawa-Shehr, Kherian and Bhir Khund.

This excavation will also provide extensive material to the newly established Hazara Cultural Museum at the Hazara University and will shed new light on the people of the area living 2,000 years ago.

Furthermore, the Hazara University will ensure the preservation of the exposed structures at the site and will provide security, thus this site will be established as a major tourist attraction in the area and will bring prosperity by opening up new job prospects for the local population. It is to be mentioned here that during 2006, the Hazara University discovered more than 250 archaeological sites in Mansehra district, 304 in Abbottabad district and 100 in Haripur district, dating from 2nd millennium BC to the Sikh-British period, and is actively pursuing the preservation and documentation of the endangered cultural assets of the area.

Archaeologists discover largest

 

[UnitedPak]

Pakistanis refuse to call it “partition”. In 1947 it was independence or separation

“Pakistan” as it existed 5000 years ago. Today Many call it the “Indus Valley Civilization“. They also called it Meluhha and other names. However China 5000 Yers ago is not called “The Yangtze Civilizatoin” and Egypt is not called “The Nile Civilization” and India is not called “The Gangetic Valley Civilization”.

How could there be a “partition” when “Pakistan” has been in existance from the dawn of history, 5000 years ago as the Indus Valley Civilization”. Even before that, 150,000 years ago Pakistanis roamed the Soan River valley…where there was ice everywhere else.

THE THESIS: “There was no ‘partition’.”

Read the rest here: Link:
Pakistanis refuse to call it “partition”. In 1947 it was independence or separation « Green Views-Rupee News: Moin Ansari’s Disquisitions and Fulminations

 

[Flintlock]

Hi,

My indian colleagues can correct me on this----I have been told by a very well educated bangladeshi friend that hinduism has the flexibility to absorb any religion within itself. If such is the case then I would like some idnian members or other knwledgeable people to participate. Thanks.

It is true to some extent, Hinduism has absorbed a number of influences and changed considerably during its evolution.
Also, it has expanded in both depth of thought, and variety of thought.
Within the Hindu stable, you can find practices ranging from the most primitive animism to the most complex philosophical thought.

I guess it also depends on how you define hinduism. Some people like to think of Hinduism as the sum total of all religions of India, which would include sikhism, jainism, buddhism etc. and other philosophies.

Others like to separate what they call "mainstream hinduism", i.e. the most widespread practices, from the rest, perhaps classifying others as Indian philosophy, animism etc. and treating buddhism, jainism, sikhism etc. as separate religions.

In any case, it is easily seen that India has the ability to accomodate a massive number of conflicting philosophies, with some help from unifying theories like advaita etc.

The notable exception in this has been orthodox islam, which is unwillling to compromise and be counted among the indian religions. It stands apart, aloof and distant from hinduism.

The biggest disadvantage of this plurality is the lack of social cohesion, which has led to massive fragmentation within Indian society, and consequently massive inequality.
The Abrahmic Monotheisms have always emphasised the "Purity" of the faith, and avoided "corrupting" influences like the plague. This has certain advantages, in the military arena for example, and also for the formation of cohesive societies.
However its biggest disadvantage is the lack of freedom to express, and consequently a stifling of new thought and ideas.

 

[Flintlock]

When one religious concept changes and contradicts the previous one, then the religion itself is not the same. To call it the same religion is disingenuous.

If I write down a theory that proves the moon is made out of cheese and call it RR's theory, then someone else writes down a theory that proves the moon is made out of anorthositic rock and calls it RR's theory again, then you have one name meaning different things. If you discard the original RR's theory (the cheese one), then you can legitimately use the second name for the anorthositic rock theory. But not same name for two different theories unless you change the first one.

Can you define exactly what the theory of Hinduism is? Please do so.

In any case, the Rigvedic practices are not extinct, and are still followed by a small minority.

Likewise you cannot say Rig Vedism is Hinduism when Vedism directly contradicts later Hindu holy books. Either those books are Hinduism, or Rig Vedism is Hinduism. Since Hindus generally do not follow Rig Vedic philosophy (see cow killing, monotheistic worship, non-casteism etc), Rig Vedism cannot be described as Hinduism.

Infact, I am repeating this, but you are trying to define hinduism on the basis of a monotheistic religion. Hinduism is not a monotheism.

Again, by your logic, the Christianity of today and the christianity of the dark ages is completely different. Check the shape of the earth, gravity, astronomical theories, biblical interpretation etc.

Also, no denomination of Islam can be called Islam at all, because the original Islam split into Shia and Sunni sects right after the death of Muhammed.

I have already pointed out that the Arya Samaj follows Rigvedic philosophies, only this time, the interpretation is metaphorical rather than literal.

 

[UnitedPak]

Can you define exactly what the theory of
Again, by your logic, the Christianity of today and the christianity of the dark ages is completely different. Check the shape of the earth, gravity, astronomical theories, biblical interpretation etc.

Also, no denomination of Islam can be called Islam at all, because the original Islam split into Shia and Sunni sects right after the death of Muhammed.

I have already pointed out that the Arya Samaj follows Rigvedic philosophies, only this time, the interpretation is metaphorical rather than literal.

The core values of Christianity and Islam remain the same. One God, Heaven, hell etc.
The 180 degree spin from Vedic religion to modern Hinduism cannot be compared to Christians changing their testament gradually to make it compatible with modern science. Not to mention their cases are well documented.

 

[Flintlock]

The core values of Christianity and Islam remain the same. One God, Heaven, hell etc.
The 180 degree spin from Vedic religion to modern Hinduism cannot be compared to Christians changing their testament gradually to make it compatible with modern science. Not to mention their cases are well documented.

Please explain how Hinduism is a "180 degree" spin from Vedic religion.

Also, I remember mentioning that some Shrautins still practice the Rigvedic rituals, the Arya Samaj practices a different interpretation of the Rigvedic rituals, and Rigvedic deities are still found in Hindu temples, though they are not popular for worship.
What do you have to say about that?

Also, please tell me what the core values of Hinduism are.

 

[Vinod2070]

The core values of Christianity and Islam remain the same. One God, Heaven, hell etc.
The 180 degree spin from Vedic religion to modern Hinduism cannot be compared to Christians changing their testament gradually to make it compatible with modern science. Not to mention their cases are well documented.

Is that all there is to core values! One would assume there would be much more to the core values.

Islam fervently believes that the Christian Bible in its current form is corrupted. In fact I believe that is one of it's core ideas. Else why would you need another revealation.

No self-respecting Christian would ever agree to that. Islam believes that Mohammed is the last and greatest prophet and his teachings over-ride any earlier ones. Christians don't even recognize him as a prophet and at least some of them have unflattering views as one can see from the Pope's statements.

All Hindus consider Vedas to be their holiest texts. Even though few ever read or understand them. All religions evolve over time. Evolution is the way of life in nature. Hinduism being one of the oldest surviving religions, there are bound to be changes in practice from it's earliest forms. But our sacred texts still remain sacred to us.

There is no war of civilizations going on between Hinduism and Vedic religion (if it is a separate entity as you believe). In fact they are one and the same.

 

[UnitedPak]

Muslims believe in the one God and his prophet. This is from the Kalma, and one of the basics of Islam. And then there are the five pillars of Islam.
I didnt give a detailed description of the core values of Islam, but merely pointing out how they have always stayed the same. Please dont twist my words.

 

[Vinod2070]

UP, no intention on my part to twist your words. I didn't mean to sound that way.

Only pointing out that there are differences in Islam and Christianity (as per the little knowledge that I have). More so than the so called differences between Hinduism and Vedic religion.

In fact this is not even an issue in India. Hinduism is the Vedic religion or at least the inheritor of it. May be the practices have changed beyond recognition over thousands of years, but it is an evolution. Not a separate religion.

 

[Logic note]

Hi,

My indian colleagues can correct me on this----I have been told by a very well educated bangladeshi friend that hinduism has the flexibility to absorb any religion within itself. If such is the case then I would like some idnian members or other knwledgeable people to participate. Thanks.

Dear Mastan,

He is wrong and right at the same time . Hinduism is not a religion .. it doesnt have any book or authority .. it can be best defined as spiritualism . it is based on Philosophy or quest .
out of many philosophy which can be Theistic or Atheistic (without God) ADVITA , DVAITA, SHAMKHYA ,NVAYA, BUDDHISM , JAINISM are Few .

Advaita Vedanta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Samkhya - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nyaya - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Modesn Hinduism mostly accepts Advaita School along with others

Islam and Christianity starts with " I belive" .
Spiritualism in Hinduism start with "I dont belive "

but hinduism accepts every other faith as "Right" . because Faith is Personal and hence according to Hinduism You and me both will find peace unlike islam or Christianity which says that you will find peace because u are Muslim and I will go to hell because I am not .

 

[Flintlock]

^^Logic has a point there.

Islam was made to replace "idolaters" and "polytheists" and "heathens".

On the other hand, Hinduism has no theological reason to be anti-Islamic.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

QuickSilver,

There is a reason for having a limit on posts before certain features are available, and the limits are not imposed so that nonsensical one liners can be used to find a way around them.

Please do not try and circumvent the rules again.

 

[QuickSilver]

I have been reading the posts by all of you guys (RR, Stealth and others). Kudos to you for taking time and effort to trace the history of the region. I am sure it would have been a very enriching experience. The patriotism of each of you is very commendable.

However, I have a few questions on the nature of the debate here. Since I am new to this forum, I can be making a mistake of sorts. If thats the case, please point it out to me.

First,I was pained to see RR repeatedly pointing out that every thing said by an Indian does not have credibility - That all Indians have a hindutva agenda- It will be as foolish as say saying all pakistanis are etremists.

Second, if you can assimilate all the content in this thread (provided by both sides), It seems more suggestive that we did have a shared back ground. The idea that since most of the sites of IVC are in Pakistan and hence people of Pakistan only have the rights for the IVC seems more like saying 'Since the earliest records of man evolving from Africa are true, the whole of mankind is African and there is no Pakistani or Indian or Chinese'.

Third, please note that because the initial sites of the IVC that were discovered(and the first sites to be discovered - not created, pls do note this) happened to be on the Indus banks, it is IVC. Had any of the other sites been discovered earier than this, elsewhere, the name would have been different - the name 'INDUS VALLEY CIVILIZATION' is a GIVEN name and no one knows for sure how much farther or narrower these people have settled. (proven by the fact that sites are being discovered pretty frequently)

Finally, the Hindu society revers the Rig Vedic culture even now

The presiding deity of the Gayatri Mantra is Lord Sun. Gayatri is personified as a goddess, the consort of Brahma (Sarasvati), and mother of the Vedas.

here is the link to the page from which I have taken the above quote:
Gayatri

Note that the gayatri mantra is still practiced by all brahmins and note the connection to goddess 'Saraswati' and in this context, the relationship to the river in IVC - Sarasvati.

Also note that one main 'diety' of Hinduism is Brahma ( from which comes the term Brahman ) and his consort is Saraswati - again a really HUGE reference to the river a

Incidentally the gayatri mantra is regarded as the mother of all vedas. (Which am sure you wouldnt want to agree - I will get back to you with references on this, but for now, let me continue the debate)




As per defining that the borders of India were confined to Indus, here goes an article by a 'neutral' observer (Sir William Jones)

India then, on its most enlarged scale, in which the ancients appear to have understood it, comprises an area of near forty degrees on each side, including a space almost as large as all Europe; being divided on the west from Persia by the Arachosian mountains, limited on the east by the Chinese part of the farther peninsula, confined on the north by the wilds of Tartary, and extending to the south as far as the isles of Java. This trapezium, therefore, comprehends the stupendous hills of Potyid or Tibet, the beautiful valley of Cashmír, and all the domains of the old Indoscythians, the countries of Népál and Butánt, Cámrùp or Asàm, together with Siam, Ava, Racan, and the bordering kingdoms, as far as the Chína of the Hindus or Sín of the Arabian Geographers; not to mention the whole western peninsula with the celebrated island of Sinhala, or Lion-like men, at its southern extremity. By India, in short, I mean that whole extent of country, in which the primitive religion and languages of the Hindus prevail at this day with more or less of their ancient purity, and in which the Nágarì letters are still used with more or less deviation from their original form.

The link for the above quote :
A Reader in Nineteenth Century Historical Indo-European Linguistics: The Third Anniversary Discourse, On the Hindus
chapter 1

(The book is from university of texas, surely, you woudnt want to think they are biased)

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Third, please note that because the initial sites of the IVC that were discovered(and the first sites to be discovered - not created, pls do note this) happened to be on the Indus banks, it is IVC. Had any of the other sites been discovered earier than this, elsewhere, the name would have been different - the name 'INDUS VALLEY CIVILIZATION' is a GIVEN name and no one knows for sure how much farther or narrower these people have settled. (proven by the fact that sites are being discovered pretty frequently)

I believe that at this point in time (archaeologists may discover more as the years go by) the majority of signs of the IV civilization are located in Pakistan, and concentrated in a certain area, hence the argument that it is part of Pakistani history.

On the question of "shared background", I don't think it would be plausible to claim that the peoples comprising Pakistanis and Indians have lived in isolation for all of history. Every culture and society interacts with its neighboring, and sometimes not neighboring cultures and societies. Lands comprising Pakistan were ruled by the Greeks, Arabs, Mayrya, and Durrani - so there is tremendous interaction between all cultures throughout history.