Ancient History not Appreciated by Pakistanis?

[roadrunner]

Well,

First of all, let me tell u I'm a Brahmin my self though not Tamil.

yes, ancestors of most Brahmins came from Northwest of India(after crossing todays pakistan), not recently but thousands of yrs ago.And there is nothing like native Brahmin population of south india ...

At the cost of looking like a racist to some, i must say atleast 50% of Brahmins are fair looking(gora chitta) even by socalled pakistani(RR's) standards...hell whats the argument here, we all know brahmins are of Indo-Aryans origins the same to which major chunk of pakistani population belongs...

It's inaccurate to say Brahmins from South India are fair skinned or share any features with say a Brahmin from the extreme northwest of India, somewhere like Himachal or Harayana.

Here is one example of the South Indian Brahmin. I would say he could easily pass for a Tamil but not for someone from the northwest of India.

 

[MilesTogo]

I normally read and do not post because sooner or later someone will come up with the exact same thoughts that I have. I think it is natural. But I could not resist this time. This thread is very interesting.

Nobody pointed out to the Muslim defenders that by trying to claim a share in the past history, they are falling in a big trap. I think they have not researched the South Asian Civilization enough. There is enough material on internet. I would recommend them to read it. Actually as some Indian defenders pointed out - it is a welcome change and I think from an indian prospective there is no need to defend/challenge it. I would rather encourage Pakistani friends to claim the share of the history. I would say lets us jump ahead and say that IVC 100% belongs to Pakistani people. It was an amazingly advanced civilization that was established by the forefathers of pakistani people. Let us tell this to the entire world. Let us even call it Pak-indus valley civilization. Let us say that pakistan always has been a geographically distinct region and had advanced ancient civilization thousands of years ago.

Now where do we go from here? One of the IVC artifacts shows a man sitting in a yoga like posture. Now, in the absense of any "Arabic / Urdu" scriptures explaining that posture, we are stuck. We could either say that thats how people used to read Namaz in those days or we take help of Vedas to find out what that man was doing. Crux of the matter is once you claim the IVC, you can not just stop at few "dead" archeological sites. That would have been easy case. But the problem is that it has already been established that Vedas and IVC are connected. I think my Pakistani friends would have now understood the trap I was talking about. The moment you acknowledge a Vedic past, you are in a fix. World including Indians are increasingly appreciating the fact that Vedic Civilization was advanced in various ways and that some of the sciences and practices are useful even today. For e.g. Yoga. Now once you find that you take pride in that and try to revive some of the lost knowledge, which is exactly happening right now.

Now, I don't think as a Pakistani, anyone can take pride in their Vedic past. I don't think Pakistani's can readily accept back and boast about Yoga, Sanskrit, Meditation, Tradition of Dance and Music, and so many other things that are being rediscovered not just by Indians but Westerners and are increasingly being accepted and studied by people either partially or fully to suit modern day needs. The only other choice is to argue that although we Pakistanis have a Vedic past but we quite don't agree with their traditions and practices. We are better off following Arabic traditions and practices in the form of Islam and they are superior that what our ancestors had. I don't think so it will be an easy argument to make to today's archeologists and other scholars, but let's say people buy that argument then in that case, why make so much efforts in the first place to claim a share in that past when you will later debunk it as the times of "Jahilya / ignorant ancestors". Its is like finding a giant Buddhist Stupa near Peshawar and preserving it as heritage of glorious past and at the same time criticizing Buddha for his teachings of Non-violence and making Dawa on buddhist to convert to Islam. I know Islam is not that tolerant. Saudi Arabia doesn't even allow construction of Churches or Temples.

Most likely scenario will be that so called Pious Muslims will destroy all evidence of a non-islamic past in Pakistan like they did in Afghanistan. I would suggest that if you really want to preserve that past heritage (mostly non-islamic in Pakistan's case), don't dig at all until Islam becomes tolerant enough to accept it. I suspect all these Archeological sites will be destroyed in time to come by the the so called pious muslims. A thought might come that "good muslims" will not attack these harmeless sites, but then Imran Khan had similar views about cricket.

On a lighter note, I am very hopeful for Pakistan when I see debaters/thinkers/researcher like the ones on this forum who are making honest and genuine efforts to find more about their past and trying to reconcile it with their present.

PS: I know one of the counter arguments from Muslim defender will be that IVC was not Vedic Civilization. However, it does not impact my thoughts above. As long as IVC is non-islamic, it does not have any future in Pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

As long as IVC is non-islamic, it does not have any future in Pakistan.

The IVC is dead - it can't have a 'future'.

It is to be studied and its achievements respected as an ancient civilization and people, possibly predecessors of modern Pakistanis.

Secondly, your argument has been addressed already - Europe and the Greeks were not always predominantly Christian nor did they have the language and culture they do today, yet they celebrate their 'non-Christian' history.

The same for Pakistan - there is no contradiction here.

 

[Strike]

i Was just Wondering if this was so many years isn't it a possibility that they could have moved to India when and if they were attacked by the Aryans ?
if the decedents of IVC did assimilate with the people of Pakistan wouldn't there be better Idea of what happened to the Civilization ?

Since it was so long back , i think both countries because can call it a part of there cultural heritage since at that time Races did move from place to place no doubt that if the people of IVC did Survive and forced to leave there cities they would have assimilated with groups which can now be found in both India and Pakistan

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

i Was just Wondering if this was so many years isn't it a possibility that they could have moved to India when and if they were attacked by the Aryans ?
if the decedents of IVC did assimilate with the people of Pakistan wouldn't there be better Idea of what happened to the Civilization ?

Since it was so long back , i think both countries because can call it a part of there cultural heritage since at that time Races did move from place to place no doubt that if the people of IVC did Survive and forced to leave there cities they would have assimilated with groups which can now be found in both India and Pakistan

We have explored ideas on what happened to the IVC people on this and the other thread. Please take the time to read them instead of repeating the same arguments again.

 

[Strike]

We have explored ideas on what happened to the IVC people on this and the other thread. Please take the time to read them instead of repeating the same arguments again.

I'm sorry , i did read most of it , i must have missed a few threads , i'l try to make sure it doesn't happen again

 

[MilesTogo]

The IVC is dead - it can't have a 'future'.

It is to be studied and its achievements respected as an ancient civilization and people, possibly predecessors of modern Pakistanis.

Secondly, your argument has been addressed already - Europe and the Greeks were not always predominantly Christian nor did they have the language and culture they do today, yet they celebrate their 'non-Christian' history.

The same for Pakistan - there is no contradiction here.

When I say future I meant exactly what you said - "It is to be studied and its achievements respected..."

I agree with your stand on Pakistan celebreating their non-islamic past. I don't think any one can stop you from that. I think the Indian defenders are over-reacting here. There is nothing to defend/challange here. All the indians should welcome it.

 

[Moorkh]

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 .

religion is difficult to define. but going by the standard definition taken by sociologists, religions have 2 things in common
1) A set of rituals and other similar practices (namaz, aarti ,etc)
2) A diety - (god , allh, bhagwan , etc)

so hinduism fits the definition of a religion rather well

 

[sadiqams]

This is because pakistanis use 1947 as a start point but in reality we are an ancient civilisation and our roots go bnack more than 5000 years and more. We should teach our children history as it affected our region and not from an out siders point of view. eg western history.

 

[vandemataram]

On the contrary, it is up to you to show that no Pakistanis care for their history.

Merely quoting a handful of articles as representative of the sentiment of 170 million Pakistanis is completely disingenuous.

As I said before, even if a minority of Pakistanis care for their history, and the GoP accepts that history (both claims are beyond doubt) then this argument of 'some authors have said this or that' is nothing but a distraction.


The region was completely splintered before the British occupied it and turned it into a large colony.

Even from a civilizational point of view there were multiple civilizations, and the presence of multiple peoples and cultures is unarguable.

The history before 1947 is the history of the peoples that inhabited that land - that history was primarily of the peoples who inhabited what is now Pakistan. Yes there was some overlap with what is today India, but origins, nucleus and major parts of the IVC were all in Pakistan.

Pakistan does therefore have a far stronger claim to the IVC.

AM going by your idea ...do you accept what Islamic empires in India have had as their history belong to India and India alone?

For example the Bengal Sultanate (starting with Bakhtiyar Khalji) and then Malwa sultanate, the Bijapur Sultanate etc...

Going by your quote

"........but origins, nucleus and major parts of these were and are still in India"

What do you say ?

 

[sadiqams]

The history of the region belongs to the whole of the peoples of the region as one way or other they have been affected by it. It was an event that happened on the shores of sindh that eventually led to pakistan but if the British were not invloved there might have been no pakistan (and with out pakistan no Bangladesh) as we know it today but most likely muslim and non muslim majority areas living in harmony.

 

[Milind]

Well, I went through the thread pages & was amazed like anything.
I was wondering why pakistanis are so ignorant of established historical facts. But, when I found what history pakistanis are taught in their schools, I realized the problem.
I know that it is unusual for Islamists to use reason ( Don't take it otherwise), but please try if you are really seeking truth. I'm not an expert but can help a bit. I believe so...

I start with the following-
* Some people calling absurd things like India never existed before 1947 etc . To them, true, India as it was just before 1947 partition, was not under a single central rule (except the latest british) as a whole. But unlike 'Pakistan', the term 'India' was not invented in the 20th century AD, it was always there. The ancient outside world always referred to the region ( or part of it) from Hindukush mountanis to the river brahmaputra & down south up to the tip of the peninsula as one nation, one civilisation - by the name India & likes. Proofs are just so many. Some of them in chronological order are-

Proof: * The 5th century BCE Naqsh -e-Rustam eddict of Parsi king Dariyhu ( Sanskrit: Drayhu, Greek: Darius I) refers to his victory over regions of modern balochistan-pakistani punjab as victory over India. (India as Farsi 'HIND')

*Ancient greeks refer to the region as INDIA. The professional historians who came with the armies of Alexander in 326 BCE , to them crossing Mountain Hindu kush (mentioned as 'Indicus caucasus') is crossing into INDIA, Gandhara- Arachosia as first INDIAN provinces won, Hemphis ( Sanskrit: Ambhi) of Taxila as INDIAN Traitor, Porus( Sanskrit: Puru) of modern Lahore-sialkot -Mirpur area as a brave INDIAN King, Kingdom of Gangetic planes(mentioned as Gangadirai) as the most powerful INDIAN kingdom, mallis of Malva ( modern Multan) as a deadly INDIAN tribe whose leader Singhran critically injured Alexander. To the invading Macedonians- from Kalinga in the far east to the lower Indus valley, all was INDIA.
All subsequent Greek-Roman-Arab documents refer to any part of the subcontinent as INDIA.

Likewise, the chinese travellers, whether they entered into Assam in the east or Swat in the west, they wrote that they had entered into INDIA. Professional Arabian historian Al Baruni who came with the armies of Turk Sultan Mehmood Ghajani referred to punjanb sindh gujrat gangetic planes all as Hindu civilised HIND(= India). At the time all these regions were independant kingdoms & no one was called hind, so what was HIND that applied to all? He titled his book as 'Kitab UL HIND'. Also, at closure of 15th century AD, Europeans arrived at Malabar in the far south kerala, but declared that they had arrived INDIA.

Continuously, throughout recorded history, to the outside world the subcontinent was one nation- INDIA. And to the residents, it was always Jambudweep(Divine ancient Land)or Bharata Varsh(Land of Bharatas) or Aryavarta (land of Aryans)or Hindustan(Land of Hindus).

Pakistan was never there before the radcliff line was drawn. There never was a cultural or even political separation between the areas today called pakistan & rest of india before 1947 along the radcliff line. So all things prior to that in modern Pakistani areas were Indian & must be properly referred to as India & Indian.

One last thought, I'm a so happy that despite all the Mullah Islamist propaganda , some pakistanis openly accepting the obvious that their forefathers were not Arabians or Turkish. Their blood is like a drop in ocean.

 

[Milind]

For IVC , I'll return later.

 

[Milind]

Really! Kashmir was not hindu at any point of time. Do you regularly get such revealations like your prophet?
Before the attack of kabayalis & subsequent huge masssacres, every bit of kashmir was hindu from gilgit to srinagar.

 

[Awesome]

Really! Kashmir was not hindu at any point of time. Do you regularly get such revealations like your prophet?
Before the attack of kabayalis & subsequent huge masssacres, every bit of kashmir was hindu from gilgit to srinagar.

Stop laying flame baits. Have a conversation like a normal human being. There was no need to include that comment about the Prophet.