empirical evidence ?lol
Just accept it that your bias never let you read about hindu history of south east asia . you have just proved it.
Nothing you guys have shown negates my claim that the
predominant cultural export from India was Buddhism, not Hinduism. It is typical behavior for people to resort to absolutes when cornered. Did I ever say it was 100% Buddhism and 0% Hinduism? I specifically used the words 'predominant', and 'most'.
That fact remains true to this day, despite periods of Hindu rule in pockets of south East Asia -- mostly along the maritime trade routes. Can you show me significant direct Hindu influence in Japan, China, Korea? This is where the majority of Asia's populations have resided and they are influenced by Buddhism not Hinduism directly. The various Hindu kingdoms in south East Asia (Cambodia, Vietnam and Indonesia) had limited reach into the rest of Asia.
As for Buddhism, aside from Ashoka's proselytizing period, the main Buddhist expansion in Asia occurred from 1st to 10th century CE.
This is precisely the period during which Buddhism was persecuted and in decline within India./
About 1971 and kashmir , are you the only one who is allowed to deviate from the topic on this forum ? and when returned in kind why do you then whine ?
Who brought Buddhism into this discussion? Islamic conquest of India? 1971? Kashmir?
It was Indians who keep going off on tangents when they fail to address the issue at hand.
There are Indians in this thread -- names obvious -- who are pathologically bigoted against Muslims. For them, every discussion always comes down to Muslim conquest of India and how that is an "open wound" for them that will not heal until there is an official apology. It's not clear who is expected to deliver this apology but, until then, all Muslims are to be hated. Anyone who challenges their hate-filled obsession is an Islamist.
As for 26/11, it is entirely relevant because it relates to military attacks on Pakistan, which is the topic of discussion.
About the freudian slip part , I am still trying to find out what slip you are talking about but before that try looking downwards you have been caught with your pants down trolling on this thread and continuing and then having the audacity to whine when someone returns it to you .don't start what you are incapable to continue .
The Freudian slip is your subconscious slip to equate 'Hindu' with 'Indian' as interchangeable concepts. Not very secular of you...
No! Unless you consider "all options open before a final decision is taken" as a threat.
Spare me the dance. I showed you a statement by your foreign secretary threatening military strikes within Pakistan. Now you guys are fumbling around to save face by claiming India never intended to "occupy" Pakistan like US is doing in Afghanistan.
Really now!
There was nothing dark about the history of Pakistanis' ancestors in the pre Jahiliyah period. At least compared to post jahiliyah.
Have to agree with you. This is a pathetic attitude to have, to abuse one's own ancestors and make heroes out of the worst bigots.
Ah, the Islamic conquest of India...
I am surprised it took you this long to drag that topic in here.
It was not persecuted. People didn't convert to Buddhism in the sense of conversion to Islam or Christianity. It was always fuzzy.
People just glided back to their old belief system as the state support moved towards the old system.
Yeah, sure.
Unlike you, I am not interested in the sordid details on past evils. What's done is done.
I only mentioned it since Indian indoctrination seems to leave out the unpleasant parts of Indian history.
Its a lot of hallucination. There was never any decision taken about military strikes, not in the public domain at least.
You have been hallucinating in claiming this based on nothing but indirect heresy.
OK.
I am hallucinating.
Zeenews quoting your own foreign minister is hallucinating.
US officials telling India not to compare 26/11 to 9/11 are hallucinating.
Everyone's hallucinating except you guys...
In simple lingo, that is not 'doing one better'. An apt description of what's been done here: 'Running away from a challenge'!
I provided an Indian news source quoting your own foreign minister. That's pretty direct.
Didn't you agree that Buddhism derived from Hinduism?
So a variation of a variation still remains a variation of the original?
The whole discussion was that it was the variant, not the precursor, which was responsible for most of the cultural influence.
Developereo,
Is it that difficult to get half-a-decent history book and read through it with an uncluttered mind? While your statements are without any doubt got nothing to do with history, the reasoning behind it is absolutely moronic!
Not difficult at all. You guys should try it some time.
