Historical Background of Pakistan and its People

[PureAryan]

I dont know about NWFP,Baloch and the northern areas.But punjab and sindh,east or west of the indus is all hindu territory.Muslims came there much later and it doesn't matter what the poluation was recently.

Jinnah is a baniya/bora muslim from gujrat.He is not rajput.

Ghaznavid stuff happened 800 years thats like one week in history,thats all.

BTW,i have R1-A1 dna haplogroup and i am tamil brahmin from kanyakumari.My ancestors ran away from muslim oppresion of alauddin khilji and settled in the south of india since 1400 AD.big deal,man.

Punjab and sindh were never hindu, Pakistan became a buddhist country during the reign of Asoka and remained buddhist until muslims(Arabs) arrived. When Muslims invaded Pakistan region (Arabs called the region btw arabian sea and hindu kush as sindh everything east of sindh as hindh) the majority of its people were Buddhists (as testified in Chachnama), so much so that the word for idol became “budh”. The fact is there is barely any trace of Hindu past in Pakistan region yet there are plentiful of Buddhist and other non-Hindu archeological remains in Pakistan region. The very few Hindu temples found in Pakistan region cannot be dated past the 9th century AD. And by the way buddhism has nothing to do with hinduism, the largest budhist country Japanese do not call them hindus, buddhism opposes everything which hinduism has.

Jinnah grandfather was from Punjab Pakistan and was a punjabi rajput and he migrated to kathiawar and got married over there. Kathiawar is a disputed territory and acceded to pakistan but bharat forcefully occupied it, It is still shown as part of pakistan in official maps. So Jinnah was a pakistan both from paternal and maternal lineage

 

[aviator]

Punjab and sindh were never hindu, Pakistan became a buddhist country during the reign of Asoka and remained buddhist until muslims(Arabs) arrived. When Muslims invaded Pakistan region (Arabs called the region btw arabian sea and hindu kush as sindh everything east of sindh as hindh) the majority of its people were Buddhists (as testified in Chachnama), so much so that the word for idol became “budh”. The fact is there is barely any trace of Hindu past in Pakistan region yet there are plentiful of Buddhist and other non-Hindu archeological remains in Pakistan region.

Dude what are you smoking ? Around lil less than half of Punjab became part of India in 1947 (oh yea Indian states of Punjab-Haryana-Himachal Pradesh), I am from Haryana and I don't see many Buddhist in these states. Also my grandparents were from pakistani side Punjab and from all those who came from that side I haven't seen a single being Buddhist, all Hindus and Sikhs. Most of people who converted to Sikhism were also Hindus, Sikh gurus were from Hindu background.

Accepted you hate Hindus to the core that you don't want to have any indirect association with them either but Do you have some concrete unbiased sources to claim your point ?

PS: Haryana and Himachal were Hindu majority in 1947.
Correction: 42% of Punjab became part of India in 1947.

 

[PureAryan]

Dude what are you smoking ? Around lil less than half of Punjab became part of India in 1947 (oh yea Indian states of Punjab-Haryana-Himachal Pradesh), I am from Haryana and I don't see many Buddhist in these states. Also my grandparents were from pakistani side Punjab and from all those who came from that side I haven't seen a single being Buddhist, all Hindus and Sikhs. Most of people who converted to Sikhism were also Hindus, Sikh gurus were from Hindu background.

Accepted you hate Hindus to the core that you don't want to have any indirect association with them either but Do you have some concrete unbiased sources to claim your point ?

PS: Haryana and Himachal were Hindu majority in 1947.

If you had read my post clearly i did give you unbiased source, The book is called Chachnama
Chach Nama (Sindhi: چچ نام&#1608 also known as the Fateh nama Sindh (Sindhi: فتح نامه سن&#1676,and also known as Tarekh-e-Hind wa Sindh Arabic (تاريخ الهند والسند ) is a book about the history of Sindh, chronicling the Chacha Dynasty's period, following the demise of the Rai Dynasty and the ascent of Chach of Alor to the throne, down to the Arab conquest by Muhammad bin Qasim.

It was written after invasion and it explain how the majority buddhist population were ruled by repressive minority hindu kingdom, and when muslim arrived the buddhist helped them to get rid of hindu kingdom.

According to ancient designation the real punjab lies in pakistan(5 rivers) the indian punjab and haryana were incoporated into punjab during delhi sultanate so indian punjab is not the ancient punjab. India should change the name of their punjab state its creating confusion because it doesn't have 5 rivers.
I am talking about pakistani punjab not indian punjab, In pakistani punjab budhism wasn't dominant but so was hinduism, there were dozens of other religion zoroastrianism, animism, shamis, fire worshipping but in all other provinces buddhism was dominant. There are only few hindu architecture cannot be dated past few centuries.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Lets get this straight. Hindi and Urdu are the same language (spoken)

utter bullshyte in pure powder form....and i'd be very careful if I were you about making such silly statements

they are not the same language; there is a whole culture behind Urdu that can never be imitated or duplicated by modern or classical hindi

And India and Pakistan have no basis of independent seperation before partition.

clearly, they did. We were just finally blessed in 1947. hindustan (india) was never even one nation before partition. This is how a huge number feel.

Also the Dravidians were originally invaders from the middle east who displaced the native austric people. Later few Indo-Eropeans invaded (aryans), their language became predominant in the North, the Dravidian languages were preserved in the more isolated south. Still there is not evidence for a massive move of the Dravidians them selfs, nor a massive input of Aryans thus the gene-pool of the sub-continent is of mainly Dravidian (what ever your skin color).

always trust a hindustani to bring up this whole Aryan & dravidian/ skill colour related stuff.

I know about the north vs. south indian and white vs. brown obcession in that country --- we don't focus or worry about it so much. At least the sane people.



the truth is, the eventual people of Pakistan then and the Pakistanis of today are proud to have their own country; neither we nor our ancestors had any affinity to hindustan. Though I do know people whose parents were born indian and died Pakistani

 

[PureAryan]

Lets get this straight. Hindi and Urdu are the same language (spoken). And India and Pakistan have no basis of independent seperation before partition.




Also the Dravidians were originally invaders from the middle east who displaced the native austric people. Later few Indo-Eropeans invaded (aryans), their language became predominant in the North, the Dravidian languages were preserved in the more isolated south. Still there is not evidence for a massive move of the Dravidians them selfs, nor a massive input of Aryans thus the gene-pool of the sub-continent is of mainly Dravidian (what ever your skin color).

hindi and urdu are not the same language, Urdu originated in Lahore in Ghaznavid punjab around 10th century, it is a mixture of old punjabi, farsi, arabic, and turkish, it is a pakistani language no amount of bharati propaganda can change that

Genetics and excavations around harrapa have proven there was an aryan migration and the local did put up a fight.
I hope Pakistan is not included in your defination of sub-continent.

 

[Subramanian]

I dont know about NWFP,Baloch and the northern areas.But punjab and sindh,east or west of the indus is all hindu territory.Muslims came there much later and it doesn't matter what the poluation was recently.

Jinnah is a baniya/bora muslim from gujrat.He is not rajput.

Ghaznavid stuff happened 800 years thats like one week in history,thats all.

BTW,i have R1-A1 dna haplogroup and i am tamil brahmin from kanyakumari.My ancestors ran away from muslim oppresion of alauddin khilji and settled in the south of india since 1400 AD.big deal,man.

Punjab and sindh were never hindu, Pakistan became a buddhist country during the reign of Asoka and remained buddhist until muslims(Arabs) arrived. When Muslims invaded Pakistan region (Arabs called the region btw arabian sea and hindu kush as sindh everything east of sindh as hindh) the majority of its people were Buddhists (as testified in Chachnama), so much so that the word for idol became “budh”. The fact is there is barely any trace of Hindu past in Pakistan region yet there are plentiful of Buddhist and other non-Hindu archeological remains in Pakistan region. The very few Hindu temples found in Pakistan region cannot be dated past the 9th century AD. And by the way buddhism has nothing to do with hinduism, the largest budhist country Japanese do not call them hindus, buddhism opposes everything which hinduism has.

Jinnah grandfather was from Punjab Pakistan and was a punjabi rajput and he migrated to kathiawar and got married over there. Kathiawar is a disputed territory and acceded to pakistan but bharat forcefully occupied it, It is still shown as part of pakistan in official maps. So Jinnah was a pakistan both from paternal and maternal lineage

Buddhism has everything to do with Hinduismin.It was formed right in the middle of india in bihar and it is an atheistic sect whose ideas have been imbibed into hinduism.Unlike muslims,hindus dont have an inferiority complex and different spiritual paths have always existed so do nonspiritual paths that exist like today.

Taxila was where Chanakya went to study,which is pretty much in Pakistan and as you say 9th century is a very recent thing.

1100 years in nothing in the history of the subcontinent which has been existing for 3000 years and more.

Who cares what the Japanese say?today we have cults theravad buddhism which makes buddhism look like a warrior cult rather than a spiritual cult.

Jinnah's lineage was of rajputs,but what was his hindu grandfather doing as a merchant in gujarat?Last time i heard that was not rajputs did.

 

[Subramanian]

If you had read my post clearly i did give you unbiased source, The book is called Chachnama
Chach Nama (Sindhi: چچ نام&#1608 also known as the Fateh nama Sindh (Sindhi: فتح نامه سن&#1676,and also known as Tarekh-e-Hind wa Sindh Arabic (تاريخ الهند والسند ) is a book about the history of Sindh, chronicling the Chacha Dynasty's period, following the demise of the Rai Dynasty and the ascent of Chach of Alor to the throne, down to the Arab conquest by Muhammad bin Qasim.

It was written after invasion and it explain how the majority buddhist population were ruled by repressive minority hindu kingdom, and when muslim arrived the buddhist helped them to get rid of hindu kingdom.

According to ancient designation the real punjab lies in pakistan(5 rivers) the indian punjab and haryana were incoporated into punjab during delhi sultanate so indian punjab is not the ancient punjab. India should change the name of their punjab state its creating confusion because it doesn't have 5 rivers.
I am talking about pakistani punjab not indian punjab, In pakistani punjab budhism wasn't dominant but so was hinduism, there were dozens of other religion zoroastrianism, animism, shamis, fire worshipping but in all other provinces buddhism was dominant. There are only few hindu architecture cannot be dated past few centuries.

Panjab is the land of 5 rivers and everyone knows that pakistan has the panjab and india only has the Doaba but so what?Does that mean it belongs to muslims?

vedic hinduism is the not the only thing.My mom once picked up a stone while she was playing and took it to her dad,a pious sanskrit speaking brahmin and he examined it and saw the uniqueness of the stone.

He kept it in his worship and started worshipping it for the qualities it gave.

Hinduism is free,when we say hindu u need not necessarily go to a shiv temple and worship,it just means you dont follow something blindly because they say so in saudi arabia/rome.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Panjab is the land of 5 rivers and everyone knows that pakistan has the panjab and india only has the Doaba but so what?Does that mean it belongs to muslims?

river water doesnt have a religion......those rivers were there before human race

let's not even delve into 'water issues' for now

Hinduism is free,when we say hindu u need not necessarily go to a shiv temple and worship,it just means you dont follow something blindly because they say so in saudi arabia/rome.

feel free to elaborate

 

[Subramanian]

river water doesnt have a religion......those rivers were there before human race

let's not even delve into 'water issues' for now






feel free to elaborate

there is nothing to elaborate?am just stating facts there.

If you query/disagreement is specific,go on....

 

[Rafi]

The Punjab has been Islamic for a over a thousand years, and will always be Muslim Inshallah. We were taken from dark into light, by the wonderful Sufi Missionaries - and their beautiful example

 

[Subramanian]

river water doesnt have a religion......those rivers were there before human race

let's not even delve into 'water issues' for now



feel free to elaborate

yeah,but pakistani punjab also belongs to the hindu/sikh people who used to live there.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

yeah,but pakistani punjab also belongs to the hindu/sikh people who used to live there.

whether true or not, moot point now!

 

[PureAryan]

Buddhism has everything to do with Hinduismin.It was formed right in the middle of india in bihar and it is an atheistic sect whose ideas have been imbibed into hinduism.Unlike muslims,hindus dont have an inferiority complex and different spiritual paths have always existed so do nonspiritual paths that exist like today.

Taxila was where Chanakya went to study,which is pretty much in Pakistan and as you say 9th century is a very recent thing.

1100 years in nothing in the history of the subcontinent which has been existing for 3000 years and more.

Who cares what the Japanese say?today we have cults theravad buddhism which makes buddhism look like a warrior cult rather than a spiritual cult.

Jinnah's lineage was of rajputs,but what was his hindu grandfather doing as a merchant in gujarat?Last time i heard that was not rajputs did.

Tell that to japanese buddhist or chinese buddhist, A bharti has no right to claim budhism as their own religion given the fact how buddhism was exterminated from its place of birth by hindus all the budhists were hounded out of bharat during gupta empire, millions were slaughtered.

Following are some of the differences we can see in the principles and practice of these two religions.

1. Hinduism is not founded by any particular prophet. Buddhism was founded by the Buddha.

2. Hinduism believes in the efficacy and supremacy of the Vedas. The Buddhist do not believe in the Vedas or for that matter any Hindu scripture.

3. Buddhism does not believe in the existence of souls as well in the first cause, whom we generally call God. Hinduism believe in the existence of Atman , that is the individual soul and Brahman, the Supreme Creator.

4. Hinduism accepts the Buddha as an incarnation of Mahavishnu, one of the gods of Hindu trinity. The Buddhist do not accept any Hindu god either as equivalent or superior to the Buddha.

5. The original Buddhism as taught by the Buddha is known as Theravada Buddhism or Hinayana Buddhism. Followers of this do not worship images of the Buddha nor believe in the Bodhisattvas. The Mahayana sect considers the Buddha as the Supreme Soul or the Highest Being, akin to the Brahman of Hinduism and worship him in the form of images and icons.

6. The Buddhists consider the world to be full of sorrow and regard ending the sorrow as the chief aim of human life. The Hindus consider that there are four chief aims (arthas) in life which every being should pursue. They are dharma (religious duty), artha (wealth or material possessions), kama (desires and passions) and moksha (salvation.)

7. Hindus also believe in the four ashramas or stages in life. This is not followed in Buddhism. People can join the Order any time depending upon their spiritual preparedness.

8. Buddhists organize themselves into a monastic Order (Sangha) and the monks live in groups. Hinduism is basically a religion of the individual.

9. Buddhism believes in the concept of Bodhisattvas. Hinduism does not believe in it.

11. Buddhism acknowledge the existence of some gods and goddesses of Hindu pantheon, but give them a rather subordinate status.

12. Refuge in the Buddha, the Sangha and Dhamma are the three cardinal requirements on the eightfold path. Hinduism offers many choices to its followers on the path of self-realization.

13. Although both religions believe in karma and rebirth, they differ in the manner in which they operate and impact the existence of individual beings.

 

[Omar1984]

yeah,but pakistani punjab also belongs to the hindu/sikh people who used to live there.

Most of the people who witnessed partition are long gone and even if they have descendents living in india, they can't buy property in Pakistan's Punjab Province.

A Baloch who has Pakistani citizenship and not a drop of Punjabi blood in him can buy property in Pakistan's Punjab but not a hindu/sikh who had a grandfather who migrated from Pakistan's Punjab to indian punjab during partition.


By the way, I think its hilarious to see indians screaming we are the same but Pakistanis responding no we are not

I'm so glad we Pakistanis separated from indians.

 

[PureAryan]

yeah,but pakistani punjab also belongs to the hindu/sikh people who used to live there.

Ok, Could you enlighten us, how does pakistani punjab belongs to hindus siks, as i told you before the real punjab lies in pakistan, indian punjab is not the ancient punjab, pakistani punjab belongs to the pakistani people wwho live their, no bengali, no nepali and no bharti can claim that even if his ancestors used to live there