What's new

How much of Pakistani culture is Indian?

Icewolf, why are you intent on insulting the Muslims and Islam today ? First you post a picture of a Sunni Muslim disparagingly and now you are giving articles about how Muslims were involved in the inhumane slave trade and praises Hindus for not indulging in it.

I know Bohras are big supporters of Modi, but this is carrying it a bit far. :lol:
I wonder if he even read that extract or carefully saw that pic before posting it
 
All wedding culture is Pakistani.


A typical wedding was a 7-10 day affair and a lot of ceremonies and the games, music and dance incorporated in it were for people to pass time. The wedding guests used to travel from long distances to the wedding ceremony by foot or bullock carts and they stayed back to rest for a few days. Hence started all the ceremonies and whatever goes on in a wedding ceremony to fill up the time and keep the guests entertained for those 7 days.

This happened in ancient India and is still followed to some extent, I don't know how significant it is to what you call as Pakistani culture.
 
To be honest I'm happy Joe Shearer is here to calm down the retards from making outrageous statements.

Pdf should make joe shearer a mod for his fairness and his undeniable scholarly ability. My two cents. The rest of the Indians are morons.

So are you.

So I guess it takes one to know one.
 
This topic is probably discussed 1000 times before. :lol:
Actually starting same topic it again and again tends to remind the confused minds that Ah we are different or we are this or that.In all the melee actual identity culture is lost.
 
In India the Muslims established a number of slave trade centres. Besides Delhi and cities in Bengal there is mention of Badaon in Uttar Pradesh and Mandor in Rajasthan.62 But of course from the narrative of the chroniclers it appears that slave markets existed in almost all important places in the country, for slaves were also sold in fairs held in major cities. In this inhuman business the Hindus were not interested. Firstly, they were themselves at the receiving end, they themselves were the victims. And secondly, as W.H. Moreland points out, “We may infer from della Valle’s statements that the principal Hindus at Surat - perhaps the most humane people that ever lived - disapproved entirely of slavery.” Now few people are as good traders as Gujaratis. They would have excelled if they had taken to slave-trading. But catching and selling of slaves did not fit in with the Hindu psyche. Although, commenting on the statement of della Valle, Moreland says, “but I do not think that this remark can be extended to Hindus generally… though in Akbar’s time at least it did not secure the approval of all Hindus… The existence of slavery is testified to by the travellers Abdur Razak, Conti and Barbosa.”63 It would be safe to presume that it prevailed in the Deccan, because it prevailed farther north in the country whence the Deccan dynasties had sprung and we may believe Nikitin’s statement that in his time there was a trade in ‘Black people’ in Bidar.”64 But the trade was carried on by Muslims and not Hindus, for Moreland adds that in 1643, “a Nayak, or chief, rejected a Dutch request for leave to buy up to 1000 slaves yearly on the ground that the sale of human being was not only a scandal but a sin.”

:P :P

But the Portuguese in this matter followed the custom of the Muslims. “Linschoten recorded that they never worked, but employed slaves, who were sold daily in the market like beasts, and della Valle notes that the ‘greatest part’ of people in Goa were slaves.”66 The Portuguese not only employed Indian slaves for domestic and other duties, but they also regularly brought slaves from Abyssinia and Mozambique for sale at good price in Goa and Surat. They dominated the Indian seas where they pirated non-chalantly, captured slaves and sold them in the markets of Hugli, Tamluk, Pipli, St. Thome, Ceylon and Goa. Pyrard (1608-11) observed that goods of all the world must pass Ormuz and pay tribute to the Portuguese.67 It so happened that their Governor in Hugli, Manoel Travers, infuriated Shahjahan when as a prince, he was in rebellion and in a helpless position. Travers seized some of the prince’s richly laden boats and carried away some of Mumtaz Mahall’s slave girls. When Shahjahan became king he ordered the Mughal governor of Bengal to chastise the Portuguese. After a sanguinary battle on the famous river port Hugli in 1632 they were expelled from Bengal.68 As a matter of fact the people of India hailed the other European adventurers as liberators from Portuguese tyranny, their forcible conversions and their obnoxious slave trade.69

You had alot of self respect on this :P

WTF this?? Have you taken today's pill?
 
Pakistani culture is IVC indian culture is dravidian and ganges

Well for one there was elements of IVC stolen by Hinduism such as worshipping of cow and the Swastika.. .There are also proof Vedas may have been written in Pakistan
Spiral confusion:D

To be honest I'm happy Joe Shearer is here to calm down the retards from making outrageous statements.
Good luck JS:P
 
To be honest I'm happy Joe Shearer is here to calm down the retards from making outrageous statements.

Pdf should make joe shearer a mod for his fairness and his undeniable scholarly ability. My two cents. The rest of the Indians are morons.


Going by your logic - the 8 mods are the worthies the rest of the Pakistani's here are morons...right :lol:
 
Still they were all subordinate to Shah Jahan and history remembers only him.

In a similar way, you guys were probably conscripts toiling away under foreign masters and fighting their wars. Actually you know what ? You are doing that even now - fighting America's GWOT. I guess not much has changed.

Mughals gave us the platform to spread islam.

And they treated muslims equally so we didn't fought their war we fought our own.

Also if history just knows shah jahan then he was born in lahore my home town. :D
 
Back
Top Bottom