Indian Indonesian

[Cobra Arbok]

So Ancient India exteded to Burma, Cambodia, Malaysia and Indonesia. wow.

Not really, ancient India only refers to the Indian subcontinent(mostly modern day India). However, it is a well known fact that ancient Indian Empires/civilizations spread their culture and religion to Southeast Asia through conquest and trade, The Cholas are a good example of this. Modern day India was home to some of the world's most advanced civilizations at the time, so it was natural for India to spread its influence to nearby regions. As some posters have pointed out, some of that influence exists today. So it can be accurately said that Ancient Indian influence existed everywhere between Myanmar and the Phillipines. Some of the first powerful empires in Southeast Asia were Hindu Empires, many of which were tributaries to the CHolas. These are known as the Indianized Kingdoms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Southeast_Asia

And I am not sure what you mean when you say Indians are not proud of their connection to Southeast Asia. There are several threads even on this forum about that. I was actually thinking about making a thread on this subject on one point, but I felt that would be redundant given how much it has been discussed. As for Indus envy, well you know how much I hate it when people steal other's history, and that applies to Indians who want to claim Pakistani IVC sites. It is very ridiculous, especially because Indians do not need to claim Pakistani history, since India has a rich and ancient history that goes much beyond some ruins, impressive as they may be. Not to mention, India has a more than sufficient amount of IVC sites of ancient sites dating to that era.

We love our ancestry, traditions, values, languages and history. We deplore the artificial and utterly meaningless categorisation as "Indian". We have our shared pasts and a lot more that is not shared.

The problem is that Indians cannot respect their neighbours identities and feel the need to intentionally blur lines in order to credit their modern nation for the achievements of outsiders. Your identity is based on deceit if you interchangeably refer to the "subcontinent" and your nation as "India", while throwing tantrums if your neighbours don't engage in the same practice. Its not only Pakistanis who feel like this. Most Nepalis have the same opinion of Indians claiming Buddha as Indian. Its even more farcical when you claim Islamic/Mughal/Central Asian cultures as "Indian".

Hindu nationalism is clearly a very insecure movement that is frustrated by never identifying with or having anything resembling a historic nation like Persia or China. So now you resort to this "soft influence" and "celebrate festivals and exchange ideas" crap to convince the world that you are historic equals. Its sad and laughable at the same time. The truth is that Hindustan. which itself has had numerous meanings, was never the basis for any identity. This is why you desperately need to blur the lines and claim the Indus valley, Afghanistan, Nepal, OIT, Sanskrit (which itself is foreign) to supplement Hindu Nationalism.

With all due respect, there are a lot of inaccuracies in your post. First of all, the Buddha WAS born in India. Siddhartma Guatma was born in a kindom that is now in Nepal, but he only became the Buddha, or the enlightened one, in Bodh Gaya Bihar. He then spread his teachings(which would later become the religion of Buddhism) at Varanasi, which btw is the oldest city in South Asia, older than any city in Pakistan. From there it spread west to modern day Pakistan and East to SE and East Asia. India arguably has more Buddhist heritage and history than any nation on Earth, which is why many of the holiest sites in Buddhism are in India(Bihar to be specific). Without India, there is no Buddhism.

And what is that garbage about India never being a historic nation? the phrase historic nation itself is an oxymoron because the idea of the nation state did not come until recently. And this looks a lot like a nation to me.

In case you do not know, Hindu nationalists base India after the Maurya Empire, which is pretty accurate. And what makes Persia and China more of a nation than India? Persia is a multi-ethnic state with countless cultures and religions aside from Farsi speaking Persians. What exactly do Kurds have in common with Armenians and Bolochis? China has historically been more like a nation, but the modern PRC has little todo with the Han Empire, and is a result of the COmmunist revolution. What exactly do Uighurs. Tibetans, and Manchurians have in common? If anything, India is MORE of a nation because out of all the cradles of civilization, only the people of modern India largely follow the same religion, culture, and traditions as their ancestors did 10000 years ago.
As for Sanskrit, even if it is foreign(which is debateable) we definitely are the masters of it, since the greates works of Sanskrit literature have been written in modern India. No great work of post-Vedic Sanskrit literature has been written anywhere else.

As for the topic, it is a historical fact that ancient Indian empires such as the cholas successfully invaded and spread their culture and religion to Southeast Asia, showing modern India was one of the most influential and powerful civilizations in ancient times. The fact that some posters here are derailing the topic of a thread started by an Indonesian about the historical connections between India and Indonesia and bringing up Paksitan when the OP never mentioned that country just shows their insecurity and inferiority complex.

It looks like this thread has really triggered some people. I guess they cannot stand the fact that modern day India was home to some of the most advanced and influential civilizations in the ancient world, and they successfully spread Indian culture and religion(Hinduism and then buddhism) to SE Asia, some of which exists today. The fact that India directly shaped the evolution and history of a region with over 1 billion people puts it in an elite club historically, and some here do not seem to like that.

With that being said, most South east Asians are proud of their connection to Ancient India. Kudos to @Indos for starting this informative thread, and sorry it got derailed.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

ancient India only refers to the Indian subcontinent(mostly modern day India).

How so? Because you say so?

 

[Cobra Arbok]

How so? Because you say so?

You know what I mean. Ancient India generally refers to the Indian subcontinent, just like ancient China typically refers to China. Of course the India subcontinent consists of several countries, so when I say India in historical context, I mean the land cotermonious to India. It gets rather tiring having to explain that.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

You know what I mean.

No I don't understand what you mean. Since the name 'India' is English and only gained currency in the last few hundred years please tell me how are you teleporting that name back 5,000 years????

*Even the English language only evolved over the last 1,200 years.

In case you do not know, Hindu nationalists base India after the Maurya Empire

Ah okay. Can I base Pakistan on the Moghul Empire?

 

[Cobra Arbok]

No I don't understand what you mean. Since the name 'India' is English and only gained currency in the last few hundred years please tell me how are you teleporting that name back 5,000 years????

*Even the English language only evolved over the last 1,200 years.

Ah okay. Can I base Pakistan on the Moghul Empire?

Sure why not. Does not change the ground reality. Akhsnd Bharat is as stupid as Pan Islamist Ummah Schummah people.
As for what I mean, when I refer to ancient India I refer to modern India. When I refer to Paksitan's ancient history, I say ancient Pakistan. If it is the name that bugs you, do you want me to call it something else?

 

[somsak]

To the ignorant and the uneducated, they think that we are part of them. The uneducated indians and Arabs usually have this mindset. There isn't any of their culture practiced here. Religion wise, Hindu Buddhism and islam gets to get assimilated into the Indonesian culture, not the other way around.

For the indians immigrants, they get to be assimilated and adopts the local culture based on which province they lived in and also they spoke the local languages. Most immigrant races gets to be able speak locals languages. That is how it works here, when compared to any other countries where immigrants are not assimilating.

Hindu were practiced differently here and is 180 degree different than what they practiced elsewhere. In ancient times, we merged both religion of Hindu and Buddha, forming hinddu-buddist which practiced by the sriwijayas and majapahits.

The INDIGENOUS HINDU in Bali, which also adopts Animism into Hinduism looked like this.

Oh also, while not related to the topic, we do have ancient Mayan architecture in java. Nowhere else in Asia could you find something like this.

I am extreamly interested in the Mayan like architecture on Indonesia. Could you please give me the place's name, and info, history? I speculated for a long time that the Meso-American indians are actually Malay/Polynesia people from indonesia.

 

[UnitedPak]

With all due respect, there are a lot of inaccuracies in your post. First of all, the Buddha WAS born in India. Siddhartma Guatma was born in a kindom that is now in Nepal, but he only became the Buddha or the enlightened one, in Bodh Gaya Bihar

This is the kind of Indian mental olympics that riles people up. Surely you understand that? For most normal people the two are the same person and its ridiculous to split them just to claim the latter.

And what is that garbage about India never being a historic nation? the phrase historic nation itself is an oxymoron because the idea of the nation state did not come until recently. And this looks a lot like a nation to me.

Nation does not only mean a modern nation state. Definition of the word "nation":
A nation is a stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, ethnicity, or psychological make-up.
Did Hindus/south asians historically have a common language, nope. territory, nope (even counting Maurya which was not hindu, thats just over a century of your 10k year long timeline). ethnicity, nope.
China, Persia, various Arabs more or less did, hence formed early nations on that basis.

And what makes Persia and China more of a nation than India? Persia is a multi-ethnic state with countless cultures and religions aside from Farsi speaking Persians. What exactly do Kurds have in common with Armenians and Bolochis? China has historically been more like a nation, but the modern PRC has little todo with the Han Empire, and is a result of the COmmunist revolution. What exactly do Uighurs. Tibetans, and Manchurians have in common?

See above, but thats exactly my point in regards to India. Despite the multi ethnic states, Persian, Arab and Chinese empires/nations are largely based on their main ethnic communities and are very well defined by actual historical records.
Iranians respect Afghan, Mughal, Turkic identities as distinct and separate despite the massive cultural contributions of Persian.
Chinese do not go around claiming Mongolians or Turkics as ancient Chinese.
Arabs could literally claim everything from Morocco to Bangladesh if they followed Indian "influence" logic.

Indians on the other hand do not respect any other identity, but purely see all their neighbours as something to be claimed for themselves.

only the people of modern India largely follow the same religion, culture, and traditions as their ancestors did 10000 years ago.

I am sure we have clashed on this countless of times so I am just going to leave it with, I disagree, strongly.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

This is the kind of Indian mental olympics that riles people up. Surely you understand that? For most normal people the two are the same person and its ridiculous to split them just to claim the latter.



Nation does not only mean a modern nation state. Definition of the word "nation":
A nation is a stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, ethnicity, or psychological make-up.
Did Hindus/south asians historically have a common language, nope. territory, nope (even counting Maurya which was not hindu, thats just over a century of your 10k year long timeline). ethnicity, nope.
China, Persia, various Arabs more or less did, hence formed early nations on that basis.


See above, but thats exactly my point in regards to India. Despite the multi ethnic states, Persian, Arab and Chinese empires/nations are largely based on their main ethnic communities and are very well defined by actual historical records.
Iranians respect Afghan, Mughal, Turkic identities as distinct and separate despite the massive cultural contributions of Persian.
Chinese do not go around claiming Mongolians or Turkics as ancient Chinese.
Arabs could literally claim everything from Morocco to Bangladesh if they followed Indian "influence" logic.

Indians on the other hand do not respect any other identity, but purely see all their neighbours as something to be claimed for themselves.


I am sure we have clashed on this countless of times so I am just going to leave it with, I disagree, strongly.

there really is no mental gymnastics there. Most nepalis understand that the buddha is shared heritage between india and nepal. and the buddha and sidhartma guatma are to different people. every single buddhist knows that. that is why bodh gaya is one of the most sacred places in buddhism. you are just exposig your ignorance of buddhism. As I said, without modern india, there is no buddhism. and what do you mean the mauryans were not hindu? Chandragupta Maurya was a bihari hindu. I knoe it makes you angry that the only empir that came close to conquering the entirety of SA was started by a bihari hindu, but you cannot change history. It was not untill Ashoka that the mauryans adopted buddhism. And if you think Han China and persia count as nations but not india, fine. But what makes pakistan more of a nation than India? Because for most of history, mdern pak was ruled by foreign powers such as the indo greeks, mauryans, guptas, mughals, british, etc. whereas most of modern india was never rules by a foreign power until ghaznavi can you show me whether Pakistan meets the criteria of a nation by your standards? and before you bring up the ivc, the ivc was not a centralized empire but a collection of city states.
and when did i say se asia was a part of ancient india? i simply said indian empires such as the cholas played an important part in the history and evolution of the SE Asian region. that is what this thread is abouy, and it was started by an INDONESIAN. Why does it make you feel insecure that modern india had major influence in se asia? And if you have issues with that, take it up with the op.

Look Im not saying indians are innocent. Yes it is wrong for indians to claim Pakistani sites such as mohenjo daro and harrapa, and i will call it out if i see it. But that does not change the fact that you and many other pakistanis have some major misconceptions about Indian history, and theiir attempts to try to put down and belittle indian history just reek of insecurity. of course i am not specificaly referring to you, but what i have seen as a whole. the fact you brought up pakistani history and started bashing india on a thread about indian influence on indonesia is a good example of that.

As for your last point you disagree with me because you have nothing to disprove my claim. Obviously, no nation remains static but it is accurate to say that compared to many other ancient civilizations, modern day indians remain the most similar to their ancestors in turns of culture, religion, lifestyle, etc. Han chinese would come close, but a lot f china's ancient culture was infortunately lost in the mao era.

Anyway, it is good to be back. I will likely be posting some more indian history threads soon, so feel free to check them out and try to rip me to pieces if you want.

 

[Boss Dragun]

I am extreamly interested in the Mayan like architecture on Indonesia. Could you please give me the place's name, and info, history? I speculated for a long time that the Meso-American indians are actually Malay/Polynesia people from indonesia.

it's quite difficult to say (for me anyway) that the mayans and much of native americas are directly related to us Austronesians, although there are indeed similiarities in culture and ancient belief including some architecture. us Austronesians moved west to madagascar (their ancestor comes from borneo) and east reaching as far as hawaii and micronesia (they're mixed in with the melanesian who first inhabit the place). we also share similiar austronesian language. it looked like this :

clothing wise, i don't think there are any asian countries except indonesia and the formosan who wears clothing akin to native americas/mayans. the dayaks, like the mayan counterpart, they have a lot of costumes. so i can only lists some. nevertheless they do looked alike altogether.

Mayan people

Bornean Dayaks, Indonesia

Minahasan , Indonesia

lastly, the Mayan Architecture, which is named Candi Sukuh is a temple located in solo, java. it's one of it's kind in Indonesia and Asia. and by unique, it's the only temple of fertility (can't post much of their pics here. it includes human genitalias). i'm not sure what's the connection between the mayans and us going by this temple, but IMO, i think there were Mayans who migrated to our place in order to escape slaughter from the spanish murderers.

anyway, if lining similiar architectures between us and mayans, it goes like this :

 

[somsak]

it's quite difficult to say (for me anyway) that the mayans and much of native americas are directly related to us Austronesians, although there are indeed similiarities in culture and ancient belief including some architecture. us Austronesians moved west to madagascar (their ancestor comes from borneo) and east reaching as far as hawaii and micronesia (they're mixed in with the melanesian who first inhabit the place). we also share similiar austronesian language. it looked like this :

clothing wise, i don't think there are any asian countries except indonesia and the formosan who wears clothing akin to native americas/mayans. the dayaks, like the mayan counterpart, they have a lot of costumes. so i can only lists some. nevertheless they do looked alike altogether.

Mayan people

Bornean Dayaks, Indonesia

Minahasan , Indonesia

lastly, the Mayan Architecture, which is named Candi Sukuh is a temple located in solo, java. it's one of it's kind in Indonesia and Asia. and by unique, it's the only temple of fertility (can't post much of their pics here. it includes human genitalias). i'm not sure what's the connection between the mayans and us going by this temple, but IMO, i think there were Mayans who migrated to our place in order to escape slaughter from the spanish murderers.

anyway, if lining similiar architectures between us and mayans, it goes like this :

Thanks a lot. This is truely instersting.

 

[trishna_amṛta]

If I am not wrong, when the Majapahit empire fell - the royal court, its entourage and intelligentsia fled to Bali resulting in an explosion of cultural activities in the island. The remaining citizens fled to the mountain regions and East Jawa e.g Tengger.

"Hinduism" spread to Bali from Jawa in the 11th AD during the reign of King Airlangga

Hinduism & Buddhism has already presence in Sumatera & Java long before Airlangga reign.
Only some of what remain of the Wilwatikta (Majapahit Empire) royal court who fled to Bali, while the rest settling in present days Banyuwangi regency. Tenggerese has been around since the days of Wilwatikta Empire, thus they are NOT any remnant although they were joined later on by the commoner / peasant coming from the capital city (Majapahit) afterward.

Disclaimer : I'm writing those based upon my personal knowledge gained from direct interaction with the elders / the wise man of multiple ethnic groups in Indonesia, thus don't ask me for source.

 

[Indos]

Not really, ancient India only refers to the Indian subcontinent(mostly modern day India). However, it is a well known fact that ancient Indian Empires/civilizations spread their culture and religion to Southeast Asia through conquest and trade, The Cholas are a good example of this. Modern day India was home to some of the world's most advanced civilizations at the time, so it was natural for India to spread its influence to nearby regions. As some posters have pointed out, some of that influence exists today. So it can be accurately said that Ancient Indian influence existed everywhere between Myanmar and the Phillipines. Some of the first powerful empires in Southeast Asia were Hindu Empires, many of which were tributaries to the CHolas. These are known as the Indianized Kingdoms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Southeast_Asia

And I am not sure what you mean when you say Indians are not proud of their connection to Southeast Asia. There are several threads even on this forum about that. I was actually thinking about making a thread on this subject on one point, but I felt that would be redundant given how much it has been discussed. As for Indus envy, well you know how much I hate it when people steal other's history, and that applies to Indians who want to claim Pakistani IVC sites. It is very ridiculous, especially because Indians do not need to claim Pakistani history, since India has a rich and ancient history that goes much beyond some ruins, impressive as they may be. Not to mention, India has a more than sufficient amount of IVC sites of ancient sites dating to that era.



With all due respect, there are a lot of inaccuracies in your post. First of all, the Buddha WAS born in India. Siddhartma Guatma was born in a kindom that is now in Nepal, but he only became the Buddha, or the enlightened one, in Bodh Gaya Bihar. He then spread his teachings(which would later become the religion of Buddhism) at Varanasi, which btw is the oldest city in South Asia, older than any city in Pakistan. From there it spread west to modern day Pakistan and East to SE and East Asia. India arguably has more Buddhist heritage and history than any nation on Earth, which is why many of the holiest sites in Buddhism are in India(Bihar to be specific). Without India, there is no Buddhism.

And what is that garbage about India never being a historic nation? the phrase historic nation itself is an oxymoron because the idea of the nation state did not come until recently. And this looks a lot like a nation to me.

In case you do not know, Hindu nationalists base India after the Maurya Empire, which is pretty accurate. And what makes Persia and China more of a nation than India? Persia is a multi-ethnic state with countless cultures and religions aside from Farsi speaking Persians. What exactly do Kurds have in common with Armenians and Bolochis? China has historically been more like a nation, but the modern PRC has little todo with the Han Empire, and is a result of the COmmunist revolution. What exactly do Uighurs. Tibetans, and Manchurians have in common? If anything, India is MORE of a nation because out of all the cradles of civilization, only the people of modern India largely follow the same religion, culture, and traditions as their ancestors did 10000 years ago.
As for Sanskrit, even if it is foreign(which is debateable) we definitely are the masters of it, since the greates works of Sanskrit literature have been written in modern India. No great work of post-Vedic Sanskrit literature has been written anywhere else.

As for the topic, it is a historical fact that ancient Indian empires such as the cholas successfully invaded and spread their culture and religion to Southeast Asia, showing modern India was one of the most influential and powerful civilizations in ancient times. The fact that some posters here are derailing the topic of a thread started by an Indonesian about the historical connections between India and Indonesia and bringing up Paksitan when the OP never mentioned that country just shows their insecurity and inferiority complex.

It looks like this thread has really triggered some people. I guess they cannot stand the fact that modern day India was home to some of the most advanced and influential civilizations in the ancient world, and they successfully spread Indian culture and religion(Hinduism and then buddhism) to SE Asia, some of which exists today. The fact that India directly shaped the evolution and history of a region with over 1 billion people puts it in an elite club historically, and some here do not seem to like that.

With that being said, most South east Asians are proud of their connection to Ancient India. Kudos to @Indos for starting this informative thread, and sorry it got derailed.

I dont think that South East Asian countries are Cholas tributary states, there is no prof on it. Cholas invasion to Srivijaya kingdom is meant to plunder not to take the territory. Here I give you the information from wikipedia:

"Despite the devastation, Srivijaya mandala still survived as the Chola invasion ultimately failed to install direct administration over Srivijaya, since the invasion was short and only meant to plunder. However, this invasion gravely weakened the Srivijayan hegemony and enabled the formation of regional kingdoms like Kahuripan and its successor, Kediri in Java based on agriculture rather than coastal and long-distance trade. Sri Deva was enthroned as the new king and the trading activities resumed. He sent an embassy to the court of China in 1028 CE.[20] Although the invasion was not followed by direct Cholan occupation and the region was unchanged geographically, there were huge consequences in trade. Tamil traders encroached on the Srivijayan realm traditionally controlled by Malay traders and the Tamil guilds' influence increased on the Malay Peninsula and north coast of Sumatra.[20]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chola_invasion_of_Srivijaya

 

[LASER1]

We love our ancestry, traditions, values, languages and history.

You don't love your traditions, you assimilated to ME ones (If that's what you were talking about when you said traditions then I'm wrong).

The problem is that Indians cannot respect their neighbours identities and feel the need to intentionally blur lines in order to credit their modern nation for the achievements of outsiders. Your identity is based on deceit if you interchangeably refer to the "subcontinent" and your nation as "India", while throwing tantrums if your neighbours don't engage in the same practice. Its not only Pakistanis who feel like this. Most Nepalis have the same opinion of Indians claiming Buddha as Indian. Its even more farcical when you claim Islamic/Mughal/Central Asian cultures as "Indian".

When all you do is disrespect Hindu, even your own knowledgeable TT's call Hindus in a slur sounding name like Hindoo, proves the point your words mean sh*t. So, you don't get our respect because you people hold contempt for other religions especially Hinduism. Be it defacing centuries-old statues, or destroying temples (historically that's what Muslim invaders did. No complaints).

You think Nepali's feel threatened that we're stealing their culture? Think again, because there is nothing to steal, you can't steal a culture. All your claims are material claims, like the Indus river, or excavation sites culture is beyond that. And you don't value them, all you do was stick to our face just like @Indus Pakistan (for scoring some points?). You don't try to understand the culture because if you do, you wouldn't speak in such a contemptuous manner.

As for Buddha, it's true alright. Siddhartha Gautama attained Nirvana under Bodhi tree in Gaya. We don't need to claim a well established facts.

Hindu nationalism is clearly a very insecure movement that is frustrated by never identifying with or having anything resembling a historic nation like Persia or China. So now you resort to this "soft influence" and "celebrate festivals and exchange ideas" crap to convince the world that you are historic equals. Its sad and laughable at the same time. The truth is that Hindustan. which itself has had numerous meanings, was never the basis for any identity. This is why you desperately need to blur the lines and claim the Indus valley, Afghanistan, Nepal, OIT, Sanskrit (which itself is foreign) to supplement Hindu Nationalism.

Hindu nationalism is not about the land. It's about the people. It's laughable you think you know what it is but missed the basic idea of nationalism. After all, you must know when you claim Kashmir you really claim is the people and not the land (or is it?).

If we treated the way how Semitics treated people of 'other' religions (Remember 'Reconquista of Hispania')
then there would be only one major religion or culture in this subcontinent, to say the least, we might have killed the idea of Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism etc...

So, when we resort to "soft influence" we are not spreading extremism. We're spreading that wasn't spread through the sword rather through debates and discussion. And we can be proud of that, as it is our culture and identity. These exchange of ideas include Yoga, Classical Music, Ayurveda etc... and we all know how that panned out.

@Cobra Arbok Bruh, there is no point is teaching or explaining to these lot about our culture. They simply don't have the tolerance to accept other cultures they never did. All you get will be abuses there is no discussion.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

You don't love your traditions, you assimilated to ME ones (If that's what you were talking about when you said traditions then I'm wrong).


When all you do is disrespect Hindu, even your own knowledgeable TT's call Hindus in a slur sounding name like Hindoo, proves the point your words mean sh*t. So, you don't get our respect because you people hold contempt for other religions especially Hinduism. Be it defacing centuries-old statues, or destroying temples (historically that's what Muslim invaders did. No complaints).

You think Nepali's feel threatened that we're stealing their culture? Think again, because there is nothing to steal, you can't steal a culture. All your claims are material claims, like the Indus river, or excavation sites culture is beyond that. And you don't value them, all you do was stick to our face just like @Indus Pakistan (for scoring some points?). You don't try to understand the culture because if you do, you wouldn't speak in such a contemptuous manner.

As for Buddha, it's true alright. Siddhartha Gautama attained Nirvana under Bodhi tree in Gaya. We don't need to claim a well established facts.


Hindu nationalism is not about the land. It's about the people. It's laughable you think you know what it is but missed the basic idea of nationalism. After all, you must know when you claim Kashmir you really claim is the people and not the land (or is it?).

If we treated the way how Semitics treated people of 'other' religions (Remember 'Reconquista of Hispania')
then there would be only one major religion or culture in this subcontinent, to say the least, we might have killed the idea of Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism etc...

So, when we resort to "soft influence" we are not spreading extremism. We're spreading that wasn't spread through the sword rather through debates and discussion. And we can be proud of that, as it is our culture and identity. These exchange of ideas include Yoga, Classical Music, Ayurveda etc... and we all know how that panned out.

@Cobra Arbok Bruh, there is no point is teaching or explaining to these lot about our culture. They simply don't have the tolerance to accept other cultures they never did. All you get will be abuses there is no discussion.

It is quite sad to say the least. The thing is I respect Pakistani history. But if Pakistan's ancient history is so great. why do they feel the need to desperately try and put down Indian history? The truth is deep down inside, they know there is a disconnect between Pakistan's ancient past and the modern country. On the other hand, no such disconnect exists in India. They also cannot stand the fact that the neighbor they loath is one of the most ancient and advanced civilizations and arguably contributed more to the World in fields such as math, science, literature, and philosophy than any other region on Earth. A bigger source of pain for them is that our civilization has survived for over 10000 years, and we did not submit to turkik invaders and convert to their Abrahamic faith, despite their best efforts. This rejection gives them a massive inferiority complex, and the only way they can resolve it is to try and belittle and steal our history. For example they use some manuscript to try and claim the discovery of zero when the world know the first mathematician to use zero as a number with its modern properties was Brahmagupta, an Indian mathematician who lived most of his life and worked in Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh, in the center of the Gangetic Plains they hate so much. The y simply cannot get over the fact that overall, the Gangetic plains FAR surpasses the Indus region in terms of historical contributions. Can you name one famous mathematician from ancient Pakistan? Any notable pre-Mughal architecture and literature? Hell, did they even have any indigenous Empires of their own? The reason they love the Mughals so much is because the Mughal invaders gave modern Pakistan a history and identity, whereas ours has remained mostly unchanged for over 10000 years despite the fact that modern India was not united for most of that period. Overall, this makes them insecure and jealous about their history compared to ours, and those who do not have anything steal from those who do. I see Pakistanis trying to steal and belittle Indian history on this forum almost every day for that reason. Although I did not think they would be pathetic enough to bring up their insecurities on a forum about Indonesia. Its sad to say the least. Sorry for the rant @LASER but I needed to say this.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Manoj Punjabi (born December 7, 1972 in Jakarta) is an Indian Indonesian film and television producer and owner of the biggest production house in Indonesia.

Manoj is a producer of soap operas and films for MD Entertainment and MD Pictures.

Since MD Entertainment was founded in 2003, Manoj was determined to mobilise everything, give the best for the television industry in Indonesia. Since the beginning he has been developing the concept for a steady business with a very clear goal is to be number one and the best in the country. Proven results of his work has always been a pioneer in the Indonesian television industry, such as the soap opera Cinta Fitri which is a symbol of success in Indonesian television map. Numerous prestigious awards such as the Panasonic Awards, SCTV Awards, Indonesian Movie Awards, Yahoo OMG Awards, all achieved under the leadership of MD Manoj, only in the past 10 years.

To develop the Indonesian film industry, Manoj began expanding its business into the world of cinema. Through MD Corp, subsidiary, MD Pictures, Manoj gave birth to quality films, such as Ayat-Ayat Cinta (2008), and Habibie & Ainun (2012) which won the highest number of viewers in Indonesia today.

Family
Manoj Punjabi is of Indian Sindhi descent.[1] He is married to Shania has 3 children.[1]

A guy whose funnily named Punjabi but is from Sindh... both provinces of Pakistan... and is an indonesian indian? wtf bro.