Indians who deny Aryan invasion, please explain this

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

But this is not the case. Dalits are children of muslims with hindu women. When muslims invaded some area, they killed the men and took the women as slaves. Children were born to these women who were muslims. But later, after a few years, hindus attacked this land, killed the muslims and freed the women. But these women already had children from muslims and hence these children were not accepted into the society by Hindus. They became Dalits. Being dalits has nothing to do with being non European. Even in the DNA results, it was for the tribals, who were not untouchables. Tribals just happened to live in forests and hence became backwards. There was no discrimination against them. If someone wants to live in the forest, what can anyone else do? You are taking DNA of tribals and then comparing dalits which makes no sense.





I only used them because that was the boundary for "Gandharva" territory. Wherever there was no relevance, why should I take the name of that territory? Let us say, I said Gandharvas lived across Pakistan. It would appear that Gandharvas lives in Sindh, Punjab, KPK & Baluchistan. This is incorrect as Gandhava land only started from the end of the Sindhu/Indus basin which is the KPK mountain range and Baluchistan desert

There was a race called "Nara" just like Yakshas, Gandharvas etc who lived to the east of Sulaiman-HinduKush range. Today, people think that "Nara" means "man" but that is not the case. Nara is a race of men who lived in India. This is what I mean by Indian empire.

Proof and evidence about the dalits and their origins?

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

they probably brought the caste system with them as well.

Caste system was a later development in North India.

This is incorrect as Gandhava land only started from the end of the Sindhu/Indus basin which is the KPK mountain range and Baluchistan desert

Gandhara was originally the Peshawar Valley and adjacent valleys, it later on expanded into North Punjab and parts of Afghanistan while it's ethno-cultural sphere covered the entirety of Pakistan and East Afghanistan.

North Indian upper castes have about ~15-25% of dna that is similar to ancient DNA from Corded Ware people of Europe.

Lower castes and Dalits either don't have it or have very tiny amount (~1-3%).

Even the Rakhigarhi woman didn't have it (0%). Her aDNA had been analyzed by both Indian and foreign academics.

How do you explain this without some sort of Aryan invasion theory?

The Aryan Invasion theory has long been debunked and has been replaced by the Aryan migration event. There was no evidence of conflict and the Rigveda does not mention any hostilities until they reached the Ravi river.

 

[Rana4pak]

The Roma are descended from Dalits so this is just another laughable Hindoo attempt at history. Everyone else in this thread can write this Hindoo off as the psuedohistory peddling quack he is.


False. I was under the impression Rajput is a medieval Indian identity.

Bro impression n scientific knowledge both are different things even Lithuanian embassy in India have that article in their official website .https://in.mfa.lt/in/en/news/the-times-of-india-lithuanian-tribe-traces-rajput-roots

 

[Drizzt]

Source please? You need to give the historical name and then tie that to a geography we can relate with today. The other guy mentioned Gandharava. Is that Gandhara he is talking about which is the region from present day Islamabad [Taxila] to Peshawar to Kabul?

What I meant is modern countries in South Asia, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh are all post British creation. South Asia was divided into 100s of kingdoms, based on ethnicity and language.

The Pasthun region of current Pakistan, got clubbed with British India fairly recently. Because British brought those areas under their control, to deter raids of Pasthun Tribesman on the areas of Punjab.

As for weather Gandharava is same as Gandhara, I have no idea, I can be wrong. I always view Vedic texts with skepticism. Vedas are the more made up fantasy than actual history, they should never be used to arrive at historical or geographic conclusions.

Books like these are more trustworthy than Vedas,
https://www.amazon.in/Hindus-Altern...refinements=p_27:Wendy+Doniger&s=books&sr=1-2

The most authentic version of Vedas and other Hindu texts are the oldest ones, found in museums and libraries of western countries. You can find scanned copies of them now at
https://archive.org/search.php?query=subject:"vedas"

All the modern Indian editions are fake ones, rewritten many times with changing political requirements.

 

[Indos]

checkout R1A1 gene mapping map and see Europe. They came from Steppe.

Ancient North Indian Gene entered India 45000 year ago. Migrants societies thrive and climb social order.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

Books like these are more trustworthy than Vedas,
https://www.amazon.in/Hindus-Altern...refinements=p_27:Wendy+Doniger&s=books&sr=1-2

How is Wendy Doniger's book authentic? She is some low life American funded indologist. BY what means can anyone call her views as accurate?

The most authentic version of Vedas and other Hindu texts are the oldest ones, found in museums and libraries of western countries. You can find scanned copies of them now at
https://archive.org/search.php?query=subject:"vedas"

The book I quoted of Bori's Mahabharatha is based on Sanskrit literature itself. There is a Sanskrit copy of the Mahabharatha which is only translated into English. One can read the Sanskrit shlokas and the english translations side by side and see that they refer to the same thing (of course, some translation problems exist, but that is a given due to language incompatibility). Bori's Mahabharatha cites all its sources and offers thorough explanation of how various sources were compiled together.

Secondly, Vedas don't have as much a description of life as Mahabharatha does. Mahabharatha has enormous amount of details on the life and history of Pandavas with 1 lakh shlokas. Also, Mahabharatha is written like a novel/story and hence very easy to understand with almost no misinterpretation. That is why I am referring to Mahabharatha rather than Vedas.

All the modern Indian editions are fake ones, rewritten many times with changing political requirements.

Vedas have been translated incorrectly by many foreign authors and hence there indeed are many wrong translations of them. The reason why there is a problem in understanding Vedas is because they are not written as stories but as verses and knowledge and hence people who read it without the knowledge of ancient Sanskrit feel disconnected and hence are unable to understand the concept. In addition, politics also play a role in misinterpretation, especially by the missionaries. However, Mahabharatha is not misinterpreted in Bori's edition as it can be easily found out due to its story like nature

 

[Varunastra]

Arguing over aryan migration is laughable in this day and age really. The steppe people never stopped themselves from mixing with the natives, and here people are arguing about genetics with political agenda trying to create divisions in society. Who cares who has more or less steppe ancestry? People didn't even know such stuff existed before the British. I bet even the migrating steppe people didn't know that they are steppe people by the time they arrived here What's next really? Dravidian invasion theory about how they replaced the native south asian hunter gatherers? African invasion theory about the first humans in south asia, hence proving we are all just africans? Your identity is Indian, Pakistani, etc, not a or b% of xyz.

 

[Leishangthem]

There is no online text. You will have to download the book (pdf) from here:

Mahabharata e-book -Download complete Mahabharata PDF e-book

Here is the complete Mahabharata translated into English prose directly from the original Sanskrit text by Pratap Chandra Roy. Download the complete PDF e-book here for free.

holybooks.com

If you want to look that way, the NE people have vastly different appearance than other Indians. Does this mean they were natives? As I posted the snippet above, Chins, Kiratas (hybrid between Chins & Naras/Indians) existed even during Mahabharatha and lived with others. In fact, the kingdom of Pragjyotishya (Assam) which were filled with mongoloids (Chins & Kiratas) fought in Mahabharatha on the side of Duryodhana, showing how they were part of Indian empire despite racial difference.

However, even during Mahabharatha times, there was extensive contact between Europe and India. People like Yavanas and other Europeans are mentioned regularly. Naturally, people closer to the borders tend to intermarry and carry the genes across. That is why there is a difference of genes across regions. This does not make anyone outsider or insider/native.



There was no mention of Iranians anywhere. There were Yavanas, Yakshas, Gandharvas, Naras and a few other races. The Huns, Kushans were empires/dynasties of certain kings rather than an entire race. All of them were of a mix of European & Turkic races.


Don't you think it is common sense that people's DNA changes according to region? Do you think the DNA of people in Assam is same as that of Bihar? Does it mean that Biharis are not natives? The DNA of population keeps changing over time as there are intermovements.
Let us take an example: Some Chinese came into Assam, became successful and settled there. Because of their success, people became attracted to them and wanted to have more relationship with them and many of them got multiple wives and produced a dozen children, all of whom were able to become adults due to access to family wealth. Hence their offsprings had higher success in breeding and over time the share of Chinese DNA increased in Assam. About 200 years hence, Assam got 15% of the DNA to be Chinese. Does this mean they are outsiders who invaded Assam? In older times, the population of the world was about 10% of what it is today. So, even if 200-300 people of a community became successful and settled in a place, over 100-200 years, their DNA would become widespread in that region. This in no way means anything.


Pakistan did not exist in the past. Even today, Pakistan has people with vastly different lineage. Baluchistan is mostly Persian Shia, KPK is mostly Afghan. Also, southern Pakistan (Sindh) and Pakistani Punjab was part of Indian empire, not Gandharvas.

That is because in the past Gandharva horses were extremely popular. There are no good varieties of horses in Afghanistan region of Gandhar. The good horses are mainly from Iran & Mesopotamia region. So, even though the Gandharvas existed from today's KPK, they also extended to the West Asia. Ancient Indian texts don't mention the western boundaries of Gandharva lands. Ancient Indian texts only give description of territory within India and not outside it. It only says that Gandharva kingdom existed across the North & Northwest of current day India. But the fact that Gandharvas were known for their horses and also that further west were kings of Yavanas, whom we know to be Greeks whose empire extended till Byzantine. Since no other race is mentioned between Gandharvas & Yavanas, it is only logical to consider that entire populaion of Mesopotamia extending to Central Asia, including Iranians, were Gandharvas. @Maira La this is why there is nothing called Iranian race. Iran is only a political entity, not a race

Also, nowhere in any ancient history before Asura Mahda (Zoroastrianism founder) there was any mention of Iran or Persia. Persia/Iran came to being only because of the cult formed around Asura Mahda. There was no real race of Iranians. Iran is only a political community rather than a race.

All lines has been blurred between mythology and scientific facts.

Just said what I heard from some friendly Jats.



Take the Assamese example and suppose those with lower or no Chinese ancestry are lower caste and untouchable. Suppose the division is not based on wealth but on Chinese ancestry. Suppose a wealthy person with low Chinese ancestry is still low caste. Then you would have a caste hierarchy based on Chinese ancestry in Assam, right?
That's exactly what happened in rest of India. Instead of Chinese ancestry what you have is Corded Ware / Sintashta in upper caste.

Chinese culture weren't into those untouchability things ,and the people part of sinosphere aren't the kind to blindly adopt foreign concept without incorporating eastern elements ,look at korea or Japan or any region with Chinese diaspora mix . The Chinese you are referring to are actually Dai people,though they indeed are part of the 56 Chinese ethnicity but they are a minority in china,and Myanmar has 6 times(6m) more dai people than china(1m) has. Dai is a wide spread ethnicity of its own in pacific asia with myanmar and Vietnam having the bulkshare of their population.

Myanmar	6,345,236
Vietnam	1,818,349
China	1,158,989
Laos	126,229
Thailand	145,236

NE region has its own indigenous population consisting of a buch of small tribes- Hou Lei,Chakpa,Nga,Lotha,Nung,Khu,Khem,since ancient times in the periphery of China,Tibet and Myanmar.

But apparently migration of Chinese happened in Tang-Shang dynasty ,via the iri river

Hence the name of first known King of Manipur/Meitrabak/Kangleipak is Tang-Ja Leela Pakhangba (1445 BC-1405BC) (Tang-Ja=short name for Tang-Shang; Leela=who followed the Ireel trail; Pa=forefathers, Khangba=knew his forefathers, the Tang-Shang people) His wife gave birth to a son, named Kangba.Thus, the first Mi-Tei kingdom was established. Mi-Tei later came to be pronounced as Mee-tei, Mai-tei or Mei-tei at various period; but carries the same meaning.
One can see ,simlar eastern ancestor worship practices in manipur and the people therein sees dragon entity pakhangba as supreme diety of the race meitei.The region also entered the bronze age quickly .These traits of aren't seen in assamese culture.

Cr- https://www.amazon.in/Geography-Manipur-Th-Nabakumar-Singh/dp/8185891796

 

[Adecypher]

Not to derail interesting discussion on this thread but I find this movie clip amusing which shows the pathetic situation of "caste system" in India, I mean even Bollywood is making movies on the topic :

 

[nautilaceae]

What is factual? Is there anyone who has seen what happened even 1000 year back? Mahabharatha is a book written 5000 years ago. It has mention of the races and their approximate locations with respect to India. That is much more authentic than any other source

How could you write a book without a writing system? India didn't have a writing system until 2200 yrs ago, much later than other civilizations. Vedas were all orally passed down, Mahabharata was written after 11th century AD. And it's mythology.


@PAKISTANFOREVER @Maira La

 

[Smarana Mitra]

How could you write a book without a writing system? India didn't have a writing system until 2200 yrs ago, much later than other civilizations. Vedas were all orally passed down, Mahabharata was written after 11th century AD. And it's mythology.


@PAKISTANFOREVER @Maira La

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Pakistan did not exist in the past

Pakistan as a modern polity did not exist until 1947, the same goes for India.

It is what it is, they are Avarna but not considered Dalit - what does that tell you? That traditional caste hierarchy and Brahmin supremacy does not work in Punjab like it works anywhere else in India. Why I don't know, I am not from Punjab and don't totally understand Punjabi social dynamics, but if I had to take a guess it's because the other Biradaris are more West Eurasian than the Punjabi Brahmins and don't see themselves as inferior in any way.

Pakistani social structure is based on the tribal Biradari/Qabaila system which is identical to the social structure of the Indo-Aryans prior to the development of the caste system. The Biradari/Qabaila social structure is a system of tribes, divided into clans. There is no social hierarchy, except one that can be gained and lost through renown and land-ownership. Occupations are not inherited, rather they are fluid, a Jatt can be a merchant, soldier, farmer, etc...

This social system is unique (within the region) to Pakistan and it's overlapping ethnic groups.

Even today, Pakistan has people with vastly different lineage. Baluchistan is mostly Persian Shia, KPK is mostly Afghan.

Balochistan is not Persian Shia, I'm not sure where you got that from. KPK is indeed Afghan (synonym for Pashtun) majority, however, they are like any other ethnicity in Pakistan; similar to Punjabis, Sindhis, Kashmiris, etc...

Majority of the populations of our mainstream ethnic groups reside in Pakistan. 70% of "Afghans"/Pashtuns reside in Pakistan as the historical region of Afghanistan (Suleiman range) was very different in geographic definition to the modern-state of Afghanistan (whose boundaries were formed through Barakzai conquests and the Great Game between Russia and the British Empire).

Even today, Pakistan has people with vastly different lineage

Linguistically yes, however, genetically, Pakistan is quite homogenous compared to it's neighboring countries.

A common belief was that Pakistan would serve as a good proxy for South Asia diversity under the perception that it's linguistic diversity would have strong correlations to it's genetic diversity. However, genetic studies have found that to not be the case.

Shared and Unique Components of Human Population Structure and Genome-Wide Signals of Positive Selection in South Asia - PMC

South Asia harbors one of the highest levels genetic diversity in Eurasia, which could be interpreted as a result of its long-term large effective population size and of admixture during its complex demographic history. In contrast to Pakistani ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Importantly, the Pakistani (Indus Valley) populations differ substantially from most of the Indian populations and show comparably low genetic differentiation (within the FST range of 0.008–0.020) from European, Near Eastern, Caucasian, and Indian populations (Figure 1 and Figures S1 and S11).

However, when we compare the fraction of outlying Indian signals also found in European or East Asian populations to the fraction of outlying Pakistani signals shared with the same regions, we find Pakistan consistently appearing markedly more similar to West Eurasian than to Indian populations (Figure 3). This result remains when we examine signals of recent positive selection in north and south India separately. Combined with our ADMIXTURE and PCA results, this is powerful evidence that Pakistan is a poor proxy for South Asian genetic diversity, despite having often fulfilled this role in previous publications.

Additionally, the relatively low genetic diversity among Pakistani populations (average pairwise FST 0.0056, although this measure excludes the Hazara, who show substantial admixture with Central Asian populations; see Figure 2) is less than one third of the diversity observed among all South Asian populations (0.0184), even when excluding the most divergent Austroasiatic and Tibeto-Burman speaking groups of east India.

Also, southern Pakistan (Sindh) and Pakistani Punjab was part of Indian empire, not Gandharvas.

I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion. If you're basing this off of the Mahabharata, then your claim is false. The peoples of Punjab and Sindh were grouped alongside the Gandharans and were viewed in a significantly negative light.

That is because in the past Gandharva horses were extremely popular. There are no good varieties of horses in Afghanistan region of Gandhar. The good horses are mainly from Iran & Mesopotamia region. So, even though the Gandharvas existed from today's KPK, they also extended to the West Asia. Ancient Indian texts don't mention the western boundaries of Gandharva lands. Ancient Indian texts only give description of territory within India and not outside it. It only says that Gandharva kingdom existed across the North & Northwest of current day India. But the fact that Gandharvas were known for their horses and also that further west were kings of Yavanas, whom we know to be Greeks whose empire extended till Byzantine. Since no other race is mentioned between Gandharvas & Yavanas, it is only logical to consider that entire populaion of Mesopotamia extending to Central Asia, including Iranians, were Gandharvas. @Maira La this is why there is nothing called Iranian race. Iran is only a political entity, not a race

The horse breeds of Sindhu (Lower Indus Valley) and Vahika (Punjab) were even more renowned. It's clear that these breeds were from the region but eventually went extinct due to continuous cross-breeding or breed merging just as the famed Nisean horse.

Secondly, your claim of Gandharans being Iranians is blatantly false. Gandhara was considered a distinct country/people by both Iranians and Indians. They spoke an Indo-Aryan language and followed a culture very distinct from Iranians.

We have also have genetic samples from ancient Gandhara, they are no where close to Iranians but instead fall within the Pakistani genetic cluster.

Central Asia is mix Eurosian/Chinese, very different IMO, the look more like Hazara or Uigyur

Central Asia was historically Indo-European. Ancient Central Asians would have been very different to current modern-day Central Asians.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

1. He is using a Hindu book as source of historical fact which is highly suspect.

Mythical sources can often have some historical value, what's ironic however is that the same Hindu books he is quoting depicts the Indus region in a very negative light.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion. If you're basing this off of the Mahabharata, then your claim is false. The peoples of Punjab and Sindh were grouped alongside the Gandharans and were viewed in a significantly negative light.

Who said that people of Punjab were Gandharvas? Punjab before 1947 was not separate province. Entire punjab was 1 unit. It is not possible that half of punjab was non gandharva while others were gandharva. Lot of holy sites like Kurukshetra, Parashuma's panchajanaka in jind etc are in punjab. Also, it was the land of Bharatha or Hastinapura. It was the border area with Gandharvas and may ahve been captured by Gandharvas a few times but it was not Gandharva region.

The horse breeds of Sindhu (Lower Indus Valley) and Vahika (Punjab) were even more renowned. It's clear that these breeds were from the region but eventually went extinct due to continuous cross-breeding or breed merging just as the famed Nisean horse.

Secondly, your claim of Gandharans being Iranians is blatantly false. Gandhara was considered a distinct country/people by both Iranians and Indians. They spoke an Indo-Aryan language and followed a culture very distinct from Iranians.

We have also have genetic samples from ancient Gandhara, they are no where close to Iranians but instead fall within the Pakistani genetic cluster.

How do you have genetic sample from ancient Gandhara? Also, the horse breed of Punjab or vahika was not as renowned as you claim. Otherwise, in mahabharatha, there would not be praise for gandharva horses. Hastinapura was in Punjab. Jayadratha, Duryodhana's brother in law was from Sindh. They would all have plenty of good horses which was not the case.

Also, Gandhara can't be a distinct nation in the middle of massive civilisation. It would be impractical. Gandhara region was at the border of Gandharva region and was like a buffer zone with huge intermixing

Pakistani social structure is based on the tribal Biradari/Qabaila system which is identical to the social structure of the Indo-Aryans prior to the development of the caste system. The Biradari/Qabaila social structure is a system of tribes, divided into clans. There is no social hierarchy, except one that can be gained and lost through renown and land-ownership. Occupations are not inherited, rather they are fluid, a Jatt can be a merchant, soldier, farmer, etc.

Indian system was never based on tribes. There were clans/Vamshas but the social hierarchy was based on Varnas. Pakistan has no Varna system. Pakistan has only 2 type of people - nobility and peasants. there are no specialised Vyshyas (trader/baniya) and Brahmans (scholar/teacher) class people kept distinctly separate

Mythical sources can often have some historical value, what's ironic however is that the same Hindu books he is quoting depicts the Indus region in a very negative light.

Negative in what sense?

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Who said that people of Punjab were Gandharvas?

I didn't say that the people of Punjab were Gandharans (according to the Mahabharata), rather they were grouped alongside Gandharans.

Punjab before 1947 was not separate province.

Entire punjab was 1 unit.

Also, it was the land of Bharatha or Hastinapura

Punjab is and has always been The Fiver Rivers and it's Doabs. Even Mahabharata that you are quoting clearly defines the geography of Punjab (then called Vahika, Panchanada, Vahikadesa, Aratta, etc... by Indians) and narrates it as a distinct and seperate region.

"There where forests of Pilus stand, and those five rivers flow, viz., the Satadru, the Vipasa, the Iravati, the Candrabhaga, and the Vitasa and which have the Sindhu for their sixth, there in those regions removed from the Himavat, are the countries called by the name of the Arattas. Those regions are without virtue and religion. No one should go thither. The gods, the pitris, and the brahmanas, never accept gifts from those that are fallen, or those that are begotten by Shudras on the girls of other castes, or the Vahikas who never perform sacrifices and are exceedingly irreligious."

"There where the five rivers flow just after issuing from the mountains, there among the Aratta-Vahikas, no respectable person should dwell even for two days."

"Fie on the Arattas and the people of the country of the five rivers!"

Madras/Madrakas were a frontier tribe that inhabited North Punjab.

"Beginning with the Matsyas, the residents of the Kuru and the Pancala countries, the Naimishas as well and the other respectable peoples, the pious among all races are conversant with the eternal truths of religion. This cannot be said of the Madrakas and the crooked-hearted race that resides in the country of the five rivers."

Here is a narration of a visit to a Punjabi city from a Brahmin of North India

"A foremost one among Brahmanas, venerable in years while reciting old histories, said these words, blaming the Vahikas and Madrakas, One should always avoid the Vahikas, those impure people that are out of the pail of virtue. I remember from the days of my youth that a slaughter-ground for kine and a space for storing intoxicating spirits always distinguish the entrances of the abodes of the (Vahika) kings. On some very secret mission I had to live among the Vahikas. In consequence of such residence the conduct of these people is well known to me. There is a town of the name of Sakala (Sialkot), a river of the name of Apaga, and a clan of the Vahikas known by the name of the Jattikas. The practices of these people are very censurable. They drink the liquor called Gauda, and eat fried barley with it. They also eat beef with garlics. They also eat cakes of flour mixed with meat, and boiled rice that is bought from others. Of righteous practices they have none. Their women, intoxicated with drink and divested of robes, laugh and dance outside the walls of the houses in cities, without garlands and unguents, singing while drunken obscence songs of diverse kinds that are as musical as the bray of the *** or the bleat of the camel. In intercourse they are absolutely without any restraint, and in all other matters they act as they like. Maddened with drink, they call upon one another, using many endearing epithets. Addressing many drunken exclamations to their husbands and lords, the fallen women among the Vahikas, without observing restrictions even on sacred days, give themselves up to dancing."

How do you have genetic sample from ancient Gandhara?

The genetically closest modern population groups to the ancient Gandharans: Barikot Discoveries

In 2017, DNA samples were extracted from Gandharan burial mounds found in Barikot, Swat dating back to the Iron Age. The results were recently released following analysis. Utilizing admixture modeling tools, the genetic distance between these samples and modern sample groups were measured. Here...

defence.pk

Italian excavations led to the collection of DNA samples found from Burial mounds throughout Gandhara from the Late Bronze Age, Iron Age and the Middle Age. These samples can be accessed through the G25 Genetic database.

Also, the horse breed of Punjab or vahika was not as renowned as you claim. Otherwise, in mahabharatha, there would not be praise for gandharva horses.

Hastinapura was in Punjab

Hastinapur was located between Ganga and Yamuna, it was not a part of Punjab and the Mahabharata clearly differentiates it from Punjab.

Also, Gandhara can't be a distinct nation in the middle of massive civilisation. It would be impractical. Gandhara region was at the border of Gandharva region and was like a buffer zone with huge intermixing

Gandhara is among my fields of study, I am well aware of it's culture, archeology, history, language, etc...
It was definitely a ethno-culturally distinct region, albeit influenced by various cultures due to it's history and location within the silk road.

Indian system was never based on tribes. There were clans/Vamshas but the social hierarchy was based on Varnas. Pakistan has no Varna system. Pakistan has only 2 type of people - nobility and peasants. there are no specialised Vyshyas (trader/baniya) and Brahmans (scholar/teacher) class people kept distinctly separate

I didn't say anything about the Indian social system. I am referring to the social system of Pakistan and it's overlapping ethnic groups.