Multan's strong Buddhist past Influence?

[AfrazulMandal]

Not really. Do explain why it's ridiculous.

My suggestion would be to leave 'their' labels and take pride in ourselves.

Muslims. Or some new identity, untainted by a controversial past.

Muslims didn't fight over the Babri Masjid

We did.

We are doing it to this date.

The legal battles have only recently been concluded. There are appeals. Petitions.

 

[Itachi]

We did.

We are doing it to this date.

The legal battles have only recently been concluded. There are appeals. Petitions.

They concluded the legal battles because what they wanted has been done....i.e the destruction of the Masjid.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

They concluded the legal battles because what they wanted has been done....i.e the destruction of the Masjid.

Now they are targeting other structures where older Temples were there. It is unfortunately only the beginning.

 

[Buddhistforlife]

Not really. Muslims didn't fight over the Babri Masjid, the Indian establishment gave a free rein to RSS to destroy the masjid.

Had the argument gone into an actual court, the Masjid would still be standing today.

Looks like you have been fed a lot of "manipulated version of history".



Rajput isn't a caste lol

That's what simpletons think who don't study history.

Let me give you a preview:

View attachment 636042

View attachment 636043

View attachment 636044

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajput#Origins

All Indian and non-Indian sources agree with me. Your definition of "Rajput" reeks of reading Indian nationalist books.

About Babri masjid I wanted to show how how history works.

Hindus believe Babur destroyed temple and build the mosque. Muslims believe there was no temple. So who is right now? Also who wrote the history that there was a temple or there was no temple? History keeps on changing, regime to regime.

 

[HAIDER]

Silver damma of Mihira Deva / Mih, pre-Habbarid Multan, ca. 712-856 AD - Sun-temple issue from Multan?; Ummayad and Abbasid governors of Multan, among the first Islamic coins in India!

Three dots, stylized Brahmi "Sri" above, Brahmi letters "Ta" and "Pa" in fields, below Lillah Mih in arabic / Brahmi legend "Sri Mi Hi / Ra De Va". 10mmx12mm, 0.62 grams. Unpublished and very rare.

On this type the name written in Brahmi - Lord Mihira Deva (a completely Hindu name) seems to be repeated on the reverse and "In Allah Mih" ("Mih" almost certainly a short form of "Mihira"). It is possible that a local Hindi ruler embraced Islam (based on "Lillah"...) but issued coins under his old name as well. Interestingly, "Mihira" means "Sun" - probably a reference to the giant and famous sun temple in Multan After the conquest of Multan by Umayyad Caliphate in 8th Century AD, under Muhammad bin Qasim, the Sun Temple became a source of great income for the Muslim invaders. Muhammad bin Qasim 'made captive of the custodians of the budd, numbering 6000' and looted its wealth, sparing the idol — which was made of wood, covered with red leather and two red rubies for its eyes and wearing a gem-studded gold crown — 'thinking it best to leave the idol where it was, but hanging a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery'. This coin, with it's reference to "Mihira" in both Hindu and Muslim context, might be a link to these events.

These coins are derived from the earlier "Sri Parakuta" pre-Islamic Multan coins we also sell on the website. These probably have the destinction of being among the very first Islamic coins struck in India. These early Islamic types were first discovered some 10 years or so ago, and were never properly studied or published. They are often attributed to the Habbarid rulers of Sindh and Multan, but the names on these coins do not correspond to the names of the known Habbarid rulers, and these coins are probably pre-Habbarid. I am currently working on an article on these coins which will be hopefully published in this summer's issue of JONS.

Hindu religion follower perspective:
The #5000-year-old Sun Temple of #Multan, also known as the #Aditya_Sun_Temple, was an #ancient temple that was the base of a solar-cult dedicated to the Hindu Sun God #Surya (also known as #Aditya).The original Sun Temple at Multan is said to have been built by #Samba, son of #Krishna, to gain relief from the symptoms of his #leprosy more than #5000 years ago.The Sun Temple at Multan was perhaps one of the oldest, largest and richest of all temples. It no longer exists but is buried deep in the ground.

 

[Itachi]

Silver damma of Mihira Deva / Mih, pre-Habbarid Multan, ca. 712-856 AD - Sun-temple issue from Multan?; Ummayad and Abbasid governors of Multan, among the first Islamic coins in India!

Three dots, stylized Brahmi "Sri" above, Brahmi letters "Ta" and "Pa" in fields, below Lillah Mih in arabic / Brahmi legend "Sri Mi Hi / Ra De Va". 10mmx12mm, 0.62 grams. Unpublished and very rare.

On this type the name written in Brahmi - Lord Mihira Deva (a completely Hindu name) seems to be repeated on the reverse and "In Allah Mih" ("Mih" almost certainly a short form of "Mihira"). It is possible that a local Hindi ruler embraced Islam (based on "Lillah"...) but issued coins under his old name as well. Interestingly, "Mihira" means "Sun" - probably a reference to the giant and famous sun temple in Multan After the conquest of Multan by Umayyad Caliphate in 8th Century AD, under Muhammad bin Qasim, the Sun Temple became a source of great income for the Muslim invaders. Muhammad bin Qasim 'made captive of the custodians of the budd, numbering 6000' and looted its wealth, sparing the idol — which was made of wood, covered with red leather and two red rubies for its eyes and wearing a gem-studded gold crown — 'thinking it best to leave the idol where it was, but hanging a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery'. This coin, with it's reference to "Mihira" in both Hindu and Muslim context, might be a link to these events.

These coins are derived from the earlier "Sri Parakuta" pre-Islamic Multan coins we also sell on the website. These probably have the destinction of being among the very first Islamic coins struck in India. These early Islamic types were first discovered some 10 years or so ago, and were never properly studied or published. They are often attributed to the Habbarid rulers of Sindh and Multan, but the names on these coins do not correspond to the names of the known Habbarid rulers, and these coins are probably pre-Habbarid. I am currently working on an article on these coins which will be hopefully published in this summer's issue of JONS.

Hindu religion follower perspective:
The #5000-year-old Sun Temple of #Multan, also known as the #Aditya_Sun_Temple, was an #ancient temple that was the base of a solar-cult dedicated to the Hindu Sun God #Surya (also known as #Aditya).The original Sun Temple at Multan is said to have been built by #Samba, son of #Krishna, to gain relief from the symptoms of his #leprosy more than #5000 years ago.The Sun Temple at Multan was perhaps one of the oldest, largest and richest of all temples. It no longer exists but is buried deep in the ground.

Source?

The 2nd coin doesn't look remotely like the artists concept...

 

[HAIDER]

Source?

The 2nd coin doesn't look remotely like the artists concept...

Was searching the existence of Sun temple... found this website ..
https://www.numismall.com/acc/Silve...n-among-the-first-Islamic-coins-in-India.html

 

[Kabira]

Rajupt is a caste. When a hindu converts out of Hinduism I think he becomes a person of the lowest caste or he is not required to follow the caste system.

A Rajput can never be a Muslim because it's a hindu Varna or Caste system. Many Pakistani muslims have Rajput caste but they are not Rajputs because they don't belong to the Hindu Varna(Caste) system.

Rajput identity come in to being 500 years ago under Turkic rule. No wonder 90% of punjab rajputs are muslims. You have to remember half of "hindu" history has been under Islamic rule. Rajput caste too was formed under the nose of Turks.

Rajputs were never an ethno-cultural group until recently.

It was just a title given to specific land-owning communities that became associated with an ethno-cultural identity over time.
Other examples of this are Malik, Jam, Rana, Khan, Sardar, Singh, Mir, Sheikh, etc...

Rajputs of Potohar, have nothing in common with Rajputs of Rajasthan. Distinct culture, traditions, history, language and even genetics.

Spot on. Majority of hindu rajputs were loyal servants of various Turk/Mughal kings.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Rajput isn't a caste lol

That's what simpletons think who don't study history.

Let me give you a preview:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajput#Origins

All Indian and non-Indian sources agree with me. Your definition of "Rajput" reeks of reading Indian nationalist books.

As a Rajput, I resent this historical revisionism by Hindus. You don't lose your blood line and DNA by converting to another religion.

Your source is factual, Rajputs were Iranics who replaced the Greeks as the ruling elite in Punjab. Brahmins and others decorated them as Rajput, meaning they accepted their authority and rule.

Rajput native religion was altogether different from Hinduism, and has similarities to Persia and Babylon.

Today we follow more of tribal identification similar to Pukhtoons.

Rajput identity come in to being 500 years ago under Turkic rule. No wonder 90% of punjab rajputs are muslims. You have to remember half of "hindu" history has been under Islamic rule. Rajput caste too was formed under the nose of Turks.



Spot on. Majority of hindu rajputs were loyal servants of various Turk/Mughal kings.

False. Rajputs were there before Turks.

They simply made alliances with Turks, and it led to their Islamization.

 

[Kabira]

False. Rajputs were there before Turks.

They simply made alliances with Turks, and it led to their Islamization.

Obviously tribes/people who make up modern rajputs existed before but not all have common origin. I'm talking about rajput identity as a caste. The word seem to have originated in Rajasthan 12-13th century. And then adopted across various regions as caste by 17th century.

So when Indian hindus say rajput can only be hindu, they are bullshitting as usual.

 

[Jackdaws]

That is quite true.



Nope, we take the good with the bad. We don't hide history.



If you read older history books or even compare history books with Western sources, you'll find the truth one way or another.



That's just a made up religious connotation.

Rajput literally means son of a King. From the combo of Raja and Putra if I'm not mistaken.

The title was given to anyone worthy of such a title. Before Hinduism, these people were warriors. After Hinduism, these are still warriors.

No it is not. A Samurai has to follow Bushido. A Knight has to be Christian. A Rajput has to be Hindu.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

Rajputs were Iranics who replaced the Greeks as the ruling elite in Punjab. Brahmins and others decorated them as Rajput

Bahijaan, there is really no evidence for this. There are multiple theories about the origins of the Rajputs. But THIS above you quoted has no evidence, yet.

Rajput native religion was altogether different from Hinduism, a

Unlike the one above, this has absolutely no evidence at all.

They simply made alliances with Turks, and it led to their Islamization.

This is also not true.
Alliances were made with Turks by Germans too - did not lead to their Islamization. The Rajputs were DEFEATED and this led to their Islamization liberating them from Jauhar, Sati and other vile practices. Good for them though.

So when Indian hindus say rajput can only be hindu, they are bullshitting as usual.

We are originally from Maharashtra. Hindus claim that Maratha people can't claim to be Muslims.

So we don't. We call ourselves Muslims and be content with it.

Better actually. Keeps us united and free from regional conflicts.

 

[Kabira]

As a Rajput, I resent this historical revisionism by Hindus. You don't lose your blood line and DNA by converting to another religion.

Your source is factual, Rajputs were Iranics who replaced the Greeks as the ruling elite in Punjab. Brahmins and others decorated them as Rajput, meaning they accepted their authority and rule.

Rajput native religion was altogether different from Hinduism, and has similarities to Persia and Babylon.

Today we follow more of tribal identification similar to Pukhtoons.

lol no, rajputs if anything are more local then others in punjab if we go by their DNA results.

We are originally from Maharashtra. Hindus claim that Maratha people can't claim to be Muslims.

So we don't. We call ourselves Muslims and be content with it.

Better actually. Keeps us united and free from regional conflicts.

I think hindus brainwashed in RSS school think every rajput ever always fought against Islamic kings. When the reality is opposite of that when it comes to majority of rajputs. Plus they like to give themselves false mythical origins of thousands of years old, delusional fools. Considering all that no wonder they refuse to think rajput can be muslim as well.

 

[Naofumi]

No it is not. A Samurai has to follow Bushido. A Knight has to be Christian. A Rajput has to be Hindu.

There were Christian Samurai though before they were purged and burned down.
And on conversion, Rajputs retained or even gained more land holdings, their superior status over various farming communities, the endogamy inside their caste.

We are originally from Maharashtra. Hindus claim that Maratha people can't claim to be Muslims.

So, how you got to Bengal?

Rajputs were never an ethno-cultural group until recently.

It was just a title given to specific land-owning communities that became associated with an ethno-cultural identity over time.
Other examples of this are Malik, Jam, Rana, Khan, Sardar, Singh, Mir, Sheikh, etc...

Rajputs of Potohar, have nothing in common with Rajputs of Rajasthan. Distinct culture, traditions, history, language and even genetics.

What do you make of different clans linking themselves like I read somewhere Janjuas are a branch of Rathores (though it is disputed), Sahu are a Branch of Chauhans or Bhattis being from Jaisalmer originally?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1251591193709948934

 

[Bouncer]

I don't know how to break it to you but taking pride in dead idol worshippers isn't going to boost morale.

Bhai, its not about morale. Its about nation building the right way and taking pride in our history

I went through the desi education system of Pakistan (matric, FSc route). So I'll limit my comments to that only. The history we are taught doesn't make much sense. It seems like a forced narrative to support just that part of the Two Nation Theory; we are Muslims and we suddenly appeared in this land in 712AD and btw there were some people living here in IVC etc.

I personally believe that this narrative was designed and propagated by Bhutto and later Governments. Now it is not incorrect to say that yes Pakistan was created for the Muslims of Sub-Continent. Our ancestors scarified a lot for this homeland. But this doesn't mean that Pakistan did not exist in one form or another, with one name or another, throughout the centuries preceding the events of 1947.

I agree 100%. Post more, I would like to see more of your views. I have some threads on Pakistani history, check them when you get a chance.

Thank you, I will go through these threads IA.