What's new

Oxford Debate: Partition of India.

Right. People should switch to local costumes? So hijabs should be banned in Canada?
lol, claimants to indus valley reject sari !

In the history of Indian clothing the sari is traced back to the Indus Valley Civilisation, which flourished during 2800–1800 BC around the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent. Cotton was first cultivated and woven in Indian subcontinent around 5th millennium BC. Dyes used during this period are still in use, particularly indigo, lac, red madder and turmeric. Silk was woven around 2450 BC and 2000 BC. The earliest known depiction of the sari in the Indian subcontinent is the statue of an Indus Valley priest wearing a drape.


The sari evolved from a three-piece ensemble comprising the Antriya, the lower garment; the Uttariya; a veil worn over the shoulder or the head; and the Stanapatta, a chestband. This ensemble is mentioned in Sanskrit literature and Buddhist Pali literature during the 6th century B.C. This complete three-piece dress was known as Poshak, generic term for costume. Ancient Antriya closely resembled dothi wrap in the "fishtail" version which was passed through legs, covered the legs loosely and then flowed into a long, decorative pleats at front of the legs. It further evolved into Bhairnivasani skirt, today known as ghagri and lehenga. Uttariya was a shawl-like veil worn over the shoulder or head, it evolved into what is known today known as dupatta and ghoongat. Likewise, Stanapatta evolved into choli by 1st century A.D. Between 2nd century B.C to 1st century A.D, Antariya and Uttariya was merged to form a single garment known as sari mentioned in Pali literature, which served the purpose of two garments in one-piece.
 
Right. People should switch to local costumes? So hijabs should be banned in Canada?
wrong analogy here.

Hijab is a religious obligation.

Sari is just ethnic clothing.

lol, claimants to indus valley reject sari !

In the history of Indian clothing the sari is traced back to the Indus Valley Civilisation, which flourished during 2800–1800 BC around the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent. Cotton was first cultivated and woven in Indian subcontinent around 5th millennium BC. Dyes used during this period are still in use, particularly indigo, lac, red madder and turmeric. Silk was woven around 2450 BC and 2000 BC. The earliest known depiction of the sari in the Indian subcontinent is the statue of an Indus Valley priest wearing a drape.


The sari evolved from a three-piece ensemble comprising the Antriya, the lower garment; the Uttariya; a veil worn over the shoulder or the head; and the Stanapatta, a chestband. This ensemble is mentioned in Sanskrit literature and Buddhist Pali literature during the 6th century B.C. This complete three-piece dress was known as Poshak, generic term for costume. Ancient Antriya closely resembled dothi wrap in the "fishtail" version which was passed through legs, covered the legs loosely and then flowed into a long, decorative pleats at front of the legs. It further evolved into Bhairnivasani skirt, today known as ghagri and lehenga. Uttariya was a shawl-like veil worn over the shoulder or head, it evolved into what is known today known as dupatta and ghoongat. Likewise, Stanapatta evolved into choli by 1st century A.D. Between 2nd century B.C to 1st century A.D, Antariya and Uttariya was merged to form a single garment known as sari mentioned in Pali literature, which served the purpose of two garments in one-piece.
Sari may have originated from the Indus River Valley civilization, but Sari is now associated with India.

Hence why we Pakistanis reject Saris.

Dupatta I can accept, but not Sari.

Yes we Pakistanis claim Indus River Valley civilization, but sari is now associated with India.

So we reject Sari.

Pakistanis wear Shalwar Kameez and Shalwar Kameez is the creativity of Muslims.

Now @jetray don't try to claim Pakistani culture. You know very well that Shalwar Kameez is a Muslim dress.

Shalwar Kameez is associated with the Muslims.
 
Partition would have happened even if the religious factor was taken out. The differences in language, culture, traditions, ethnic groups and so on were enough to constitute a seperate nation(s).

In the history of Indian clothing the sari is traced back to the Indus Valley Civilisation, which flourished during 2800–1800 BC around the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent. Cotton was first cultivated and woven in Indian subcontinent around 5th millennium BC. Dyes used during this period are still in use, particularly indigo, lac, red madder and turmeric. Silk was woven around 2450 BC and 2000 BC. The earliest known depiction of the sari in the Indian subcontinent is the statue of an Indus Valley priest wearing a drape.
:omghaha:

Does that mean that Greek, Egyptian, Romans, Babylonians and so many other civilizations also wore Saris?

Having draped clothing was common throughout the ancient world.

The connections that you Indians draw is very absurd and hilarious at the same time.
 
the reason for partition is outster of Muslim rule which ended by british occupation in india.until Mughal and other Muslims ruled india there was no partition.india and Pakistan will again get united only under Islamic rule and leadership
 
the reason for partition is outster of Muslim rule which ended by british occupation in india.until Mughal and other Muslims ruled india there was no partition.india and Pakistan will again get united only under Islamic rule and leadership
I strongly feel Pakistanis will become less and less religious with each passing generation and will join India within 100 years.. My strong intuition
 
I strongly feel Pakistanis will become less and less religious with each passing generation and will join India within 100 years.. My strong intuition
love for Islam is increasing every day here and we will become more religiuos in future
 
wrong analogy here.

Hijab is a religious obligation.

Sari is just ethnic clothing.


Sari may have originated from the Indus River Valley civilization, but Sari is now associated with India.

Hence why we Pakistanis reject Saris.

Dupatta I can accept, but not Sari.

Yes we Pakistanis claim Indus River Valley civilization, but sari is now associated with India.

So we reject Sari.

Pakistanis wear Shalwar Kameez and Shalwar Kameez is the creativity of Muslims.

Now @jetray don't try to claim Pakistani culture. You know very well that Shalwar Kameez is a Muslim dress.

Shalwar Kameez is associated with the Muslims.

Very convenient. Shalwar Kameez has nothing to do with Islam - unless you are claiming it is Arab?
 
I strongly feel Pakistanis will become less and less religious with each passing generation and will join India within 100 years.. My strong intuition

You are badly mistaken. Pakistan is a different entity and was borne out of necessity. Religion is one dimension. There is no going back. Not until planet earth seizes to exist.

Indians need to accept this reality. There really is no point in daydreaming.
 
Partition would have happened even if the religious factor was taken out. The differences in language, culture, traditions, ethnic groups and so on were enough to constitute a seperate nation(s).


:omghaha:

Does that mean that Greek, Egyptian, Romans, Babylonians and so many other civilizations also wore Saris?

Having draped clothing was common throughout the ancient world.

The connections that you Indians draw is very absurd and hilarious at the same time.
yeah but only that they dont call all those as sari , lol.
 
The debate is stupid. The point is that partition can now NEVER EVER be reversed. Not only is Pakistan a completely different nation to india but we are also a completely different race to indians. Saying partition is wrong is like saying it is wrong that india is now longer a part of the British Empire.
 
I strongly feel Pakistanis will become less and less religious with each passing generation and will join India within 100 years.. My strong intuition




Even if Pakistanis become less and less religious they will still NEVER EVER join india as they are racially and culturally very different to indians. Partition was due to race as well as religion.
 
I did not watch through the whole debate so correct me if I am wrong but as far as I can see only one person in this panel discussing the events of 1947 was Pakistani! And even she belongs to an unorthodox viewpoint. How on earth do you debate an issue where one of the two major parties is not even invited!
 
Back
Top Bottom