Since Earliest Historical Times Hinduism Was Never Popular in Pakistan

[Ajatashatru]

As if Nehru was the Prime Minister of Aryavarta.

It has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that Dravidians were never part of the IVC, unless you are a believer of the Aryan Invasion Theory, which has also been debunked. The descendants of the IVC live in Pakistan and it has also been genetically proven that a large majority of Pakistanis are genetically different from the Indians. Therefore, there is no linkage of the IVC people with Indian people.

Jains, Sikhs part of broader Hindu religion, says SC
New Delhi, August 10 [2005]

In a significant ruling defining the status of communities like Sikhs and Jains within the Constitutional frame work, the Supreme Court has declined to treat them as separate minority communities from the broad Hindu religion, saying encouraging such tendencies would pose serious jolt to secularism and democracy in the country.

The so-called minority communities like Sikhs and Jains were not treated as national minorities at the time of framing of the Constitution. Sikhs and Jains, in fact, have throughout been treated as part of wider Hindu community, which has different sects, sub-sects, faiths, modes of worship and religious philosophies, a Bench of Chief Justice R.C. Lahoti, Mr Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari and Mr Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said.

The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Nation

The theory is Aryan migration, not Aryan invasion. There is overwhelming evidence that this migration took place. Linguistic analysis of spread of Indo-European languages proves it beyond doubt. And majority of Pakistanis ARE Indo-Aryans and Iranian people which did not live in Indian subcontinent when IVC was there. Whether or not Dravidians lived in IVC is disputed, not proven or disproven. And here you confirm what I said about Indian faiths.

 

[Indischer]

You show me a pre 1947 mosque from Gurdaspur areas which was then a Muslim majority area and I won't remind you of Babri Mosque destruction which even your Prime Ministers have stated was a black mark on India. The hundreds of years old Muslim graveyards were destroyed by you people and modern houses were built on them. Please, lets not get in to those aspects. It is an historical fact that there were very less historical Hindu structures west of Delhi.

The temple you are talking about was not a historic one.



Please visit an eye specialist first thing this morning.

Well, unless you don't want readers here to understand your post, let it be. In the small pic provided by you, care to look where the Punjabis are placed? So, while the majority of Pakistan's population i.e the Punjabis are closer to the Indian populations, the Nation of Pakistan somehow isn't??

And in your pic, look who else is grouped in the same quadrant as Pakistan. It's the Koyas. The Koyas live in Kerala, the southern-most Indian State!!

Hence, please post the rest of the contents from which you've selectively put this pic without even bothering to understand it. Otherwise, Happy day-dreaming, fella!

 

[Nassr]

The theory is Aryan migration, not Aryan invasion. There is overwhelming evidence that this migration took place. Linguistic analysis of spread of Indo-European languages proves it beyond doubt. And majority of Pakistanis ARE Indo-Aryans and Iranian people which did not live in Indian subcontinent when IVC was there. Whether or not Dravidians lived in IVC is disputed, not proven or disproven. And here you confirm what I said about Indian faiths.

The IVC existed before Bactria and Andronovo. Therefore if there was a migration that took place, it were the IVC people who may have migrated first towards those areas as they already traded with these areas and the IVC artifacts were found in those areas. Later in history the Kushan empire who were Bacrtians did occypy large tracts of IVC landmass and even upto Gangetic plains. However, the Kushans came much after the demise of IVC. Even Talageri states that the Indo-Iranians were occupying areas of Punjab when the battle between purus and bharats was fought. Rig Vida's advent has been recorded after the fading out of the IVC. If at all the IVC people migrated, they migrated in Large numbers to Ur in Mespotamia around 2000-1900 BC and much later around 600 BC a Meluhha Kingdom was found in Palestine on the border of Egypt. An Egyptian King defeated them in a battle and the inscriptions are available testifying this fact.

Well, unless you don't want readers here to understand your post, let it be. In the small pic provided by you, care to look where the Punjabis are placed? So, while the majority of Pakistan's population i.e the Punjabis are closer to the Indian populations, the Nation of Pakistan somehow isn't??

And in your pic, look who else is grouped in the same quadrant as Pakistan. It's the Koyas. The Koyas live in Kerala, the southern-most Indian State!!

Hence, please post the rest of the contents from which you've selectively put this pic without even bothering to understand it. Otherwise, Happy day-dreaming, fella!

I had said that large majority of Pakistanis have different genetic admix and this genetic map proves it. The study is available on the net. I will post the link when I have the time.

 

[Indischer]

The IVC existed before Bactria and Andronovo. Therefore if there was a migration that took place, it were the IVC people who may have migrated first towards those areas as they already traded with these areas and the IVC artifacts were found in those areas. Later in history the Kushan empire who were Bacrtians did occypy large tracts of IVC landmass and even upto Gangetic plains. However, the Kushans came much after the demise of IVC. Even Talageri states that the Indo-Iranians were occupying areas of Punjab when the battle between purus and bharats was fought. Rig Vida's advent has been recorded after the fading out of the IVC. If at all the IVC people migrated, they migrated in Large numbers to Ur in Mespotamia around 2000-1900 BC and much later around 600 BC a Meluhha Kingdom was found in Palestine on the border of Egypt. An Egyptian King defeated them in a battle and the inscriptions are available testifying this fact.

Again, you talk without proof! What you refer to is the State of Mittani, and it wasn't established in Palestine, but in Anatolia. The dieties recorded are all Vedic and Indo-Iranian while the numbering system and names of kings conclusively points to an Indo-Aryan ruling elite.

Mitanni - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Nassr]

Again, you talk without proof! What you refer to is the State of Mittani, and it wasn't established in Palestine, but in Anatolia. The dieties recorded are all Vedic and Indo-Iranian while the numbering system and names of kings conclusively points to an Indo-Aryan ruling elite.

Mitanni - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No it was not Mitanni who had signed a treaty naming some Vedic deities. It was a Meluhha Kingdom. Mitanni were located in a different area.

 

[Indischer]

The IVC existed before Bactria and Andronovo. Therefore if there was a migration that took place, it were the IVC people who may have migrated first towards those areas as they already traded with these areas and the IVC artifacts were found in those areas. Later in history the Kushan empire who were Bacrtians did occypy large tracts of IVC landmass and even upto Gangetic plains. However, the Kushans came much after the demise of IVC. Even Talageri states that the Indo-Iranians were occupying areas of Punjab when the battle between purus and bharats was fought. Rig Vida's advent has been recorded after the fading out of the IVC. If at all the IVC people migrated, they migrated in Large numbers to Ur in Mespotamia around 2000-1900 BC and much later around 600 BC a Meluhha Kingdom was found in Palestine on the border of Egypt. An Egyptian King defeated them in a battle and the inscriptions are available testifying this fact.



I had said that large majority of Pakistanis have different genetic admix and this genetic map proves it. The study is available on the net. I will post the link when I have the time.

Large Majority i.e 55% of Pakistan comprises of Punjabis, who have been grouped near the Indian Brahmins in your pic. A further 7% are Muhajirs who have a proven record of having migrated to Pakistan from India. The Sindhis are very close to Gujaratis genetically. So, how exactly is the "vast majority" of Pakistan having a different admixture from India? I guess you haven't even bothered to open the links that I sent you.

I think you've misunderstood the picture and hastily posted it here just because it showed a dot as Pakistan some distance away from India. Mistakes happen, we're only human.

 

[oFFbEAT]

You show me a pre 1947 mosque from Gurdaspur areas which was then a Muslim majority area and I won't remind you of Babri Mosque destruction which even your Prime Ministers have stated was a black mark on India. The hundreds of years old Muslim graveyards were destroyed by you people and modern houses were built on them. Please, lets not get in to those aspects. It is an historical fact that there were very less historical Hindu structures west of Delhi...

As I expected, you couldn't provide any proof.....so you bring in Babri Masjid issue.....
Babri Masjid was a one-off incident.....nothing similar happened before or after that.....but thousands of Hindu Temples are being destroyed systematically in Pakistan...

The temple you are talking about was not a historic one.

'If it is non- Islamic, it is not historic'.....when that is your perception, how can a Temple be regarded as part of History....

 

[Indischer]

No it was not Mitanni who had signed a treaty naming some Vedic deities. It was a Meluhha Kingdom. Mitanni were located in a different area.

Proof please! I know for sure there have been no such discoveries of the nature you've described. Why do you think scholars are still unsure of the Religion followed by IVC?

 

[Nassr]

You may like to read this as well:

The Meluhhaites according to the inscriptions of Sargon II (c. 712 BC) mention the “bowmen, chariots and horses of the king of Meluhha”, together with the Egyptians fought the Assyrians in Palestine. Later the Assyrian king Assurbanipal of Assyria, noted in his inscriptions that he “ marched against Magan (Egypt) and Meluhha (Kush) in order to defeat the armies of Tarku (Taharqa), king of Egypt and Kush (D. Potts, “The road to Meluhha”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 41(4) (1982) pp.279-288).

As I expected, you couldn't provide any proof.....so you bring in Babri Masjid issue.....
Babri Masjid was a one-off incident.....nothing similar happened before or after that.....but thousands of Hindu Temples are destroyed systematically in Pakistan...



'If it is non- Islamic, it is not historic'.....when that is your perception, how can a Temple be regarded as part of History....

Non Islamic and non historic has never been mentioned by me as justification of anything.

 

[oFFbEAT]

...Non Islamic and non historic has never been mentioned by me as justification of anything.

That is the general perception of common Pakistanis.....as that's what they teach you in your text books.....

 

[Nassr]

Proof please! I know for sure there have been no such discoveries of the nature you've described. Why do you think scholars are still unsure of the Religion followed by IVC?

Please read post 309.

The scholars may not be sure of the religion of the people of IVC but it has been proved beyond any doubt that they were neither Vedic nor Hindu. No temples have been found in any IVC site. No idles have been found. The people buried their dead whereas Hindus cremate them. They ate meat etc and Hindus do not. The unitary system that they followed along with many other sings make it more closer to them being monotheistic in nature.

 

[Indischer]

You may like to read this as well:

The Meluhhaites according to the inscriptions of Sargon II (c. 712 BC) mention the “bowmen, chariots and horses of the king of Meluhha”, together with the Egyptians fought the Assyrians in Palestine. Later the Assyrian king Assurbanipal of Assyria, noted in his inscriptions that he “ marched against Magan (Egypt) and Meluhha (Kush) in order to defeat the armies of Tarku (Taharqa), king of Egypt and Kush (D. Potts, “The road to Meluhha”, Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 41(4) (1982) pp.279-288).

@Nassr Hey! I went through the text you cite as reference. The scholars are arguing about the probable location of Meluha here. The sentence just before what you've quoted says that Meluha was probably an African country. Plus, the fact that evidence of horses or their remains haven't been found in IVC is further proof that the Meluha mentioned by Sargon may not be the IVC.

 

[Nassr]

That is the general perception of common Pakistanis.....as that's what they teach you in your text books.....

And how many times have you visited Pakistan to form such an opinion. School text books of NCERT and BJP cum RSS run Sihshumandar schools etc do more or less the same. They tend to spread communal hatred. A small example of a class XI Indian text book taught in Indian schools have an article of Vijay, editor of the RSS weekly Panchajanya, who laments over the loss of the Indus and wonders why it does not flow in Bharat like the other rivers.

Lets not get into such issues and remain on topic.

 

[Indischer]

Please read post 309.

The scholars may not be sure of the religion of the people of IVC but it has been proved beyond any doubt that they were neither Vedic nor Hindu. No temples have been found in any IVC site. No idles have been found. The people buried their dead whereas Hindus cremate them. They ate meat etc and Hindus do not. The unitary system that they followed along with many other sings make it more closer to them being monotheistic in nature.

I think you've never been to India. Only the high caste populations cremate their dead. There's a cemetery just 2kms from my place where the buried are all Hindus. And non-veg food?! Dude, MOST Indians eat non-veg food.( I eat non-veg and I am a Brahmin by birth)

 

[Nassr]

@Nassr Hey! I went through the text you cite as reference. The scholars are arguing about the probable location of Meluha here. The sentence just before what you've quoted says that Meluha was probably an African country. Plus, the fact that evidence of horses or their remains haven't been found in IVC is further proof that the Meluha mentioned by Sargon may not be the IVC.

We now know that the problem of Meluhha's location has been solved. What I posted the reference was for identification of a Meluhha Kingdom as mentioned by an Egyptian King around 700-600 BC in Palestine. You asked for the proof. The horse and chariots were not found in the IVC times which was 3300-1900 BC and this reference is of 700-600 BC. The reason was to inform you that the IVC people migrated to Mesopotamia in large number and then further moved to Palestine.