Since Earliest Historical Times Hinduism Was Never Popular in Pakistan

[Ajatashatru]

If the Indo-Aryan migrations started after the IVC, where did the original people of IVC go. These people were there before the arrival of Indo-Aryans. Did they vanish in thin air.

It is believed that changing of river channels caused people of IVC to migrate eastwards towards banks of Ganga. Many natives were called dasyus or dasas by Indo-Aryans. These dasyus possibly also included IVC people who were later assimilated in Indo-Aryan fold through inter-marriage and adoption of Indo-Aryan culture. This means descendants of IVC are more likely in North India than in Pak, although sizable populations will be in Pak, no doubt.

Rig Veda which became the basis of Vedic culture emanated after fading out of the IVC and is monotheistic in its pronouncements. Later and over a period of time, it was diluted with emergence of Hinduism as a polytheistic culture.

Rig Veda is a Hindu scripture. Modern Hinduism is a direct descendant of Vedic Hinduism. Hinduism is not outright polytheistic, Hinduism is a diverse system of thought with beliefs spanning monotheism, polytheism, panentheism, pantheism, monism, and atheism among others.

The people of IVC were monotheists and largely followed monotheistic forms of religion even after fading out of IVC and never remained majority Hindus. When Buddhism spread, the core of IVC became a majority Buddhist population till gradually its population converted to Islam.

Indians and Nepalis never differentiated b/w Hinduism & Buddhism. Hindu word was given by Muslims and later the British historians further classified them into Hinduism/Buddhism/Jainism. My family is Hindu in govt records but since time immemorial my ancestors have followed all Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhisim and never considered any of these three separate religions. The very concept of religion is foreign to India. Although small populations of Christians and Jews existed for long in India, it was only with Islam that concept of religion came into Indian mainstream. Don't try to see Indian faiths through the prism of religion, you will never understand them. Religion is a very narrow concept.

Pakistan had a different history since the earliest times as we remained an independent geographical and political entity for majority of its known history since over 9000 years, and we are proud of our history.

Yeah I already said Jinnah founded Pak in Harappa in 2000 BC now it seems he did it 9000 years ago. Pak's version of history has never been accepted by neutral historians. Pakistanis rewrite history because of their identity crisis like Qasim was the first Pakistani, IVC as Pakistani, Pak was never a part of India and all that s**t.

 

[Vinod2070]

You are having pain in your backside. Hindus were and are jahil and you are great example of it. Hindus were slaved by everyone not just Arabs and only you can be proud of such beliefs who teach cowardice . you accept that Hindus got killed, enslaved and raped in the hands of few invaders .shame on you coward hindus who could not defend and give protection to fellow hindus .

Yea our primary identity is Islam and it has nothing to do with confusions. We would love to give up those cultural practices and beliefs which contradict to our religious belief. We dont give a fack about who practiced what thousand years ago. we love what we are practicing now

Well, that is the point. Your identity crisis makes you identify with invaders rather than your own ancestors.

As far as we are concerned, we have only contempt for such people.

And we just have to disagree on whether your jahiliya was before or after the conversion.

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

Well, that is the point. Your identity crisis makes you identify with invaders rather than your own ancestors.

As far as we are concerned, we have only contempt for such people.

And we just have to disagree on whether your jahiliya was before or after the conversion.

What nonsense. We just don't like the beliefs and non Islamic practices of our/your ancestors which contradict to our Islamic beliefs. Nothing more nothing less. Pagan Arabs fought wars with their own tribes and blood relatives after converted into Islam. Does it mean they had identity crisis ? Stop this BS. For Muslims love for Islam/God is above everything else i.e tribe, caste, family. We are thankful to invaders who brought such a beautiful religion for us and i know our love for Islam and Muslims hurt you but sorry we cannot do anything about it

 

[bronxbull]

Actually, Indians do not include Islam and Christianity as Indian, Indic or Dharmic religions. They still call Muslims as Maleech (the dirty one, neech) in large parts of India. Calling Muslims as Maleech is reducing in the cities but the rural India, which is 70% of India, they still call Muslims as Maleech - this is used as a racist slur. Though they would say that the word is Mlechha which in Sanskrit means a foreigner from the west. But the fact is that Maleech is what they call Muslims in most of India as a racist slur.



A very very angry young Indian indeed.

Mlecha means an uncouth uncivilized barbarian who attempts to live a life based only upon his carnal instincts and is caught in the cycle of the 7 sins and someone who is incapable to bringing upon the power of the mind,the power of abstinence.

Meluhha, the people of IVC and the ancestors of Pakistanis practiced monotheism long before Rig Veda was even evolved and was written. Whatever you copied from earlier times including the IVC era and used them for religious purposes thousands of years later does not definitely mean that the earlier people also used them for the same purpose. This is mere speculation.

Swastika was also found in Europe and was identified to be 7000 years old - much older than the Vedic culture.

How do you differentiate Vedic culture from Indian Hinduism.

Terms like Meluha/IVC and all are mere jargons.

There is nothing absolutely nothing which says the present day pakistanis are the descendants of the original people of the land.

I do not understand what we did not get from 1971 and what does it have to do with the history of the land of Meluhha which is Pakistan. The historical facts clearly highlight that the people of Pakistan did not ever have a majority Hindu population since the earliest times.

And who are those Pakistanis who are refugees in India. Could you please elaborate.



Actually, we not only have to educate ourselves about the history of our country but also bring out historical facts so that the Indians also understand the realities as they existed in earlier times. They have their own country and should work and research to find out their own identity instead of identifying themselves with something which was not theirs in the first place and belongs to another nation.

Before Islam,this land was 100% Sanatan Dharam,which comes in different forms.

This includes till Arabia.

Hindus can insult their own kind in attempt of insulting Pakistani and to make themselves superior. I like when they insult Hindus or hindusim no matter who they were. I think ex president/scientist of India was probably coward dalit converted into Islam and so are those showbiz Muslim celebrities and Hindus rajpouts haha

Man its your patience to be calm with such low lives

I dont know about who is superior or who has a complex but generally the person discussing superiority/inferiority endlessly often has the inferiority complex.

Hindus can insult their own kind in attempt of insulting Pakistani and to make themselves superior. I like when they insult Hindus or hindusim no matter who they were. I think ex president/scientist of India was probably coward dalit converted into Islam and so are those showbiz Muslim celebrities and Hindus rajpouts haha

Man its your patience to be calm with such low lives

I dont know about who is superior or who has a complex but generally the person discussing superiority/inferiority endlessly often has the inferiority complex.

 

[Vinod2070]

What nonsense. We just don't like the beliefs and non Islamic practices of our/your ancestors which contradict to our Islamic beliefs. Nothing more nothing less. Pagan Arabs fought wars with their own tribes and blood relatives after converted into Islam. Does it mean they had identity crisis ? Stop this BS. For Muslims love for Islam/God is above everything else i.e tribe, caste, family. We are thankful to invaders who brought such a beautiful religion for us and i know our love for Islam and Muslims hurt you but sorry we cannot do anything about it

No issues with any of that. We already know this.

Pakistan is all about Islam and not its ancient Dharmic history. That is what you are saying and what I am saying as well.

The premise of this thread is completely different though.

 

[Ajatashatru]

For Muslims love for Islam/God is above everything else i.e tribe, caste, family.

And above nation too.

 

[Carl Johnson]

Genetics dont lie, 98% of Indians are chamars. And one more thing Brahui may speak dravidian but they sure as hell are not related to Indian chamars, they have 12% ASI lowest in South Asia.

You guys hate your self there is no doubt about it. I mean using dalit as insult proves my point lol. And why you guys cant find any actor from 98% Indian chamars to represent Indians in bollywood? Why leading actors are punjabis, pathans and sindhis? At least other Indian inddustries use chamar actors and it shows lol

Genetics dont lie, 98% of pakistanis are chooras beyond doubt . Brahui and all pakistanis east of indus are choora converts .obviously they are not related to indian chamars as chamars are far better looking than any of the 98% of pakee chooras . Ugly pakeez can't be descendents of IVC .All ivc people migrated to gangetic plains after saraswati dried some 4000 years ago. Only pakeez in extreme north of pak punjab are good looking and also pathans west of indus . rest 98% pakeez are uglier than a baboon's arse . The reason the brahuis have lower asi than south indians is because of being mass raped and converted by invading muslims. pakistani chamars and chooras which comprise 98% of pakistan are 66% asi which proves they are related to south indians . It also proves caste system is no racial classification. Nowhere in any vedas , vedic people used aryan as a race . Rig veda was written before at least 3000BCE in north india around the banks of saraswati which is proved by hints and descriptions in rig veda itself . which disproves any aryan invasion which is said to happen by AIT theorists at around 1500bce and compilation of rigveda around 1200bce which is utter bull. The so called aryans, which is not a race, are native to India . There has been no significant external admixture In india in at least the last 10-20 millenia.

You guys hate your self there is no doubt about it.I mean using chamar/choora as insult proves my point lol.
There are many chamars who work in bollywood as actors and singers etc. Sonu Nigam ,Abhijeet Sawant, Mika Singh , Daler Mehndi , Late Divya Bharti ,Sukhwinder Singh , Kailesh Kher , chirag paswan and many others and they are far better than looking than any lollywood actor leave alone average ugly pakeez. Also almost all khans of bollywood have Indian ancestry like shahrukh is south indian from his mother's side , salman is marathi , saif and hrithik bengali etc. So all bollywood actors are indians ethnically . Almost all actresses are non punjabis as well .and look far better than their lulliwood counterparts .If you want to compare average people compare the cricketers . Indian cricketers are 10000 times better looking than pakistani cricketers .Only indian muhajirs like wasim akram and extreme northen pakistanis like shahid afridi look good . all others are just

 

[Nassr]

It is believed that changing of river channels caused people of IVC to migrate eastwards towards banks of Ganga. Many natives were called dasyus or dasas by Indo-Aryans. These dasyus possibly also included IVC people who were later assimilated in Indo-Aryan fold through inter-marriage and adoption of Indo-Aryan culture. This means descendants of IVC are more likely in North India than in Pak, although sizable populations will be in Pak, no doubt.


Rig Veda is a Hindu scripture. Modern Hinduism is a direct descendant of Vedic Hinduism. Hinduism is not outright polytheistic, Hinduism is a diverse system of thought with beliefs spanning monotheism, polytheism, panentheism, pantheism, monism, and atheism among others.


Indians and Nepalis never differentiated b/w Hinduism & Buddhism. Hindu word was given by Muslims and later the British historians further classified them into Hinduism/Buddhism/Jainism. My family is Hindu in govt records but since time immemorial my ancestors have followed all Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhisim and never considered any of these three separate religions. The very concept of religion is foreign to India. Although small populations of Christians and Jews existed for long in India, it was only with Islam that concept of religion came into Indian mainstream. Don't try to see Indian faiths through the prism of religion, you will never understand them. Religion is a very narrow concept.


Yeah I already said Jinnah founded Pak in Harappa in 2000 BC now it seems he did it 9000 years ago. Pak's version of history has never been accepted by neutral historians. Pakistanis rewrite history because of their identity crisis like Qasim was the first Pakistani, IVC as Pakistani, Pak was never a part of India and all that s**t.

Changing or dying of rivers and their channels is also the favourite Indian reason for claiming the IVC with presenting the mythical Saraswati river as a bulwark. Oh please, do not go into the Rig Vedic Aryans and the Indo-Iranian Gods and Anti-Gods through by playing Rig Veda against the Avesta. The Gods of Iranian Zoroastrians were Satans for Vedic Aryans and vice versa. However, as I said earlier, the Rig Veda evolved and was written much much later than the fading out of IVC. Yes, there were some IVC migrations eastwards as well into Punjab as it existed in pre 1947 British India. But you fail to understand that this was part of IVC landmass and was not part of Ganges valley and its adjoining plains. And do not start saying that there were IVC settlements within Ganges valley and its plains. These were discovered after 1947 and I highly suspect the Indian archeologists who have been working under an agenda since Nehru ordered them to start discovering IVC sites in Rajasthan and other places in India because majority of the IVC had gone to Pakistan.

And when you state that Hinduism is a diverse system of various beliefs, you are highlighting your own belief and not what people of other religions feel. Hindus identify Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism, Shaivism etc etc as part of a broader Hindu culture and Hindu sub-sects, which is vehemently denied by the people who follow these religions. The claim that their religions are distinctly separate from Hinduism and want the Indian Constitution changed to accept their separate religious identity.

Inventing and giving new meanings to Dharmic, Indic, Bharti and Hindutva etc etc is farce and a cloak put on to present Hinduism as a broad concept and culture which engulfs every other faith in India. These aspects are only propagated by the Indian Hindus and are not accepted by people of other faiths.

The distinctly separate geographical and historic identity of the land which is called Pakistan has been maintained by its people since over 9000 years barring a few aberrations during the Maurya, Muslim and British rules. This separate identity can not be changed by the type of false history propagated by the Indian Hindus. And this is a fact.

 

[Nassr]

Mlecha means an uncouth uncivilized barbarian who attempts to live a life based only upon his carnal instincts and is caught in the cycle of the 7 sins and someone who is incapable to bringing upon the power of the mind,the power of abstinence.

Terms like Meluha/IVC and all are mere jargons.

There is nothing absolutely nothing which says the present day pakistanis are the descendants of the original people of the land.

Before Islam,this land was 100% Sanatan Dharam,which comes in different forms.

This includes till Arabia.

Thank you for further elaborating the meaning of Mlechha. This gives a new meaning to the anti-Muslim sentiment of Indian Hindu population who identify Mlechhas as Muslims.

Meluhha and the IVC are realities which have been proven through archeological excavations and historical facts.

Unless the Indian Hindus move beyond their concept of broader Hindu Dharmic entity and start accepting the separate identity of various other faiths that inhibit Republic of India, there never will be a closure to discriminatory treatment of Indian minorities.

No issues with any of that. We already know this.

Pakistan is all about Islam and not its ancient Dharmic history. That is what you are saying and what I am saying as well.

The premise of this thread is completely different though.

The land of Pakistan never had a Dharmic history as the Indian Hindus would like to propagate. Since the earliest of times, majority of the people of this land were monotheists, Buddhists and later followed Islam.

 

[Yeti]

Meluhha, the people of IVC and the ancestors of Pakistanis practiced monotheism long before Rig Veda was even evolved and was written. Whatever you copied from earlier times including the IVC era and used them for religious purposes thousands of years later does not definitely mean that the earlier people also used them for the same purpose. This is mere speculation.

Swastika was also found in Europe and was identified to be 7000 years old - much older than the Vedic culture.

How do you differentiate Vedic culture from Indian Hinduism.

The word Swastika is a Sanskrit word lol what do you know yr madrasa version of history is not even accurate in the least

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Genetics dont lie, 98% of pakistanis are chooras beyond doubt . Brahui and all pakistanis east of indus are choora converts .obviously they are not related to indian chamars as chamars are far better looking than any of the 98% of pakee chooras . Ugly pakeez can't be descendents of IVC .All ivc people migrated to gangetic plains after saraswati dried some 4000 years ago. Only pakeez in extreme north of pak punjab are good looking and also pathans west of indus . rest 98% pakeez are uglier than a baboon's arse . The reason the brahuis have lower asi than south indians is because of being mass raped and converted by invading muslims. pakistani chamars and chooras which comprise 98% of pakistan are 66% asi which proves they are related to south indians . It also proves caste system is no racial classification. Nowhere in any vedas , vedic people used aryan as a race . Rig veda was written before at least 3000BCE in north india around the banks of saraswati which is proved by hints and descriptions in rig veda itself . which disproves any aryan invasion which is said to happen by AIT theorists at around 1500bce and compilation of rigveda around 1200bce which is utter bull. The so called aryans, which is not a race, are native to India . There has been no significant external admixture In india in at least the last 10-20 millenia.

You guys hate your self there is no doubt about it.I mean using chamar/choora as insult proves my point lol.
There are many chamars who work in bollywood as actors and singers etc. Sonu Nigam ,Abhijeet Sawant, Mika Singh , Daler Mehndi , Late Divya Bharti ,Sukhwinder Singh , Kailesh Kher , chirag paswan and many others and they are far better than looking than any lollywood actor leave alone average ugly pakeez. Also almost all khans of bollywood have Indian ancestry like shahrukh is south indian from his mother's side , salman is marathi , saif and hrithik bengali etc. So all bollywood actors are indians ethnically . Almost all actresses are non punjabis as well .and look far better than their lulliwood counterparts .If you want to compare average people compare the cricketers . Indian cricketers are 10000 times better looking than pakistani cricketers .Only indian muhajirs like wasim akram and extreme northen pakistanis like shahid afridi look good . all others are just

As expected you could only come up with singers chamars who are Punjabis anyway lol. First you guys need to worry about how to represent 98% Indians in bollywood. Considiring the sucess bollywood movies enjoy in India it seem you guys dont want any chamar face as leading actor in bollywood.

At least other regional industries give chances to common men of India. And caste was race based and it shows in genetic tests, no one deny that. Lol

 

[Carl Johnson]

As expected you could only come up with singers chamars who are Punjabis anyway lol. .

What a loser ! You were saying all chamars look round faced pitch black . Now using the excuse that they are punjabis.Thats what i have been saying . All punjabis would look the same no matter what caste they belong to . Similarly all biharis or tamils or gujaratis would look more or less the same regardless of the caste . That proves caste system is not racial.also these singer chamars are better looking than many bollywood actors and all lollywood actors .

First you guys need to worry about how to represent 98% Indians in bollywood. Considiring the sucess bollywood movies enjoy in India it seem you guys dont want any chamar face as leading actor in bollywood.

more than 90% of actresses are non-punjabi . Also many male lead actors are also not punjabi . so don't know what you are blabbering about. Sonu nigam has played lead actor in a few movies and also chirag paswan who is bihari . Divya bharti was one of the leading actresses of her times .

 

[Ajatashatru]

Changing or dying of rivers and their channels is also the favourite Indian reason for claiming the IVC with presenting the mythical Saraswati river as a bulwark. Oh please, do not go into the Rig Vedic Aryans and the Indo-Iranian Gods and Anti-Gods through by playing Rig Veda against the Avesta. The Gods of Iranian Zoroastrians were Satans for Vedic Aryans and vice versa. However, as I said earlier, the Rig Veda evolved and was written much much later than the fading out of IVC. Yes, there were some IVC migrations eastwards as well into Punjab as it existed in pre 1947 British India. But you fail to understand that this was part of IVC landmass and was not part of Ganges valley and its adjoining plains. And do not start saying that there were IVC settlements within Ganges valley and its plains. These were discovered after 1947 and I highly suspect the Indian archeologists who have been working under an agenda since Nehru ordered them to start discovering IVC sites in Rajasthan and other places in India because majority of the IVC had gone to Pakistan.

And when you state that Hinduism is a diverse system of various beliefs, you are highlighting your own belief and not what people of other religions feel. Hindus identify Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism, Shaivism etc etc as part of a broader Hindu culture and Hindu sub-sects, which is vehemently denied by the people who follow these religions. The claim that their religions are distinctly separate from Hinduism and want the Indian Constitution changed to accept their separate religious identity.

Inventing and giving new meanings to Dharmic, Indic, Bharti and Hindutva etc etc is farce and a cloak put on to present Hinduism as a broad concept and culture which engulfs every other faith in India. These aspects are only propagated by the Indian Hindus and are not accepted by people of other faiths.

The distinctly separate geographical and historic identity of the land which is called Pakistan has been maintained by its people since over 9000 years barring a few aberrations during the Maurya, Muslim and British rules. This separate identity can not be changed by the type of false history propagated by the Indian Hindus. And this is a fact.

All I have presented are facts accepted by world historians. As I've said Pak's version of history is never accepted outside Pak. Must be because of the global conspiracy against Pak and Islam as propagated by ISI and Zaid Hamid. This war of words b/w us will lead nowhere. You give me neutral non-Pakistani non-Islamic sources which say Pak has a history of 9000 years, wasn't a part of India, is descended from IVC and has been politically and culturally a separate entity for millennia and I will list neutral non-Indian non-Hindu sources that it is not. That way this debate will get a logical end. So, list your sources if you have any. Otherwise don't troll.

 

[MohitV]

@WebMaster @Aeronaut ....threads based on religion are not allowed anymore na ???

 

[Carl Johnson]

At least other regional industries give chances to common men of India. And caste was race based and it shows in genetic tests, no one deny that. Lol

Maybe in pakistan 98% choora low castes look different and uglier than 2% northern pakeez thats why you think they are different .No where in the hindu riligious texts its mentioned that low castes are different looking not even in manusmriti from which the discriminatory caste system originated .