Since Earliest Historical Times Hinduism Was Never Popular in Pakistan

[Nassr]

Sorry dude, you must have missed latest development in IVC. The most scientific analysis of their language puts it nearer to Sanskrit. The other contender is Tamil language which again is the part of Hindu heritage. Om was there in the IVC seals, then how on earth you claim that it was not? Your claim is so funny, first you say IVC did not know Rig Veda then say they might have recited a small part but they were not Hindus? No where you address my questions though. Also, how do you know descendants of IVC people live only in present day Pak and not in India? you got proof or did some IVC person time traveled to inform you specially? After IVC, did that whole area lay empty till muslims came and settled? in that case, you can't claim that present day people are IVC descendants. Or, if people were present, which religion they belonged to?
You see, when you start with a conjunction to suit your propaganda, and then you try to throw some jargon and made up facts to prove yourself right, you look amateurish like you are looking like now...

The language of IVC has not been deciphered so far. How would you put its structure nearest to Sanskrit if you can not even read what is written. Have a heart, please. I never said that IVC people recited Rig Veda. When Rig Veda was not present at that time how could they have recited it. OM is a Sanskrit word as written in Sanskrit. What was discovered was certainly not OM. Large majority of descendants of IVC people live in Pakistan. Only a small quip live in India as the IVC spread was also in parts of Indian Punjab, Rajasthan and Gujarat. Around 4-5% od the total Indian population, if I am not exaggerating it a bit. The people of IVC continued living in the area and the religions they followed, please read the first post.

 

[Indischer]

This is what your belief is, not of Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists or Shaivites etc etc. The whole world accepts Sikhs and Buddhists etc as separate religions except India where they live and demand their separate religious status which is denied to the, probably in order to preserve the Dharmic Hindu format.

These are not my beliefs, but rather the possible reasons why nobody's been able to prove them as separate religions in the Indian Supreme Court. I don't see Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism as part of Sanatana Dharma, but rather as Religions inspired and triggered by the ideologies expounded in Hinduism. Shaivism is beyond doubt a part of Sanatana Dharma. It's one of the primary sects of Hinduism and all the Gods honoured in Shaivism are part of the Hindu pantheon.

 

[Nassr]

Make up your mind. First you say Hinduism is monotheistic and give example of Arya Samaj. Now you say IVC were monotheist and thus can not be Hindus. So, which religion they belonged to? Which religion majority people belonged to in present day Pak between the time period of end of IVC and 5th century CE?

hahahahah ..... you certainly are a confused one aren't you. Educate yourself about Arya Samaj and those who state that Rig Veda was monotheistic in nature before you question me in the manner. Regarding their religion please read the first post. However, just to satisfy your eagerness, let me say that the people of Pakistan were never majority Hindus since the earliest times.

These are not my beliefs, but rather the possible reasons why nobody's been able to prove them as separate religions in the Indian Supreme Court. I don't see Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism as part of Sanatana Dharma, but rather as Religions inspired and triggered by the ideologies expounded in Hinduism. Shaivism is beyond doubt a part of Sanatana Dharma. It's one of the primary sects of Hinduism and all the Gods honoured in Shaivism are part of the Hindu pantheon.

Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains disagree with such categorization and so too the whole world. Shaivism as practiced in those times was and is a monotheistic format. You have your own way of looking at things and these do not conform to the categorization of the rest of the world.

 

[Thirdfront]

The language of IVC has not been deciphered so far. How would you put its structure nearest to Sanskrit if you can not even read what is written. Have a heart, please. I never said that IVC people recited Rig Veda. When Rig Veda was not present at that time how could they have recited it. OM is a Sanskrit word as written in Sanskrit. What was discovered was certainly not OM. Large majority of descendants of IVC people live in Pakistan. Only a small quip live in India as the IVC spread was also in parts of Indian Punjab, Rajasthan and Gujarat. Around 4-5% od the total Indian population, if I am not exaggerating it a bit. The people of IVC continued living in the area and the religions they followed, please read the first post.

As said, you have missed the train. Deciphering unknown languages with unknown script starts with discovering which language it is nearest as languages seldom develop and disappear in complete isolation. So, the advance computer simulation have shown it to be related to Sanskrit. Just try google. How do you know Rig Veda wasn't present? Also you say Mauryan empire was Shaivites, which religion is that if not Hindu (FYKI, I am a shaivite hindu)...

The language of IVC has not been deciphered so far. How would you put its structure nearest to Sanskrit if you can not even read what is written. Have a heart, please. I never said that IVC people recited Rig Veda. When Rig Veda was not present at that time how could they have recited it. OM is a Sanskrit word as written in Sanskrit. What was discovered was certainly not OM. Large majority of descendants of IVC people live in Pakistan. Only a small quip live in India as the IVC spread was also in parts of Indian Punjab, Rajasthan and Gujarat. Around 4-5% od the total Indian population, if I am not exaggerating it a bit. The people of IVC continued living in the area and the religions they followed, please read the first post.

Proof please. Or did you pull the data out of your behind as usual???

 

[Indischer]

I am sorry if you are disappointed but what I am stating is factual in entirety. You say that there were figurines of Mother Goddess and male Deities recovered from IVC. These figurines became Goddess and Deities because thousands of years later these were identified as such by a religion in India and not because the people of IVC also accepted and characterized these as such. This is justification in reverse and does not prove anything.

The Aryan Invasion Theory has been debunked a long time ago and I do not agree with any such happening taking place. If at all there were any migrations that took place, these would have been over a long long period of time and would not have changed or impacted the local culture in a big way. The fact that the people of IVC conducted major trade with Mesopotamia, yet also the fact that no Mesopotamian cultural similarity exists between the two civilizations speak of the strength of IVC civilization in maintaining their societal and cultural singularity and distinctive and separate identity. In such an environment, how could the invading and migrating Aryans would have changed the cultural and societal practices of the people of IVC - they could not have.

Most of the Vedic period falls within the early part of the Iron Age between 12th to 6th centuries BC. This was the evolutionary period and one can not state this with any surety that whether the people of IVC followed Vedic culture. You see even after complete fading out of IVC by around 1300 BC, the people living in the cities did not move out of these cities and continued living there and this has been accepted by all the archeologists and historians that I have read. The Vedic culture as described in the Rig Veda is primarily rural in nature and the IVC people even after complete fading out were still urbanized in nature. This change, if at all, would have occurred much later in time frame and could not have started around 1200 BC. Talageri describes the emanation of Aryaverta as not Punjab but area east of Punjab and he says that it later moved west to Punjab. Which would also place it much later in time frame.

And if these people followed monotheistic format, as many scholars believe, their religious format would certainly be different than the one Indian Hindus practice. Many scholars believe that Porus, who fought Alexander the Great around 300 some BC, was a monotheist and thus falls well within the expanding history. Kushans invaded in the 3rd century BC. Various Kushan emperors represented a wide variety of faiths including Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, and possibly Shaivism (monotheists).

In pre-1947, non-Muslim population in present day Pakistan was:

1. W. Punjab: 9% Hindu, 11% Sikh
2. Sindh: 10% Hindu, 5% Sikh
3. NWFP: 2.5% Hindu, 2.5% Sikh
4. Baluchistan: 3% Hindu

According to the UN and other respected organizations, 12-24 millionis the total estimate of migrations from both India and Pakistan(East Pakistan included) of Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs combined at the time of partition. This amounts to almost 50% of the total Hindu and Sikh population migrating to India.

Therefore, the history very clearly indicates that since the earliest times, there was never a majority Hindu population in the areas of Pakistan.

Well, it's not just the Indian experts who contend the figurines likely represent divinities(And images of Mother Goddesses are found in cultures all over the World). And if their word is to be taken as mere speculation, then so too the words of those experts who said they might have been monotheistic. It can, then, also be argued that the people of IVC were atheists.

Regarding the stats, again, the overwhelming majority of Muslims were converted from Hinduism, not Buddhism. The many accounts from travellers to India during this time, accounts of Kings etc are testimony to this fact. The process of conversion too, was not a one time affair. It happened right from 1200s to 1900s (Jinnah's own Grandfather was a Hindu, right?). So, it's wrong to absolutely state that today's Pakistanis never practiced Hinduism like you say.

 

[Thirdfront]

hahahahah ..... you certainly are a confused one aren't you. Educate yourself about Arya Samaj and those who state that Rig Veda was monotheistic in nature before you question me in the manner. Regarding their religion please read the first post. However, just to satisfy your eagerness, let me say that the people of Pakistan were never majority Hindus since the earliest times.



Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains disagree with such categorization and so too the whole world. Shaivism as practiced in those times was and is a monotheistic format. You have your own way of looking at things and these do not conform to the categorization of the rest of the world.

Link please.... In India, all these people are under Hindu common code of law. Even supreme court has clarified it. I mean, tell me according to you, what is Hinduism?

 

[Nassr]

As said, you have missed the train. Deciphering unknown languages with unknown script starts with discovering which language it is nearest as languages seldom develop and disappear in complete isolation. So, the advance computer simulation have shown it to be related to Sanskrit. Just try google. How do you know Rig Veda wasn't present? Also you say Mauryan empire was Shaivites, which religion is that if not Hindu (FYKI, I am a shaivite hindu)...


Proof please. Or did you pull the data out of your behind as usual???

Ah the Rajaram crap of computer simulations ending with the infamous horseplay. The experts do not agree with any such thing. Please come back when the IVC language has been deciphered. And till then happy googling. Shaivites of the era were monotheists - are you a monotheist.

Link please.... In India, all these people are under Hindu common code of law. Even supreme court has clarified it. I mean, tell me according to you, what is Hinduism?

Please read Article 25 of Indian Constitution.

Well, it's not just the Indian experts who contend the figurines likely represent divinities(And images of Mother Goddesses are found in cultures all over the World). And if their word is to be taken as mere speculation, then so too the words of those experts who said they might have been monotheistic. It can, then, also be argued that the people of IVC were atheists.

Regarding the stats, again, the overwhelming majority of Muslims were converted from Hinduism, not Buddhism. The many accounts from travellers to India during this time, accounts of Kings etc are testimony to this fact. The process of conversion too, was not a one time affair. It happened right from 1200s to 1900s (Jinnah's own Grandfather was a Hindu, right?). So, it's wrong to absolutely state that today's Pakistanis never practiced Hinduism like you say.

They could be atheists, but the environment under which they lived, governed and administered, this may not be the case.

Majority conversions from the untouchable Hindus took place from within Republic of India and not from the territories of Pakistan. From the Pakistani territories majority converted from Buddhism and not from Hinduism.

 

[Indischer]

hahahahah ..... you certainly are a confused one aren't you. Educate yourself about Arya Samaj and those who state that Rig Veda was monotheistic in nature before you question me in the manner. Regarding their religion please read the first post. However, just to satisfy your eagerness, let me say that the people of Pakistan were never majority Hindus since the earliest times.



Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains disagree with such categorization and so too the whole world. Shaivism as practiced in those times was and is a monotheistic format. You have your own way of looking at things and these do not conform to the categorization of the rest of the world.

LOL. Have you ever, ever asked any Shaivite about this? Shaivism is monistic, not monotheistic.

I have no problems accepting Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs are a different religion. I'm sure most Hindus have no problem with this either. We see them as similar religions, not the same religion as us.

 

[Nassr]

LOL. Have you ever, ever asked any Shaivite about this? Shaivism is monistic, not monotheistic.

I have no problems accepting Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs are a different religion. I'm sure most Hindus have no problem with this either. We see them as similar religions, not the same religion as us.

hahahahah ...... I won't ask for such a categorization.

Your Supreme Court disagrees with you and states that these religions are a sect of Hindu religion. So does your Constitution.

 

[Indischer]

Ah the Rajaram crap of computer simulations ending with the infamous horseplay. The experts do not agree with any such thing. Please come back when the IVC language has been deciphered. And till then happy googling. Shaivites of the era were monotheists - are you a monotheist.



Please read Article 25 of Indian Constitution.



They could be atheists, but the environment under which they lived, governed and administered, this may not be the case.

Majority conversions from the untouchable Hindus took place from within Republic of India and not from the territories of Pakistan. From the Pakistani territories majority converted from Buddhism and not from Hinduism.

Then again, today's Pakistanis were atheists or polytheists depending on how you interpret Buddhism. In addition to the Buddha, the Mahayana Buddhists also worship Avalohiteshwara(a Bodhisattva) and believe in certain Devas. While the Theravada Buddhists believe the Buddha too was only human and hence are atheistic/nontheistic in their outlook.

 

[MilSpec]

Why cant we just conclude that all people residing in pakistan have no ties to hinduism or anything perceived hindu, all are arab progeny and just chill.... let them be happy

 

[Nassr]

Then again, today's Pakistanis were atheists or polytheists depending on how you interpret Buddhism. In addition to the Buddha, the Mahayana Buddhists also worship Avalohiteshwara(a Bodhisattva) and believe in certain Devas. While the Theravada Buddhists believe the Buddha too was only human and hence are atheistic/nontheistic in their outlook.

Yes agreed. History of Pakistan does not begin with the landing of Mohammad Bin Qasim at the Sindh port of Debal. It is over 9000 years old.

 

[Indischer]

hahahahah ...... I won't ask for such a categorization.

Your Supreme Court disagrees with you and states that these religions are a sect of Hindu religion. So does your Constitution.

As I said before, it may have been difficult to prove them so in the Supreme Court. And you should read what monism means. Ask any learned Shaivite and he'll tell you that Shaivism is monism, not monotheism. (Simplest way to make you get this is: A Shaivite will believe Gods like Ganesh,Brahma or Vishnu exist, and that like all things in this universe, the other Gods too are composed of Shiva; with Shiva being the monistic substance that pervades the entire universe)

 

[AUz]

My ancestors (people of Indus Valley Civilization) were smart people. They couldn't have accepted Hinduism as their religion. Throughout history, this area was never core Hindu area.

Very good thread Nassr bhai...

Pakistanis residing to the East of Indus river share many things with Indians, but we are, and we have been, different -unique- peoples throughout history since ancient times.

Same as Germans and French..they might share many things, but both of them are unique people with unique identities.

Thank God we got separated from india and now have our own lands, own resources, own laws, own military, and own culture...We preserved the tradition of our ancient forefathers..a tradition with maintains that we, the people of Indus, have ALWAYS been different than ganga people, with our own unique, and superior culture and customs.

 

[Thirdfront]

Ah the Rajaram crap of computer simulations ending with the infamous horseplay. The experts do not agree with any such thing. Please come back when the IVC language has been deciphered. And till then happy googling. Shaivites of the era were monotheists - are you a monotheist.



Please read Article 25 of Indian Constitution.



They could be atheists, but the environment under which they lived, governed and administered, this may not be the case.

Majority conversions from the untouchable Hindus took place from within Republic of India and not from the territories of Pakistan. From the Pakistani territories majority converted from Buddhism and not from Hinduism.

Who said anything about Rajaram? There have been multiple, independent studies all agreeing to same. So you basically pull up data from your behind as you go? Chandragupta converted to Jainism "After" he was succeeded by his son. So, Hinduism was majority in pakistan atleast till then (as per your logic). After that You forgot Gupta empire which was completely hindu (well, as per your def). Then just ignore times from 1500 BCE to 300 BCE.... Funniest assumptions of all is that people follow religion of king.....
Talk to me when you have total population data with religion wise breakup.