Since Earliest Historical Times Hinduism Was Never Popular in Pakistan

[Nassr]

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

Nope. What I said was and history is a testament to this fact that Hinduism was never a majority religion within the areas of Pakistan. This does not mean that Hindus did not live in Pakistan and are not living here. Very few people of Arab descent would be present in Pakistan. And I am surprised as to why this Arab thing is so famous amongst the Indians which is used sarcastically by them. It somehow does not create the affect the Indians may want to create. Yet Indians persist on using this Arab sarcasm.

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.

hahahahah ..... idiocy personified.

 

[MilSpec]

Nope. What I said was and history is a testament to this fact that Hinduism was never a majority religion within the areas of Pakistan. This does not mean that Hindus did not live in Pakistan and are not living here. Very few people of Arab descent would be present in Pakistan. And I am surprised as to why this Arab thing is so famous amongst the Indians which is used sarcastically by them. It somehow does not create the affect the Indians may want to create. Yet Indians persist on using this Arab sarcasm.

Then just settle it to, people of pakistan (formerly west pakistan), historically were part of no religion and accepted islam as it knocked o the doors or thier former religion has no historical records but categorically wasn't adherent to any forms of sanathan dharma... right?

 

[Indischer]

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.

I don't think you've read the whole discussion in this thread. Even @Nassr agrees that Pakistan has not enough to preserve the memory of it's forefathers. It doesn't matter if your forefathers were Hindu or Buddhist, what Pakistan has done to spread awareness about it's own history to it's own populace is miniscule compared to what the likes of Germany, France or even China and India do. Pakistan needsto do a lot more to reclaim it's own legacy. And yes, Pakistan's culture may be unique. But different does not automatically translate to superior or inferior.

 

[Thirdfront]

Nope. What I said was and history is a testament to this fact that Hinduism was never a majority religion within the areas of Pakistan. This does not mean that Hindus did not live in Pakistan and are not living here. Very few people of Arab descent would be present in Pakistan. And I am surprised as to why this Arab thing is so famous amongst the Indians which is used sarcastically by them. It somehow does not create the affect the Indians may want to create. Yet Indians persist on using this Arab sarcasm.



hahahahah ..... idiocy personified.

Yeah, I thought so.... Thanks for accepting

Nope. What I said was and history is a testament to this fact that Hinduism was never a majority religion within the areas of Pakistan. This does not mean that Hindus did not live in Pakistan and are not living here. Very few people of Arab descent would be present in Pakistan. And I am surprised as to why this Arab thing is so famous amongst the Indians which is used sarcastically by them. It somehow does not create the affect the Indians may want to create. Yet Indians persist on using this Arab sarcasm.



hahahahah ..... idiocy personified.

You contradicted yourself during Maurya empire... pull out some data from your behind and edit post 1 to cover up...

 

[AUz]

I don't think you've read the whole discussion in this thread. Even @Nassr agrees that Pakistan has not enough to preserve the memory of it's forefathers. It doesn't matter if your forefathers were Hindu or Buddhist, what Pakistan has done to spread awareness about it's own history to it's own populace is miniscule compared to what the likes of Germany, France or even China and India do. Pakistan needsto do a lot more to reclaim it's own legacy. And yes, Pakistan's culture may be unique. But different does not automatically translate to superior or inferior.

I agree 100%

 

[Ajatashatru]

He does not have to indicate that the landmass covering Pakistan about which he is referring to, is over 9000 years old. It is already a proven fact. Mehrgarh, excavated by the French archeologists in 1974, is over 9000 years old city which is located between the cities of Quetta and Sibi in Balochistan.

Robert Kaplan is a geography expert and a geopolitical analyst. The era of history that we are talking about, these two were the principle geographic regions. However, the aim of mentioning this geographical distinction was to highlight the fact that the landmass occupied by Pakistan was a separate geographic and political entity, distinctly different from India and not India’s geography.

The empires that you are referring to ruled only a part of the IVC landmass and not the complete landmass itself to govern the two separate regions as one political entity. This has not happened except during the Mauryan, Muslim and British rules. Kushan Empire also rose from eastern Afghanistan and conquered parts of Indus and Gangetic plains, though could not join the two regions completely as one political unit.

You quoted Encyclopedia Britannica as if it is a book which comprises of historical analyses. I didn’t object to it. But you object to Robert Kaplan who is a world famous geopolitical analyst and a geographic expert.

My dear friend you try to show you have good GK yet you know nothing about the most famous encyclopedia in the world. In Encyclopedia Britannica, all articles are written by experts, history articles are written by historians, political articles by political analysts, geographical by geographers and so on.

Robert Kaplan is a journalist, not a historian or a geographic expert. You don't have any history sources to back your claims. Every neutral historian considers Pak as historically Indian.

Pak's pre-Islamic population followed Hinduism/Buddhism/Jainism in the exact same manner as the people of present day North India, they called them residents of Bharatvarsha. Many holy scriptures of Indian faiths have been written in what is now Pak. People of pre-1947 Pak everywhere in the world are referred to as Indian, never as Pakistani.

Separate geography does not mean separate civilisation. North and South India are separated by Narmada yet they form the same country. Europe could not unite because they believed in the concept of nation states and not of multi-ethnic nations. Yet despite many geographical barriers, Europe forms one common civilization. They have cultural differences b/w nations but such differences exist even within different states/provinces of India and Pak.

There is overwhelming evidence that Pak has always been part of Indian civilization. Even today Pak has nothing original, your faith and script is of Arab origin, your cuisine, culture is of Indian origin and while you substitute your languages heavily with words of Persian & Arabic, most of your languages are of Indian origin. Their is not a single faith, language, script, empire, kingdom, etc anywhere from history to present which is termed "Pakistani". These are not attributes of a 9000 year old independent geopolitical entity with its own civilization. Such an entity will have most things original of its own.

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

Even today Pak has nothing original, your faith and script is of Arab origin, your cuisine, culture is of Indian origin and while you substitute your languages heavily with words of Persian & Arabic, most of your languages are of Indian origin. Their is not a single faith, language, script, empire, kingdom, etc anywhere from history to present which is termed "Pakistani". These are not attributes of a 9000 year old independent geopolitical entity with its own civilization. Such an entity will have most things original of its own.

Do you know anything about original faith of Arabs before they were converted into Islam? Not all Arabs were/are Muslims and not all Muslims are Arabs. An Arab can be a Muslim, Christian, Jew, atheist or follower of any other religion or ideology. How you are making Islam as religion of Arabs? Islam is universal religion with universal message and Muslims belong to different tribes, races, cultures, languages, color etc and these all things become irrelevant as long as teaching of Islam concern.What matter in Islam is how much you love and fear Allah. Its what Quran teach

"O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things)"

Islam dominated the native cultures of Muslims no matter which culture and tribe they were from and Muslims molded their culture according to their religious beliefs although there are still some Pre- Islamic practices in different cultures of Muslim which some illiterate people still practice. Arabs also gave up many culture practices which were against the teaching of Islam. Pagan culture and practices of Arabs were not any different than practices of Hinduism in past where birth of daughter were considered shame and women had no rights and were buried alive with husband etc.

 

[Ajatashatru]

Do you know anything about original faith of Arabs before they were converted into Islam? Not all Arabs were/are Muslims and not all Muslims are Arabs. An Arab can be a Muslim, Christian, Jew, atheist or follower of any other religion or ideology. How you are making Islam as religion of Arabs? Islam is universal religion with universal message and Muslims belong to different tribes, races, cultures, languages, color etc and these all things become irrelevant as long as teaching of Islam concern.What matter in Islam is how much you love and fear Allah. Its what Quran teach

"O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things)"

Islam dominated the native cultures of Muslims no matter which culture and tribe they were from and Muslims molded their culture according to their religious beliefs although there are still some Pre- Islamic practices in different cultures of Muslim which some illiterate people still practice. Arabs also gave up many culture practices which were against the teaching of Islam. Pagan culture and practices of Arabs were not any different than practices of Hinduism in past where birth of daughter were considered shame and women had no rights and were buried alive with husband etc.

I said Islam is Arab in origin which is true.

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

I said Islam is Arab in origin which is true.

No its not true. You are confusing islam with Prophet of lslam who was arab by origin but his messege of islam was for all mankind thatswhy muslims went all over the world to spread this messege of islam. We even consider Moses and jesus as Prophet

 

[Ajatashatru]

No its not true. You are confusing islam with Prophet of lslam who was arab by origin but his messege of islam was for all mankind thatswhy muslims went all over the world to spread this messege of islam. We even consider Moses and jesus as Prophet

Do you know the meaning of word 'origin'? I am not concerned with message of Islam. Islam originated in Arabia so it's of Arab origin, just like Buddhism is said to be of Indian origin despite being practiced in many countries.

 

[KRAIT]

I thought in earlier times, there was no Pakistan. I don't see any mention of word Pakistan in any text or any documents made by various travelers, lets say 150 years ago.

 

[Nassr]

Then just settle it to, people of pakistan (formerly west pakistan), historically were part of no religion and accepted islam as it knocked o the doors or thier former religion has no historical records but categorically wasn't adherent to any forms of sanathan dharma... right?

Howsoever we in Pakistan interpret various religions is Pakistan’s own matter and it does not have to relate in any way according to what is prophesized by Indian Hinduism. According to Indian Hindu categorization, Sanatana Dharma (another name of Hinduism) also includes other religions like Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism etc. This categorization is not accepted and neither recognized in Pakistan. We believe that Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism etc are separate religions and are not part of Hinduism or Sanatana Dharma. In view of this, Sanatana Dharma was never practiced in the manner in Pakistan.

My dear friend you try to show you have good GK yet you know nothing about the most famous encyclopedia in the world. In Encyclopedia Britannica, all articles are written by experts, history articles are written by historians, political articles by political analysts, geographical by geographers and so on.

Robert Kaplan is a journalist, not a historian or a geographic expert. You don't have any history sources to back your claims. Every neutral historian considers Pak as historically Indian.

Pak's pre-Islamic population followed Hinduism/Buddhism/Jainism in the exact same manner as the people of present day North India, they called them residents of Bharatvarsha. Many holy scriptures of Indian faiths have been written in what is now Pak. People of pre-1947 Pak everywhere in the world are referred to as Indian, never as Pakistani.

Separate geography does not mean separate civilisation. North and South India are separated by Narmada yet they form the same country. Europe could not unite because they believed in the concept of nation states and not of multi-ethnic nations. Yet despite many geographical barriers, Europe forms one common civilization. They have cultural differences b/w nations but such differences exist even within different states/provinces of India and Pak.

There is overwhelming evidence that Pak has always been part of Indian civilization. Even today Pak has nothing original, your faith and script is of Arab origin, your cuisine, culture is of Indian origin and while you substitute your languages heavily with words of Persian & Arabic, most of your languages are of Indian origin. Their is not a single faith, language, script, empire, kingdom, etc anywhere from history to present which is termed "Pakistani". These are not attributes of a 9000 year old independent geopolitical entity with its own civilization. Such an entity will have most things original of its own.

The people of pre-1947 Pakistan since the earliest times did not identify their land as Bharatvarsha. This is the version highlighted by Indian Hindus and not the people of Pakistan even before the partition. Before the partition, the people of Pakistan were referred as British Indian as the land was ruled by the British.

Separate geography in case of Pakistan and India denoted separate political entities except during the times of Mauryas, Muslims and British when they were ruled as one political unit. Besides these eras, India was never united even in the lands of Republic of India which gained independence in 1947. The landmass of current India was divided in many sovereign states since the earliest times except for the three rules that I mentioned earlier. Heck even at the time of partition there were around 580 states, many of which were forcibly made part of Republic of India.

Pakistan has never been part of Indian civilization as India never had a civilization of its own. The only civilization that existed in sub-continent, the IVC was and is a Pakistani civilization. Pakistani culture and cuisine is certainly not of Indian origin. Even Indian cuisine is basically of Turkish origin. This land has been a separate political entity from Republic of India except for minor aberrations, since over 9000 years.

It is time that you Indians look for your own identity from within Republic of India and stop stealing identity from other peoples heritage.

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)

Kashmiri Shaivism may be termed as monism. In the larger sense, Shaivism is accepted as monotheistic format the world over.

 

[Kloitra]

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.

Whenever did the Indian Supreme Court declare all these religions as sect of Hinduism? Give a reference. Neither Supreme Court nor Constitution considers them same as Hinduism.

 

[Nassr]

And do you remember me asking whether every Muslim will believe everything that an Ayatollah preaches? Swami Dayanand Saraswati indoctrinated the Arya Samaj the way he saw fit. His words on Hinduism are his interpretations alone and are respected by many. But to call him the absolute authority on Hinduism is to call Ayatollah Khomenei as the absolute authority of Islam.

The word Mlechha for an outsider(the Tusharas i.e Tocharians, the Kambojas i.e the Cambodians etc were considered outsiders) is first mentioned in the RigVeda.

I don't know who has accused Pakistan of mixing History with Religion. I don't, as long as there is another source that can corroborate them. And yes, the Dharmic school of thought is what has given rise to Buddhism, Jainism etc. The Gautama Buddha is also seen as one of 10 avatars of Vishnu. In fact, each of these religions have expanded upon the idea of renunciation, non-violence etc, ideas which were first propounded by the Sanatana Dharma. Hinduism and Islam can jointly claim to have given rise to Sikhism, but since Islam is seen as the final word of God, Islam has shunned Sikhism and Hinduism has ended up getting the sole credit.

I checked up the Rig Veda that I have and did not find mention of the word Mlechha in the entire rig Veda. Could you please quote a reference. Thanks.

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

Do you know the meaning of word 'origin'? I am not concerned with message of Islam. Islam originated in Arabia so it's of Arab origin, just like Buddhism is said to be of Indian origin despite being practiced in many countries.

I know the meaning of word "origin" . By your logic all humam beings came from common ancestor lol . you dont know the meaning of word "Islam". Origin of islam is Allah and islam is the messege of Allah revealed on Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) through angels. Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) was messenger of Allah and he was arabs but at his time Arabs were worshipping idols so by your logic idols worshipping is Arabic by origin. We also believe that rest of the islamic prophets also brought nothing but islam but they were sent down for particular nation unlike prophet Muhammad(PBUH). Get some education first what is slam