The Real Two Nation Theory Is Cultural

[AfrazulMandal]

What if I told you that the original Indus Vedic religion forbade idolatry, allowed the consumption of beef and had no hierarchical caste system?

None of those are true.

Only the caste system was not there.

Idolatry was VERY much there. As was the sanctity of the cow. A few cherrypicked quotes do not prove anything.

 

[Indus Priest King]

And Ramayana was written where exactly? Lahore was never part of the Ganga cultural circle. Punjab and Sindh were VEDIC territories and considered Dasyuvarta (North India) off limits.

Similarly, you folks called the Indus Valley as "Vahika Desa" and called us "Mlecha".

So clearly there was a conflict between the two groups.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

The Vedas referred to these people as traitors or "Dasyu"

Nope. Dasyus were not ethnicities. Anybody could become one. Only they had to be organized, powerful criminals who broke Dharma.

And only what is written in Quran is true ?? lol

It is the word of God. So yes.

Nationalism has completely destroyed communities in the entire Middle East, pitting one Muslim nation against another.

Even then we have Hindu Pakistanis who are trying to do the same in South Asia. You should be grateful. But you are encouraging conflict.

 

[Indus Priest King]

None of those are true.

Only the caste system was not there.

Idolatry was VERY much there. As was the sanctity of the cow. A few cherrypicked quotes do not prove anything.

It seems you need a lesson.

The earliest application to the formal division into four social classes appears in the late Rigvedic Purusha Sukta, which has the Brahman, Rajanya (instead of Kshatriya), Vaishya and Shudra classes.

This Purusha Sukta varna verse is now generally considered to have been inserted at a later date into the Vedic text, possibly as a charter myth. Stephanie Jamison and Joel Brereton, a professor of Sanskrit and Religious studies, state, "there is no evidence in the Rigveda for an elaborate, much-subdivided and overarching caste system", and "the varna system seems to be embryonic in the Rigveda and, both then and later, a social ideal rather than a social reality".

Ram Sharma states "the Rig Vedic society was neither organized on the basis of social division of labor or on that of differences in wealth ... [it] was primarily organised on the basis of kin, tribe and lineage."

In the post-Vedic period, the varna division is described in the Mahabharata and Puranas.

Hence, Vedic society had no real caste system. This was an invention in the Ganga.

I've written a whole article on the differences between Hinduism in Pakistan (Indus Vedic) and Hinduism in North India (Ganga Puranic). I'll share it with everyone at a later time.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

It seems you need a lesson.

The earliest application to the formal division into four social classes appears in the late Rigvedic Purusha Sukta, which has the Brahman, Rajanya (instead of Kshatriya), Vaishya and Shudra classes.

This Purusha Sukta varna verse is now generally considered to have been inserted at a later date into the Vedic text, possibly as a charter myth. Stephanie Jamison and Joel Brereton, a professor of Sanskrit and Religious studies, state, "there is no evidence in the Rigveda for an elaborate, much-subdivided and overarching caste system", and "the varna system seems to be embryonic in the Rigveda and, both then and later, a social ideal rather than a social reality".

Ram Sharma states "the Rig Vedic society was neither organized on the basis of social division of labor or on that of differences in wealth ... [it] was primarily organised on the basis of kin, tribe and lineage."

In the post-Vedic period, the varna division is described in the Mahabharata and Puranas.

Hence, Vedic society had no real caste system. This was an invention in the Ganga.

That's PRECISELY what I said.

The caste system was not there.

Rest all exist. There are multiple Gods. Only the Paramatman is not. But there is no prohibition either.

It seems you want to save your skin by distancing your Hinduism from Indian Hinduism.

In that case, I am cool with that.

But then, read about Islam. Hope you see the light.

 

[Indus Priest King]

That's PRECISELY what I said.

The caste system was not there.

Rest all exist. There are multiple Gods. Only the Paramatman is not. But there is no prohibition either.

It seems you want to save your skin by distancing your Hinduism from Indian Hinduism.

In that case, I am cool with that.

But then, read about Islam. Hope you see the light.

I don't call it "Indian Hinduism"...I refer to it as Puranic Hinduism.

South India has a very different form of Hinduism, as does Far East Asia (Burma, Thailand, Indonesia). Hinduism differs from region to region and broadly divided into four types:

Indus Vedic (Pakistan)
Puranic Ganga (North Indian)
South Indian
Far East (Burma, Thailand, Laos etc.)

 

[AfrazulMandal]

I don't call it "Indian Hinduism"...I refer to it as Puranic Hinduism.

South India has a very different form of Hinduism, as does Far East Asia (Burma, Thailand, Indonesia). Hinduism differs from region to region and broadly divided into four types:

Indus Vedic (Pakistan)
Puranic Ganga (North Indian)
South Indian
Far East (Burma, Thailand, Laos etc.)

May Allah SWT guide you.

 

[Indus Priest King]

May Allah SWT guide you.

Thanks, but I'm happy with my life at the moment.

 

[jetray]

The "origin of Lahore" name is a myth.

That story is based in the Mahabharata. The Mahabharata was not written in the Indus Valley...it was written in the Ganga. The Puranas, Mahabharata or Manusmiriti mean nothing to Hindu communities in the Indus Valley. The Vedas reign supreme here.

For me, any history ancient history on the Indus Valley after Harappa and before the Persian/Greek/Buddhist influences should be taken from the Vedas.

I am sure it must be a myth, so must be gandhara , peshawar,takshashila ..etc. It is just bcos you cannot comprehend or accept the facts as it is. Either it is sheer ignorance or deliberate amnesia.

 

[Hamza913]

My argument is this...had religious tensions not been created by the British Brahmin alliance after 1857 and had World War 1 and 2 not occurred, I believe a natural cultural division would have formed anyway. The Indus and Ganga have always been separate throughout its 9000 years of human history, with the exception of around 500 years with various Kingdoms and Empires, the longest being the British Empire from 1842 to 1947.

While we share similarities, I often like to compare the two as Japan and Korea.
Very similar, yet very different at the same time.

Even the Hinduism practiced in the Indus and Ganga are vastly different. Hindu communities in Pakistan worship and revere Vedic customs and gods, which was related to the Avestan religion of Persia. Whereas Indian Hindus (North Indian Hindus) revere Puranic customs and gods, which were mainly adopted from Dravidian South Indian mythology.

Vedic gods like Varuna, Indra, Mitara etc. (all of which were adopted from Avestan faith) are worshiped by Sindhi Hindus for example (Jhuelal is considered the Sindhi god, and a reincarnation of Varuna). The Kalash also revere an Indra like figure, while Kashmiri Pandits worship Kheer Bhawani, another Vedic deity.

Indian Hindus on the otherhand worship gods like Ram, Krishna, Vishnu etc. These gods are not very revered among Pakistani Hindu communities.

Asalamu Alaikum

I love your FB account by the way.

 

[Indus Priest King]

I am sure it must be a myth, so must be gandhara , peshawar,takshashila ..etc. It is just bcos you cannot comprehend or accept the facts as it is. Either it is sheer ignorance or deliberate amnesia.

Gandhara actually existed...it's a name that has transcended through Vedic, Persian and Greek rule and sources.

The origin of the name Lahore has many problems:

a. It does not directly say that the city of Lahore is based on that name
b. Puranas, Mahabharata and Manusmiriti were not followed in Saptha Sindhu (Punjab)

So try again please.

 

[Hamza913]

And only what is written in Quran is true ?? lol

We have more proof for it than you do that's for sure, but you wouldn't know that since you've never looked into Islam properly.

 

[TMA]

That's PRECISELY what I said.

The caste system was not there.

Rest all exist. There are multiple Gods. Only the Paramatman is not. But there is no prohibition either.

It seems you want to save your skin by distancing your Hinduism from Indian Hinduism.

In that case, I am cool with that.

But then, read about Islam. Hope you see the light.

I prefer not to call Hinduism that. Hind is Arabic and Persian for that land where the Indus is. And today that heart land of Hind is Pakistan. It was the British that came up with this term as they could not understand it.
The "Indus Land" is culturally and ethnically different even before the Religion of Abraham (PBUH) came in. This just added more difference. Sure various empires from old and new joined "Indus Land" and "Ganga Land" together.
It is unfortunate that Pakistanis have been brainwashed by the colonialists to think if it were not for religion, we would be one people. What should have happened was Bharat Punjab and Rajastan should have come to "Indus Land" as that is the only real part of today's Bharat that is similar to Pakistan. But it was not meant to be....

 

[jetray]

Gandhara actually existed...it's a name that has transcended through Vedic, Persian and Greek rule and sources.

The origin of the name Lahore has many problems:

a. It does not directly say that the city of Lahore is based on that name
b. Puranas, Mahabharata and Manusmiriti were not followed in Saptha Sindhu (Punjab)

So try again please.

lol, try again with facts.

When gandhara is mentioned in mahabharata what makes you think that the regions in between were not known?

well either you can use facts or just keep parroting words like vedic,manusmriti..etc which you have no idea about.

Lava Mandir is a Hindu temple dedicated to the Hindu deity Lava, the son of Rama. It is in Lahore Fort, Lahore, Pakistan. The city itself is named after him.

 

[MilSpec]

The "origin of Lahore" name is a myth.

That story is based in the Mahabharata. The Mahabharata was not written in the Indus Valley...it was written in the Ganga. The Puranas, Mahabharata or Manusmiriti mean nothing to Hindu communities in the Indus Valley. The Vedas reign supreme here.

For me, any history ancient history on the Indus Valley after Harappa and before the Persian/Greek/Buddhist influences should be taken from the Vedas.

Its Ramayana, not Mahabharata, jeez.