What's new

Why do Indians dislike Pakistani attachment to Muhammad Bin Qasim?

Do you identify with Muhammad bin Qasim or Raja Dahir?


  • Total voters
    45
When a tourist or 'foreigner' thinks of India; he thinks of the Taj Mahal and other Mughal buildings. The fact that i've never heard (being an American) of Brihadeeswara Temple builds on this .


In quantity yes; India has a 'superior' military and economy than the British. In quality; India ranks even poorer than sub-saharan Africa.
According to your logic Pakistan is worse than sub-saharan Africa as Pakistan has a lower GDP per capita, a lower literacy rate and a lower HDI than India.
 
.
By the way porus lost the war we are still proud of that.

Ok, let me get this. You have a problem with some Pakistanis who appear to take pride in Ghauri, Ghazni, Salahuddin Ayubi (probably) and even MBQ since they are not related in the genetic sense to them and Pakistanis arent the descendants of them but you oppenly take pride in Porus, a supposed 'Hindu', whatever that term means, who probably was a Buddhist given historic context, despite yourself being an Indian with zero genetic relation to Porus and not being descended from him.

WHAT.THE.F***

67563158.jpg
 
.
When a tourist or 'foreigner' thinks of India; he thinks of the Taj Mahal and other Mughal buildings. The fact that i've never heard (being an American) of Brihadeeswara Temple builds on this .
There is an hour long documentary video available in you tube created Harvard University Architectural research students.. Just type Brihadeeswara temple tanjore American documentary.. You'll come to know..
And coming to your initial notion, not every tourist or foreigner thinks about Mughal buildings.. If a Pakistani comes to India then they might think so..
 
.
When a tourist or 'foreigner' thinks of India; he thinks of the Taj Mahal and other Mughal buildings. The fact that i've never heard (being an American) of Brihadeeswara Temple builds on this .


In quantity yes; India has a 'superior' military and economy than the British. In quality; India ranks even poorer than sub-saharan Africa.
Typical Pakistani who knows nothing.

Most of Indian heritage sites are pre Islamic, even thousand years before Islam.

Taj Mahal is what ! More People visit architectural marvels in Maharashtra and Deccan apart from Buddhist Hindu sites all over the country.


Even Mughal architecture is a blend of Perisan and Indian. Not remotely related to present day Pakistan.

Ok, let me get this. You have a problem with some Pakistanis who appear to take pride in Ghauri, Ghazni, Salahuddin Ayubi (probably) and even MBQ since they are not related in the genetic sense to them and Pakistanis arent the descendants of them but you oppenly take pride in Porus, a supposed 'Hindu', whatever that term means, who probably was a Buddhist given historic context, despite yourself being an Indian with zero genetic relation to Porus and not being descended from him.

WHAT.THE.F***

67563158.jpg
Porus was follower of Hercules according to Greek sources. Krishna which Greeks mistook as Hercules.

So either way he was follower of Indian religion.
 
.
Ok, let me get this. You have a problem with some Pakistanis who appear to take pride in Ghauri, Ghazni, Salahuddin Ayubi (probably) and even MBQ since they are not related in the genetic sense to them and Pakistanis arent the descendants of them but you oppenly take pride in Porus, a supposed 'Hindu', whatever that term means, who probably was a Buddhist given historic context, despite yourself being an Indian with zero genetic relation to Porus and not being descended from him.

WHAT.THE.F***

67563158.jpg
Perhaps he wanted to imply that he is proud about the fact that the ruler from Pakistan Porus lost the war against the Greeks while the ruler from India Chandragupta Maurya was able to defeat the Greeks.:partay:
 
.
Porus was follower of Hercules according to Greek sources. Krishna which Greeks mistook as Hercules.

So either way he was follower of Indian religion.

A version of the Greek deity Herakles was found in Northern Gangetic India by an ambassador of the Selucids to the Mauryans, though connection to Krishna or any other deity is vague and not solid.

About Porus however, the most you can get is a vague description of Porus' army having a Herakles-like figure on their shields at the Hydaspes (Jhelum). To jump to a conclusion that it is Krishna, is absurd. Indians use this logic to say that a figure of a human in Mohenjodaro is Shiva, which is totally absurd as well.

Secondly, even if we discard all that, and you say that Porus was a 'Hindu' (not a legit term anyway), so Indians can take pride in him, this logic can be used to say that since Ghauri, Ghazni, Aurangzeb etc. were Muslim and so Pakistanis can take pride in them.

Perhaps he wanted to imply that he is proud about the fact that the ruler from Pakistan Porus lost the war against the Greeks while the ruler from India Chandragupta Maurya was able to defeat the Greeks.:partay:

That may very well be his intention.
 
.
A version of the Greek deity Herakles was found in Northern Gangetic India by an ambassador of the Selucids to the Mauryans, though connection to Krishna or any other deity is vague and not solid.

About Porus however, the most you can get is a vague description of Porus' army having a Herakles-like figure on their shields at the Hydaspes (Jhelum). To jump to a conclusion that it is Krishna, is absurd. Indians use this logic to say that a figure of a human in Mohenjodaro is Shiva, which is totally absurd as well.
Firstly, i don't take pride in any thing from present day Pakistan maybe be some for they admire the local resistance of rulers.

Secondly, it's not me making the conclusion but historians. The greek account clearly mentioned Indians worship :-

1.Dionysus (Shiva)

2. Hercules (Krishna)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megasthenes'_Herakles

According to Arrian, Diodorus, and Strabo, Megasthenes described an Indian tribe called Sourasenoi, who especially worshipped Herakles in their land, and this land had two cities, Methora and Kleisobora, and a navigable river, the Jobares. As was common in the ancient period, the Greeks sometimes described foreign gods in terms of their own divinities, and there is a little doubt that the Sourasenoi refers to theShurasenas, a branch of the Yadu dynasty to which Krishna belonged; Herakles to Krishna, or Hari-Krishna: Mehtora to Mathura, where Krishna was born; Kleisobora to Krishnapura, meaning “the city of Krishna”; and the Jobares to the Yamuna, the famous river in the Krishna story. Quintus Curtius also mentions that when Alexander the Great confronted Porus, Porus’s soldiers were carrying an image of Herakles in their vanguard. ”


— Krishna: a sourcebook, Edwin Francis Bryant, Oxford University Press US, 20
 
.
According to your logic Pakistan is worse than sub-saharan Africa as Pakistan has a lower GDP per capita, a lower literacy rate and a lower HDI than India.
Pakistan's economy is 37% undocumented; so we could never know the absolute amount of GDP per capita in Pakistan.

What I meant was poverty; India's poverty is worse than the level of Sub-Saharan Africa.
 
. .
Most muslims of India including where Pakistan was put in 1947 were converted to islam by succession of invaders. But we can safely conclude that most such converted people are long gone - current day muslims were born into islamic homes, so there is no sense in attributing any Hindu stuff to them.
why make them ashamed of their own ancestry? they did not have any role in the conversion. It was the barbaric invaders who put the sword to their neck and thus brought infamy to islam. It is those invaders that should ashamed, not the muslims of Indian subcontinent who were mere victims
Yes totally; that's why almost every village has a shrine(s) dedicated to the person who converted that village to Islam (mostly Sufis).

Muslim invaders mostly were attracted by riches; they had no reason to convert the locals. Under the Umayyads; conversation to Islam was actually beginning to be discouraged (due to taxes). Many invaders destroyed and looted temples and mosques alike. They didn't come to convert people; they came for the same reason previous invaders arrived.
 
.
A version of the Greek deity Herakles was found in Northern Gangetic India by an ambassador of the Selucids to the Mauryans, though connection to Krishna or any other deity is vague and not solid.

About Porus however, the most you can get is a vague description of Porus' army having a Herakles-like figure on their shields at the Hydaspes (Jhelum). To jump to a conclusion that it is Krishna, is absurd. Indians use this logic to say that a figure of a human in Mohenjodaro is Shiva, which is totally absurd as well.

Secondly, even if we discard all that, and you say that Porus was a 'Hindu' (not a legit term anyway), so Indians can take pride in him, this logic can be used to say that since Ghauri, Ghazni, Aurangzeb etc. were Muslim and so Pakistanis can take pride in them.



That may very well be his intention.
Man you profile pic definately defines how big your brain is.

Anyways since i do have have to give you logic, here it is. Pakistan is formed less than 70 years but not pakistani. They did not come from heaven leaving the 72 virgins or even there ancestors. Who were they? They were part of Bharat(not saying India... Warna burnol deni padegi). I do not want to get into how islam came into existance in bharat as it will make more bad mouthing for it as far as logic goes. I respect islam as a religion.

Pakistan is claiming the arab inheritence, turks pride, iran/persian legacy and afganistans past to justify its existence. Hence that superiority is more in the face of pakistani by the rest of the islamic world. The names that claimed above were the attackers to bharat. They terrorize and looted the golden bird of the world. You are celebrating and justfying your evil. This is truly foolish.
 
.
Firstly, i don't take pride in any thing from present day Pakistan maybe be some for they admire the local resistance of rulers.

Secondly, it's not me making the conclusion but historians. The greek account clearly mentioned Indians worship :-

1.Dionysus (Shiva)

2. Hercules (Krishna)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megasthenes'_Herakles

According to Arrian, Diodorus, and Strabo, Megasthenes described an Indian tribe called Sourasenoi, who especially worshipped Herakles in their land, and this land had two cities, Methora and Kleisobora, and a navigable river, the Jobares. As was common in the ancient period, the Greeks sometimes described foreign gods in terms of their own divinities, and there is a little doubt that the Sourasenoi refers to theShurasenas, a branch of the Yadu dynasty to which Krishna belonged; Herakles to Krishna, or Hari-Krishna: Mehtora to Mathura, where Krishna was born; Kleisobora to Krishnapura, meaning “the city of Krishna”; and the Jobares to the Yamuna, the famous river in the Krishna story. Quintus Curtius also mentions that when Alexander the Great confronted Porus, Porus’s soldiers were carrying an image of Herakles in their vanguard. ”


— Krishna: a sourcebook, Edwin Francis Bryant, Oxford University Press US, 20

Thanks for that article, which I had already read. There are two different mentions of Herakles-like or basically Herakles figures by the Greeks. The one which you make mention of is Megasthenes' Herakles and is from a Seleucid ambassador's contact with the Mauryans.

The second is of first century Roman historian Quintus Curtius mentioning that soldiers of Porus' army had an image of Herakles or a Herakles-like figure perhaps, on their shields. This is the most you get regarding Porus and Herakles. Remember, these are two different referrences.

Now to consider this as being synonymous with Krishna or even for Dionysus to be with Shiva is rather far fetched. Most scholars won't agree on this as the reference, especially to Porus and not to the Mauryans, is rather vague.

The Greeks found a figure like this painted on the shields or banners of the army of Porus:
400px-Hercules_Farnese_3637104088_9c95d7fe3c_b.jpg


And you immediately take it to be Krishna.

Google Megasthenes' Herakles and you will find hundreds of Hindootva sites claiming that the Greek god Herakles is basically Krishna and all Greek mythology is copied/plagiarised from Hindu mythology.

As I have said earlier, this exact same logic is used by Hindootvas to say that people of Mohenjodaro worshipped Shiva or his lingam, due to a seal of a human male figure having been found there. Historians consider this claim as dubious and totally false too. Same is the case with this one.

Man you profile pic definately defines how big your brain is.

Thanks for making that totally irrelevant and retarded opening remark lol.

Anyways since i do have have to give you logic, here it is. Pakistan is formed less than 70 years but not pakistani.
Wow. That makes perfect sense.:hitwall:

They did not come from heaven leaving the 72 virgins
I respect islam as a religion

Sure you do.

They were part of Bharat(not saying India... Warna burnol deni padegi).
Yes, ofcourse the British used to call the regions that they ruled as 'Sri Mata Jee Bharat Varsha', sing Vande Mataram and shout Bharat Mata Ki Jai at the top of their lungs every day before lunch.
:yahoo:
The names that claimed above were the attackers to bharat. They terrorize and looted the golden bird of the world. You are celebrating and justfying your evil. This is truly foolish.

If you had actually bothered reading my comment properly, I was saying that his dubious logic on taking pride in Porus could be used to justify Pakistanis taking pride in Ghazni, Ghori and others. I said nothing of the sort that you are accusing me of. You seem to lack basic comprehension skills as well. Take your rants against Islam somewhere else, we have enough Indian trolls on this website.
 
Last edited:
.
Kashmiris dont want to live with you imbeciles. There is actually nothing common between an average indian who poops on the street and a Kashmiri. and dont ever call me what your mom is.
Your post is full of crap.. I'm not even going to respond to that.. your fellow PDF mods have given free hands to low lifes like you, to comment whatever nonsense you can.. But we Indians in the PDF can't do that right?? So enjoy your filthy life.. :pakistan:
 
.
Indian's don't even care about what religion or race you belong, as long as you keep your tools inside your territory.. First of all, as an Indian and a Hindu settled abroad, we have a notion in my motherland, that Islam was a religion of invaders which is true and hence we don't treat it a peaceful religion, we treat Islam with a caution, because of this so called historical hype that it was the religion of Invaders who invaded our mother land..
But Islam reached Indian sub continent long before Ghauris and Ghaznis in the form Arabic traders through sea.. I've seen a very old Masjid in Cochin, which is the port city.. But whether those traders impacted in spreading of any religion in India, the answer is no.. Because, they were just traders with business interests and religious thoughts were not so easily handled in those days.. So, the only way these many muslims, were created in Indian sub continent is by the force of sword and whip, which were handled by the invaders like Mughals, Turks etc..
According to us, the creation of Pakistan itself is a huge blunder, and due to Pussies like Nehru and Gandhi we were made to face it.. If at all a nation was created on the basis of Religion only, then all the muslims of Indian sub continent should've gone to Pakistan or east Pakistan, which didn't happen because it was a terrible idea..

So now we basically have this moment of irritation, when a muslim calls himself proud of his ancestory with Bin Qasim, because he neither have the blood lines of Qasim nor his followers.. They were simply Hindus who were converted by force and instead of dying while resisting the force they succumbed to it and made themselves muslims.. When someone robs you of your home and make himself the owner of that home, and just to stay in that home, you agreed to live by his terms and conditions and after sometime call yourself proud of it, makes us all laugh at those who says so, with puny..
@Abingdonboy @Sri @Rajaraja Chola @Trichy @TejasMk3


It is you who should fit the description of the bolded part above.. Not yet started full scale but Yes, we are trying to do in balochistan, what you are doing in Kashmir for decades.. Atleast stop whining like a female dog and face it with guts, Puny low life..

Your post is full of non sense. If you have problem with past invaders then you should not have good relationship with countries like Afghanistan, Iran, middle east and central asia where these invaders came from. Your all enmity is just for Pakistani who are actually native of this region but adopted religion Islam. Secondly Islamic ideological bond between two Muslims is based on aqeedah/same religion irrespective of whether they are genetically or culturally different to each others thats why many Muslims belong to different cultures/races/colour/languages share many similarities with each others because of having same religious beliefs and they can often marry to each others so dont be a narrow mind bigot and accept this fact that religion is also your identity like others identities i.e race/culture/tribe/lanaguge etc
 
.
Your post is full of non sense. If you have problem with past invaders then you should not have good relationship with countries like Afghanistan, Iran, middle east and central asia where these invaders came from. Your all enmity is just for Pakistani who are actually native of this region but adopted religion Islam. Secondly Islamic ideological bond between two Muslims is based on aqeedah/same religion irrespective of whether they are genetically or culturally different to each others thats why many Muslims belong to different cultures/races/colour/languages share many similarities with each others because of having same religious beliefs and they can often marry to each others so dont be a narrow mind bigot and accept this fact that religion is also your identity like others identities i.e race/culture/tribe/lanaguge etc
No dude, you are not getting the core point.. You can respect an enemy, in a war if he is powerful, win or lose doesn't matter as long as you fought bravely and fought upto your level best in a war..
So my hatred is not for those invaders.. They just did what is good for them and their tribe, that is somewhat justifiable.. But my hatred is towards Bitches of my own religion that betrays the religion which gave them identity and life.. They simply got converted when someone raped their wife or threatened hem with a sword in their neck.. It is disgusting, how could one possibly adapt the same faith an animal that massacred his family is following.. one should stop the animal or die trying.. But when you convert yourself it makes others look like the act of violence upon his family is justified by the head of the family himself by converting to the faith of invaders.. that cowardly act is what is irritating us all.. We are all Hindus and our forefathers also belonged to the same land, and we stood our ground by not giving up on our faith when there was oppression forced upon us by the invaders.. Don't you feel it is a good trait, and betraying a person's faith is Bitchy..?? And my problem now, with those who call out openly that Invaders like Bin Qasim or Malik kafur is their ancestor makes it all the more saucy...
 
.
Back
Top Bottom