Children of the Indus

[Tergon18]

How do you find the relevant info in the spur of moment?

Are you talking about the Adi Shankara part? Its all over the internet. Just Google him.

 

[Bharat Muslim]

Are you talking about the Adi Shankara part? Its all over the internet. Just Google him.

Even to Google you have to know a bit about it BEFOREHAND.

 

[Tergon18]

Even to Google you have to know a bit about it BEFOREHAND.

I read Aitzaz Ahsan's book

 

[Bharat Muslim]

I read Aitzaz Ahsan's book

I read somewhere about the public-bath of Mohenjo-daro. That's nice. It means free, safe, unrestricted show of Indus women for voyeurs. Or is there a catch? Did something obstruct the view?

 

[Tergon18]

I read somewhere about the public-bath of Mohenjo-daro. That's nice. It means free, safe, unrestricted show of Indus women for voyeurs. Or is there a catch? Did something obstruct the view?

Lol wtf

 

[Bharat Muslim]

Kuchh naya bolo guys!

@Tergon18 @Kaptaan

@Max

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Kuchh naya bolo guys!

@Tergon18 @Kaptaan

@Max

What?

 

[Mentee]

What?

Tell him something new

 

[mubs]

I think Pakistan and India are quite different, the problem is that the north western parts of India are too similar to Pakistan.

It is true that the Rigvedic Civilization was centred in the Indus River system, however, the poets also mention rivers in India and Afghanistan (Narmada and Khuba for instance). Similarly, the IVC was mostly contained in Pak but did reach out into parts of India esp Gujarat (into Afghanistan too I believe).

When I visited Rajasthan I toured a fort which I was told was built by a Jaisal Bhatti. I found it strange hearing the name Bhatti of an "Indian" Hindu Warrior, in the UK I had associated the name with Pakistanis. I later learnt this was a Sanksrit based name used often by Kashmiri Pandits. I found it sad thinking the Pakistani Bhatti guy in the UK would never know about the great warrior Jaisal Bhatti.

I believe the Vedic Civilzation started out centred around the Indus Valley and spread out both East and West. This culture then became more settled and became the IVC. I consider all Pashtuns, Pakistanis and North Indians to be of the same group (notice for instance the look of Long Hair + Beard which we also find in Taliban, Sikhs and Hindu Priests, I guess this look must go back a long way). Once you get beyond Delhi and Gujarat it becomes more different, but the important point is it is hard to draw a definitive line anywhere and say these are two different civilizations as there will always be overlap, as this is a continuous geographic region.

The word Hind, refers to Indus Valley, the earliest mention being Hapta Hendu, an Iranian form of Sapta Sindhu. Thus Hindustan should refer to Pakistan. Note that even west of Indus was called White India just prior to Islam, on account of the Pashtuns being considered 'white Indians'. I suppose the term Hindustan may have been used to refer to the Delhi region due to Delhi being an economic powerhouse and thus the Mughal capital. I also recall reading somewhere that an a Mongol King, when he wanted to invade India, spoke to a Afghan King who told him "Hind starts from Multan".

 

[Sliver]

The OP really is trying hard to find a different history than that of the Indian sub continent.
1)by the logic that a "Pakistani" is the child of Indus (the OP states this in 1965), then Bangladesh should never have been Pakistan
2) What is the problem with having a shared heritage with India? you can stil go your separate ways. having a shared history does not mean you need to have a shared future.
3) More than finding your own roots to be Unique, it feels like this person is more bent on denying India the history of the IVC/Harappan civilization.

The Mehrgarh and Andronovo culture have proved that there can be a shared civilization that have later branched out into different peoples

 

[Mentee]

The OP really is trying hard to find a different history than that of the Indian sub continent.
1)by the logic that a "Pakistani" is the child of Indus (the OP states this in 1965), then Bangladesh should never have been Pakistan
2) What is the problem with having a shared heritage with India? you can stil go your separate ways. having a shared history does not mean you need to have a shared future.
3) More than finding your own roots to be Unique, it feels like this person is more bent on denying India the history of the IVC/Harappan civilization.

The Mehrgarh and Andronovo culture have proved that there can be a shared civilization that have later branched out into different peoples

Iam a Punjabi what have I got to do with a u.p dweller or lets say a madrasi, except we both breathe
Edit : Why an American is getting annoyed on what I.V.C folks claim -------

 

[Sliver]

Iam a Punjabi what have I got to do with a u.p dweller or lets say a madrasi, except we both breathe
Edit : Why an American is getting annoyed on what I.V.C folks claim -------

My favourite pastime - Ancient history..
finished the crash course 3 times over, Scot chestworth's ancient history twice. currently on columbia university's Richerd Bulliet's class on ancient history and valley civilizations.

I had to look up where Punjabi was but its right there along the plains of sub continent India. Its an interesting culture up there. I can share a few insights if you are up for it on a different thread - complete with the flow of peoples from the Andronovo Culture to Mehrgarh to Harappa and then into present Pakistan/India

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

The OP really is trying hard to find a different history than that of the Indian sub continent.
1)by the logic that a "Pakistani" is the child of Indus (the OP states this in 1965), then Bangladesh should never have been Pakistan
2) What is the problem with having a shared heritage with India? you can stil go your separate ways. having a shared history does not mean you need to have a shared future.
3) More than finding your own roots to be Unique, it feels like this person is more bent on denying India the history of the IVC/Harappan civilization.

The Mehrgarh and Andronovo culture have proved that there can be a shared civilization that have later branched out into different peoples

Bangladesh was never meant to be part of Pakistan either..

P=Panjab
A=Afghania/KP
K=Kashmir
iS:Sindh
TAN=Balochistan


EP was a freak of history .. With alien culture,language or customs.. And shared nothing with us ..

Unlike that Modern Pak has been united since centuries as part of the same Muslim dynasties and we have lived with eachother for thousands of years.

My favourite pastime - Ancient history..
finished the crash course 3 times over, Scot chestworth's ancient history twice. currently on columbia university's Richerd Bulliet's class on ancient history and valley civilizations.

I had to look up where Punjabi was but its right there along the plains of sub continent India. Its an interesting culture up there. I can share a few insights if you are up for it on a different thread - complete with the flow of peoples from the Andronovo Culture to Mehrgarh to Harappa and then into present Pakistan/India

Panjab itself isn't a heterogenous province .. There is no heterogenous people in Panjab.. It's more like an umbrella term for the people who live in Panjab or have adopted the Panjabi language ...

I can suggest several books .. One of them being the Indus Saga,Sepoy and the Raj etc.

And if you observe Panjab itself (is divided in different regions) and has historically been more closer and part/satrapies of Iran or Afghanistan .. The culture again is different (as are the different civilisations that were born there) than the gangetic plains of India.


Even today if you observer the Indian Panjabis who are pretty homogenous .. You will see the Sikhs in other countries being proud of Panjab rather than India .. Ask a Sikh where he is from and the answer most of the time will be Panjab ..

In Indian Panjab .. The Panjabis consider themselves superior to the other "Hindustanis" the proper term for Indians (bar Panjab)... Which you will also see in British records .. British who defeated the State of Panjab and annexed it to British India..

A people who have always held the "indians" in contempt.. Who have for the most part of recorded history been a seperate entity and had a seperate culture than "india".

 

[Indus Pakistan]

plains of sub continent India.

That is a region the size of Europe. Does Portugal and Latvia have same history? Whilst there maybe some convergence - at the end day everybody is part of the globe but that does not mean what happens in Balochistan is going to have much impact in Bengal. They al have their own currents in the wash of history. It is when one does not have anything that you feel you need to "piggy back" others.

And "India" had Burma, even Aden and modern Dubai part of it. Do we draw some conclusions from that? If your so pent up about East Bengal what about Burma being part of India?

And did you know up till 1840s Indian soldiers recieved extra pay when serving in Sindh and Punjab [what is now Pakistan] because the Indus region was percieved to be "foreign"?

Excerpt

 

[Sliver]

That is a region the size of Europe. Does Portugal and Latvia have same history? Whilst there maybe some convergence - at the end day everybody is part of the globe but that does not mean what happens in Balochistan is going to have much impact in Bengal. They al have their own currents in the wash of history. It is when one does not have anything that you feel you need to "piggy back" others.

And "India" had Burma, even Aden and modern Dubai part of it. Do we draw some conclusions from that? If your so pent up about East Bengal what about Burma being part of India?

And did you know up till 1840s Indian soldiers recieved extra pay when serving in Sindh and Punjab [what is now Pakistan] because the Indus region was percieved to be "foreign"?

Excerpt

I do not know about portugal and Latvia. As of past few years the reading and the courses have been on valley civilizations of the near east and the Indus. so cannot comment on that.
frankly none of what you said has anything to do with the OP in my opinion.
Here is what I have a problem with the OP:

The OP says Pakistan is a child of Indus while differentiating the culture of of the Gangetic plains from Indus. almost to the point that he goes on to say that the culture of India has no relation to the Indus culture of the Harappa. That is not true since the roots of the culture of the Gangetic plain are also part of the roots of the Harappan culture.

There was a point of inflection at which regions closer to the Arab/Persian states moved closer to Islam while the regions closer to the Gangetic plain have continued to resist that change of religion and culture.

Ultimately, culture is what the people believe and follow. The present day Pakistan is different from India not because the roots are different - but because you chose to grow differently. You cannot deny the history to India in the same way as India cannot deny the present and future of Pakistan. in effect, they are children of Indus too.

TL;DR:

What I see is, some Indians yearn that Pakistanis have "left" the fold of the vedic ancestry - that is wrong. India cannot deny Pakistan's right to follow a different path from the same point.
Conversely I see some Pakistanis feel that the IVC history belongs to Pakistan alone and India has no rights to it. This is wrong as well. Pakistan, cannot deny the stark connections to the north and western regions of Indian subcontinent (sorry for the GoT pun in there).