Is Pakistan The Real India ?

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

The existence of Pakistan is based on the thinking that Muslims of India were outsiders, shared no history with the people of Indian subcontinent and had different heroes, according to Jinnah. In fact many Pakistanis claim descendants of mainly Arabs, Iranians, Central Asians, etc on this very forum so please do not insult then. And if you don't like the name Pakistan, you may rename it to India. No big deal

Indian logic which claims we are Indian is totally false. You are just trying to bring it to the other extreme. We are not outsiders but the actual descendants of the IVC, and share some history with India and Bangladesh (Dilli Sultanat, Mughal Sultanat.) The fact that we have intermarried with Arabs, Persians, Turks, Greeks, and Mongols doesn’t negate the claims we have to our own ancestors.

The name Pak-e-stan is very important to our national consciousness. Our concept of purity and cleansing the old world and jahilyya customs of it. We use Pak for those things which are sacred for us. Allah Pak, Nabi Pak, Quran e Pak, Sahaba Pak, Arz e Pak.

This is a line from Allama Iqbal’s 1924 Tarana e Milli from Bang e Dara.

Ae Arz-e-Pak! Teri Hurmat Pe Kat Mare Hum
Hai Khoon Teri Ragon Mein Ab Tak Rawan Humara

Oh land of purity! We fell and died for your honour;
Our blood still courses through your veins.

http://iqbalurdu.blogspot.com/2011/04/bang-e-dra-101-tarana-e-milli.html?m=1

 

[Hamza913]

The existence of Pakistan is based on the thinking that Muslims of India were outsiders, shared no history with the people of Indian subcontinent and had different heroes, according to Jinnah.

He never said we shared no history, but yes he did say the other things and he was and still is correct.

Being from the Indus was also a significant factor during partition, hence why we are called Pakistan (which stands for the Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh and the "tan" comes from Baluchistan).

 

[jamahir]

Sorry @Indus Priest King , but these kind of threads are pointless. When other people are talking of landing rovers on the moon privately ( the Google Lunar X Prize ) or making settlements on Mars ( like Elon Musk and the 'Mars One' project are doing ), what is the point of going scratching out controversial history??

 

[911]

from the Indus was also a significant factor during partition

Lol. Being a Muslim was a factor, not being from Indus. You are obsessed with Indus, India and Indus Valley Civilization which you people have nothing much to do with. People of Indus Valley Civilization moved out, very few remained.

 

[Hamza913]

Lol. Being a Muslim was a factor, not being from Indus. You are obsessed with Indus, India and Indus Valley Civilization which you people have nothing much to do with. People of Indus Valley Civilization moved out, very few remained.

Both were a factor, but you are correct in saying that being Muslim took priority.

Do you have any evidence that people from IVC engaged in a mass migration further eastward and survived? Because not a single Hindu nationalist moron on this forum has ever produced even a shred of it.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Sorry @Indus Priest King , but these kind of threads are pointless. When other people are talking of landing rovers on the moon privately ( the Google Lunar X Prize ) or making settlements on Mars ( like Elon Musk and the 'Mars One' project are doing ), what is the point of going scratching out controversial history??

Read the bolded text in the quote below.

Lol. Being a Muslim was a factor, not being from Indus. You are obsessed with Indus, India and Indus Valley Civilization which you people have nothing much to do with. People of Indus Valley Civilization moved out, very few remained.

This is why these threads are important.

 

[LASER1]

It's a bit too late to cry about it.

 

[Mace]

He never said we shared no history, but yes he did say the other things and he was and still is correct.

Being from the Indus was also a significant factor during partition, hence why we are called Pakistan (which stands for the Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh and the "tan" comes from Baluchistan).

You are referring to territories post 1971 only. Are you saying East Bengal was never considered as part of Pakistan in 1947?

More believable explanation says Pakistan = Pure place. Link below
https://nation.com.pk/19-Jan-2013/the-true-meaning-of-pakistan

 

[Hamza913]

You are referring to territories post 1971 only. Are you saying East Bengal was never considered as part of Pakistan in 1947?

More believable explanation says Pakistan = Pure place. Link below
https://nation.com.pk/19-Jan-2013/the-true-meaning-of-pakistan

The Bengal was never considered a part of Pakistan, it only got slapped on at the last minute. Even when it was a part of Pakistan, it was more of a glorified colony than anything else. We simply ruled over it.

Both explanations are correct, Rehmat Ali named it Pakistan because it acted as an acronym, and the "i" was added in to make it an actual word (land of the pure). I suggest you read his original pamphlet titled "Now or Never".

 

[Mace]

The Bengal was never considered a part of Pakistan, it only got slapped on at the last minute. Even when it was a part of Pakistan, it was more of a glorified colony than anything else. We simply ruled over it.

Both explanations are correct, Rehmat Ali named it Pakistan because it acted as an acronym, and the "i" was added in to make it an actual word (land of the pure). I suggest you read his original pamphlet titled "Now or Never".

What you are saying sounds like an urban myth dude.

There is no mention of Kashmir in Jinnah's speech on 4th May 1947 but he mentions Bengal and Assam. Bengal was definitely in the calculus for creation of homeland for muslims in the subcontinent. See excerpt below:

” I should like to point out that there is a great deal of confusion created on purpose. The question of a division of India, as proposed by the Muslim League, is based on the fundamental fact that there are two nations- Hindus and Muslims- and the underlying principle is that we want a national home and a national state in our homelands which are predominately Muslim and compromise the six units of the Punjab, the N.W.F.P., Sind, Baluchistan, Bengal and Assam. This will give the Hindus their national home and a national state of Hindustan, which means three-fourths of British India."

 

[Hamza913]

What you are saying sounds like an urban myth dude.

There is no mention of Kashmir in Jinnah's speech on 4th May 1947 but he mentions Bengal and Assam. Bengal was definitely in the calculus for creation of homeland for muslims in the subcontinent. See excerpt below:

” I should like to point out that there is a great deal of confusion created on purpose. The question of a division of India, as proposed by the Muslim League, is based on the fundamental fact that there are two nations- Hindus and Muslims- and the underlying principle is that we want a national home and a national state in our homelands which are predominately Muslim and compromise the six units of the Punjab, the N.W.F.P., Sind, Baluchistan, Bengal and Assam. This will give the Hindus their national home and a national state of Hindustan, which means three-fourths of British India."

As I said, it was a last minute addition. Rehmat Ali and Allama Iqbal do not mention the Bengal as being part of Pakistan.

You cannot use just one speech to understand the situation, you need to learn about the topic as a whole to gain a proper understanding of why Pakistan was made and what it was originally meant to be.

 

[khanmubashir]

You do realize we were never ruled by a foreign power until the 10th century ce? and even that did not last long.

The last sovereign of bangal bulk of Ganges plains beforw annexation by British was nawab serajudulah
Nawabs of dekan ruled right upto partition
Delhi sultanant and mughals rule whole India including ganges plains for 800 years

India and hindu r names given by others not forged by those who claim to be it
Let them keep it if it pleases em
We choose our own destiny our own name !!!

 

[Rollno21]

What you are saying sounds like an urban myth dude.

There is no mention of Kashmir in Jinnah's speech on 4th May 1947 but he mentions Bengal and Assam. Bengal was definitely in the calculus for creation of homeland for muslims in the subcontinent. See excerpt below:

” I should like to point out that there is a great deal of confusion created on purpose. The question of a division of India, as proposed by the Muslim League, is based on the fundamental fact that there are two nations- Hindus and Muslims- and the underlying principle is that we want a national home and a national state in our homelands which are predominately Muslim and compromise the six units of the Punjab, the N.W.F.P., Sind, Baluchistan, Bengal and Assam. This will give the Hindus their national home and a national state of Hindustan, which means three-fourths of British India."

You are trying to reason with guys who still are looking for answers after 72 years.they still ask Pakistan ka mathlab Kya ?

 

[jamahir]

This is why these threads are important.

I see.

But once you have clarified your historic origins, how does that help decide your future??

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Sir but around 80% of the Pakistanis think they are descendants of Arab, Turks or Iranians and had nothing to do with Indus civilization. Other than Rajputs and Jats, I am yet to meet a Punjabi clan that does not trace its lineage from Bukhara, Syria or some other distant place. Baluchs say they came from Syria I guess, some Pushtuns consider themselves the lost tribe of Israelite and even some of the most proud Sindhi clans like Soomro consider themselves of Arab lineage.

​

Yeah right, what about Tughlaqs
View attachment 491741



Or Khiljis
View attachment 491742

And what about Adil-Shahis, Qutub-Shahis or Nizam-Shahis(of Ahmednagar) in the south, or do you consider them indigenous as they were there before the Nizams of Deccan.

And what about the Bahmanis before them in 14th century i.e even before the mughals. I hate when people distort history to feed their ego.

View attachment 491743

Thanks you saved me a lot of trouble couldn't have done it better

That's true though. I don't remember which particular Pashtun tribe it is (Khattak maybe) - but dna tests showed they carry a Y-dna haplo type that's only found among Jews. Which means there were Jewish men among it's founding population.

Most. Of us carry that gene specially yousaf zai
Yousaf zai the children of hazrat yousaf pbuh