Is Pakistan The Real India ?

[Cobra Arbok]

We are from 2 enemy nations, founded on two rival ideologies and historical worldviews, whose leaders cannot even sit to talk about our outstanding issues. Do you honestly expect to change our minds by repeating the same arguments again and again?

These IVC arguments are a direct result of the Two Nation Theory coined by our founder Quaid e Azam, which has found fertile soul in Pakistan. For the last 70 years, we have believed in this and furthered it as a national ideology.

We have never felt part of Hindustan. Our people have a very different history from yours. Just accept it and move on.

When have I denied you have a different history? Your people willingly submitted to the Central Asian invaders and adopted there religion and culture, and in exchange they made some of your men generals. Our people resisted and eventually defeated the occupiers, and in the process kept alive our ancient religion and culture, making us the only ancient civilization to do so. It seems the differences between modern day India and Pakistan are night and day, although we do share a lot of similarities. I was simply trying to correct a major historical inaccuracy believed by you and many of your countrymen.

 

[TMA]

Don't want to make this a religious discussion, but all religions evolve over time. Saying later Hindu texts is a corruption of the Vedas is like saying the New Testament is a corruption of the Old Testament. And I fail to see how Islam is closer to the Vedas than Sanatam Dharma, considering the Vedas are in no way similar to the rigid theology of the Quoran. In a nutshell, Muslims believe there is only one path to God, whereas the Vedas teach all paths lead to God.

And if you want to claim Panini that is fine, but remember that we can claim Aurangzeb, Hyder Ali, and Tiou Sultan. Anyway, the greatest works of Sanskrit literature were written in Northern India.

Well news for ya,, yes there has been corruption in many religious books including the Torah and Gospel. The only exception to this is the Last Testament. And I want you not to take my word...but do your own research on this matter.

Vedas teach pure monotheism.
Post Vedic Sanatum Dharm does not have pure monotheism.
Islam teaches pure monotheism.

Hopefully you see the similarities.

But even if you disagree (and you are entitled), accepting the religion of Abraham (PBUH) does not negate Pakistan's right to her pre Islamic history...if a Russian accepts Islam, he does not lose his Russian heritage all of a sudden...

Yes claim them. I respect Tipu Sultan a lot for his resistance to the British.... but the Vedantists amongst you will not want to claim them...and your country is run by these extremists...

When have I denied you have a different history? Your people willingly submitted to the Central Asian invaders and adopted there religion and culture, and in exchange they made some of your men generals. Our people resisted and eventually defeated the occupiers, and in the process kept alive our ancient religion and culture, making us the only ancient civilization to do so. It seems the differences between modern day India and Pakistan are night and day, although we do share a lot of similarities. I was simply trying to correct a major historical inaccuracy believed by you and many of your countrymen.

Part of Pakistan is in Central Asia.
Pakistan is at the cross roads of great civilisations, it is but natural to have taken from others...

Your national language was invented under the auspices of a Muslim Central Asian Turkic Dynasty and was written in the Nastaliq Script until the 19th Century.... and then ye tried to remove the Persian, Arabic and Turkic words and replace them with archaic Sanskrit words and yet still called your national tongue a foreign name....perhaps you should have called your national language Bharatiya or something more native??

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Well news for ya,, yes there has been corruption in many religious books including the Torah and Gospel. The only exception to this is the Last Testament. And I want you not to take my word...but do your own research on this matter.

Vedas teach pure monotheism.
Post Vedic Sanatum Dharm does not have pure monotheism.
Islam teaches pure monotheism.

Hopefully you see the similarities.

But even if you disagree (and you are entitled), accepting the religion of Abraham (PBUH) does not negate Pakistan's right to her pre Islamic history...if a Russian accepts Islam, he does not lose his Russian heritage all of a sudden...

Yes claim them. I respect Tipu Sultan a lot for his resistance to the British.... but the Vedantists amongst you will not want to claim them...and your country is run by these extremists...

The Vedas did not teach true monotheism. There are several gods mentioned in the Vedas similar to the Grek gods. Such as Agni, God of fire, and Varun, the God of Wind. And no, Sanatam Dharma is not purely polytheistic. Perhaps you should take your advice and do some research of your own. But there is no way Islam is compatible with the Vedas. The two religions are like oil and water. The fact is many of your people were converted by force. Others likely converted to avoid paying the jizya or to get high ranking positions within the Mughal Empire. And there is definitely a correspondence between the extent to which a region was ruled by Muslims and the percentage of muslim population. That's why Pakistan and North India have high Muslim populations, whereas South India and states like Odisha and Chhattisgarh do not.

Well news for ya,, yes there has been corruption in many religious books including the Torah and Gospel. The only exception to this is the Last Testament. And I want you not to take my word...but do your own research on this matter.

Vedas teach pure monotheism.
Post Vedic Sanatum Dharm does not have pure monotheism.
Islam teaches pure monotheism.

Hopefully you see the similarities.

But even if you disagree (and you are entitled), accepting the religion of Abraham (PBUH) does not negate Pakistan's right to her pre Islamic history...if a Russian accepts Islam, he does not lose his Russian heritage all of a sudden...

Yes claim them. I respect Tipu Sultan a lot for his resistance to the British.... but the Vedantists amongst you will not want to claim them...and your country is run by these extremists...


Part of Pakistan is in Central Asia.
Pakistan is at the cross roads of great civilisations, it is but natural to have taken from others...

Your national language was invented under the auspices of a Muslim Central Asian Turkic Dynasty and was written in the Nastaliq Script until the 19th Century.... and then ye tried to remove the Persian, Arabic and Turkic words and replace them with archaic Sanskrit words and yet still called your national tongue a foreign name....perhaps you should have called your national language Bharatiya or something more native??

You do realize Urdu was developed in India right? It likely originated in Lucknow and Hyderabad. And yes it is a beautiful language and part of our great history and civilization. There is nothing wrong with borrowing from different cultures and combining it with your own, just as long as you do not lose your culture completely.

The Vedas did not teach true monotheism. There are several gods mentioned in the Vedas similar to the Grek gods. Such as Agni, God of fire, and Varun, the God of Wind. And no, Sanatam Dharma is not purely polytheistic. Perhaps you should take your advice and do some research of your own. But there is no way Islam is compatible with the Vedas. The two religions are like oil and water. The fact is many of your people were converted by force. Others likely converted to avoid paying the jizya or to get high ranking positions within the Mughal Empire. And there is definitely a correspondence between the extent to which a region was ruled by Muslims and the percentage of muslim population. That's why Pakistan and North India have high Muslim populations, whereas South India and states like Odisha and Chhattisgarh do not.


You do realize Urdu was developed in India right? It likely originated in Lucknow and Hyderabad. And yes it is a beautiful language and part of our great history and civilization. There is nothing wrong with borrowing from different cultures and combining it with your own, just as long as you do not lose your culture completely.

BTW in case you are interested, modern day Hindi is derived from a dialect of Sanskrit spoken in North India. When the Mughals invaded, Persian and Turkish words got added to the language. Nothing abnormal there, that's just how languages evolve. Modern day Hindi and Urdu were standardized at the same time under the British. and the Devnagri script far predates the Nastaliq script in South ASia. Devnagri is descended from the Brahmi script, that is now the ancestor of most South and SOutheast Asian scripts, which one of the many great things ancient India created. If you want to see how Hindi would sound without the foreign influence, lok at languages still spoken in Bihar and East UP such as Bhojpuri.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urdu
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmi_script
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhojpuri_language
Btw. linguistics is one of my passions along with history and geography, so I am happy to discuss this topic.

 

[my2cents]

Shared only with the North West Part of Bharat. Most of Bharat is not part of IVC.

I live in south India but we share both North and south genes i.e.
both ANI and ASI. Recently they found few individuals in Swat valley who had both ANI,ASI and AASI or ancient ancestral south Indian genes. Research is still on going for IVC people whose DNA is not known. Researchers are taking the DNA of peripheral IVC areas based on assumption that they are related to IVC people. Hence they choose Swat valley.

 

[Srinivas]

No gene pool is pure. Even Bharat's. This does not negate that most Pakistanis are native to the Land of the Indus just like most Bharatis are native to the Land of the Ganges.

Just because our (true) Indian ancestors accepted the Religion of Abraham (PBUH) and in a way became more closer to the true Monotheism of the Vedas rather than following the corrupted ideology that came in the later books of Sanatum Dharm, does not mean we lose our heritage.

If a Japanese fella accepts Islam, he does not suddenly lose his Japanese heritage...

Also the first grammarian of the Sanskrit tongue was a coterminous Pakistani....!

you have no idea about Vedas, there is not correlation between Abrahamic faiths and Dharmic faiths.

 

[Sharpshooter12]

Asalamu Alaikum

That's because Muslims from Pakistan and Hindustan pretty much are descended from the Islamic conquerors:

Walaikum Asalam
I am not saying brother that what they are saying is wrong, it is possible that majority of Pakistanis descended from Turks, Arabs or Iranians. But the present day Egyptians are hardly the people who built pyramids of Giza, well majority of them are not, yet they are damn proud of the Egyptian past. Same is with all the nations of the world, yet in our case our people are still looking outward for a sense of belonging. There is a reason for that, that past of ours is Hindu, and we are at odds with Hindu India hence it is hard for us to reconcile with it.

I give you an example, Porus should be a national hero of Pakistan and instead of Abdali and Ghaznavi we should have named a missile after him. One as King of present day Jehlum, he was son of the soil and two he was a true freedom fighter not bowing to the might of the invader Alexander. Yet the way we or at-least my generation was brought up, we always make fun of Porus (Porus kay Hathi) and admire Alexander, one Alexander's arabnized name Sikander sounds muslim to us and two Porus was a Hindu. We have no regard for the fact that Alexander was a polytheist as well and the incident happened a millennia before Islam arrived at our shores.

No other nation does this, take French for example. They are not all of Gallic origin, they are a mix of celts, burgundians, romans, normans, germans(the franks) and yes gauls, but Vercingetorix is their national hero because he fought to liberate the French soil.

Muslim Empires ruled large parts of India for about the same time Mauryans, Guptas, Gujjars, and Maratthas ruled large parts of Pakistan. I guess "large" and "significant" are subjective terms

Maratthas only ruled Pakistan between mid 1758 and late 1759, before they were ousted by Afghans. And this was the first time Hindu rule came back to Pakistan after nearly 700 years of continuous muslim rule starting from when Ghaznavi defeated Jai Pal. Now do you consider 1.5 years to be significant?

Then from 1799 to 1849 (50 years) we were ruled by Sikhs. So before the arrival of British, out of 850 years that Muslims arrived in present day Pakistani Punjab, KPK and upper Sindh they were ruled for 50 years by the local non-muslims(Hindu and Sikh combined). So you think majority of India was ruled by muslim dynasties for 50 years or less? This is equal to the reign of one muslim emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir(1649-1707) and here is the map of his empire.

 

[Mace]

Walaikum Asalam
I am not saying brother that what they are saying is wrong, it is possible that majority of Pakistanis descended from Turks, Arabs or Iranians. But the present day Egyptians are hardly the people who built pyramids of Giza, well majority of them are not, yet they are damn proud of the Egyptian past. Same is with all the nations of the world, yet in our case our people are still looking outward for a sense of belonging. There is a reason for that, that past of ours is Hindu, and we are at odds with Hindu India hence it is hard for us to reconcile with it.

View attachment 492050

You nailed it.. Hats off

 

[Hamza913]

Walaikum Asalam
I am not saying brother that what they are saying is wrong, it is possible that majority of Pakistanis descended from Turks, Arabs or Iranians. But the present day Egyptians are hardly the people who built pyramids of Giza, well majority of them are not, yet they are damn proud of the Egyptian past. Same is with all the nations of the world, yet in our case our people are still looking outward for a sense of belonging. There is a reason for that, that past of ours is Hindu, and we are at odds with Hindu India hence it is hard for us to reconcile with it.

I give you an example, Porus should be a national hero of Pakistan and instead of Abdali and Ghaznavi we should have named a missile after him. One as King of present day Jehlum, he was son of the soil and two he was a true freedom fighter not bowing to the might of the invader Alexander. Yet the way we or at-least my generation was brought up, we always make fun of Porus (Porus kay Hathi) and admire Alexander, one Alexander's arabnized name Sikander sounds muslim to us and two Porus was a Hindu. We have no regard for the fact that Alexander was a polytheist as well and the incident happened a millennia before Islam arrived at our shores.

No other nation does this, take French for example. They are not all of Gallic origin, they are a mix of celts, burgundians, romans, normans, germans(the franks) and yes gauls, but Vercingetorix is their national hero because he fought to liberate the French soil.

View attachment 492046

I agree with most of what you say, but with two issues:

We don't name weapons after people like Porus because Hindustanis also like him. Why would name weapons after someone they like? Obviously, the whole point is to name after people we love and they hate, hence why we name them after Ghazi's like Ghaznavi or Durrani (by the way, Durrani was born in Multan and was a Pashtun). Also, you have to remember, Pakistan was made primarily because of the two nation theory, i.e Hindus and Muslims are two distinct communities from each other that would find it difficult to coexist peacefully without any conflict (and the theory was clearly correct), so obviously our Islamic history is going to get prioritised by the authorities, as well as in the eyes of most of the general population (we're also pretty conservative Muslims which doesn't help your case either).

The other problem I have with what you say is that many Pakistanis also do find people like Porus or places like Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro as interesting parts of our pre-Islamic heritage, we just prioritise our Islamic history first and foremost because that was the main foundation upon which our nation was built. My father is from Jhelum, and he absolutely loves Porus. The main problem is that when it comes to pre-Islamic history, unless it concerns our particular tribe/city, most Pakistanis really couldn't care less. For example, my father loves Porus, but couldn't care less about Mohenjo-Daro or Panini.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Walaikum Asalam
I am not saying brother that what they are saying is wrong, it is possible that majority of Pakistanis descended from Turks, Arabs or Iranians. But the present day Egyptians are hardly the people who built pyramids of Giza, well majority of them are not, yet they are damn proud of the Egyptian past. Same is with all the nations of the world, yet in our case our people are still looking outward for a sense of belonging. There is a reason for that, that past of ours is Hindu, and we are at odds with Hindu India hence it is hard for us to reconcile with it.

I give you an example, Porus should be a national hero of Pakistan and instead of Abdali and Ghaznavi we should have named a missile after him. One as King of present day Jehlum, he was son of the soil and two he was a true freedom fighter not bowing to the might of the invader Alexander. Yet the way we or at-least my generation was brought up, we always make fun of Porus (Porus kay Hathi) and admire Alexander, one Alexander's arabnized name Sikander sounds muslim to us and two Porus was a Hindu. We have no regard for the fact that Alexander was a polytheist as well and the incident happened a millennia before Islam arrived at our shores.

No other nation does this, take French for example. They are not all of Gallic origin, they are a mix of celts, burgundians, romans, normans, germans(the franks) and yes gauls, but Vercingetorix is their national hero because he fought to liberate the French soil.

View attachment 492046


Maratthas only ruled Pakistan between mid 1758 and late 1759, before they were ousted by Afghans. And this was the first time Hindu rule came back to Pakistan after nearly 700 years of continuous muslim rule starting from when Ghaznavi defeated Jai Pal. Now do you consider 1.5 years to be significant?

Then from 1799 to 1849 (50 years) we were ruled by Sikhs. So before the arrival of British, out of 850 years that Muslims arrived in present day Pakistani Punjab, KPK and upper Sindh they were ruled for 50 years by the local non-muslims(Hindu and Sikh combined). So you think majority of India was ruled by muslim dynasties for 50 years or less? This is equal to the reign of one muslim emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir(1649-1707) and here is the map of his empire.
View attachment 492050

I have already countered that in my thread myth of 1000 Muslim rule. Yes I know Maratha rule in Paksitan was short lived, I was just including it with the Mauryans and Guptas. Combined, those three Empires ruled modern day Pakistan for at least three centuries. WHereas Auramzeb;s Empire and the Taghlaqs lasted barely a century combined, and even they were not able to conquer the entirety of India. As for whether or not Maratha invasion of Pakistan is significant, I think it is pretty significant because it showed an indigenous Indian Empire making it as far as Peshawar, whereas never has an indigenous Pakistani Empire conquered South India. And of course, you have to appreciate their bravery going that far into foreign soil to liberate the subcontinent.

Happy Independence Day BTW

 

[LASER1]

Vedas teach pure monotheism.
Post Vedic Sanatum Dharm does not have pure monotheism.

Is that so?
People like indus priest king distort history and books and his followers believe his stupidity, then they puke it here.
@Cobra Arbok This is exactly why I reply to people like him.

 

[911]

Genetic markers in the Hindu and Muslim Gujjars of Northwestern India.

"The study showed that the Muslim Gujjars differ significantly from their counterpart, the Hindu Gujjars"

Microsatellite diversity delineates genetic relationships of Shia and Sunni Muslim populations of Uttar Pradesh, India.

"we observed a certain degree of genetic contribution from Iran to both Muslim populations"

Traces of sub-Saharan and Middle Eastern lineages in Indian Muslim populations

“The correlation between the admixture contributions from Arabia and Iran is positive, with significant correlation coefficient values”

You keep posting this I bet even Pakistanis must cringe on the post of yours. Serious question. Why not utilize your Turkish, Iranian, Central Asian population to win medals for your country Pakistan (real India, aka Mighty land of Indus @Indus Pakistan )? Assuming these ethnic groups usually do good in contact sports. You would do good at South Asian games at least.

 

[Hamza913]

You keep posting this I bet even Pakistanis must cringe on the post of yours.

Nope, they have given me numerous likes and positive ratings for these kinds of posts. Meanwhile all you get is negative ratings, so it's clear who's making this forum cringe.

Anyway, if you have no way to object to the facts presented, then I suggest you just keep your mouth shut before further embarrassing yourself Abdul Baqara.