PAKISTAN - CRADLE OF CIVILIZATIONS

[Bang Galore]

The larger point I was hoping to understand better is, what is clear as one goes through this thread, is the sense among Indian friends that Pakistan have no claim to even themselves even, and while it's unfortunate and I think it's fair to say that Pakistanis "get it" (after all there are reasons there is a Pakistan), Indian friends position on the subject appears very insular, a whole lot of certitude in it , is that really a good thing?

That is a bit subjective & primarily dependent how "Pakistanis" define themselves. I have no problem sharing all of Indian culture with you, heck you don't need my permission but how do we deal with some who claim to have always been separate & base both their country & their own identity on Mr. Jinnah's views of Muslims constituting a nation (& thereby claim Tipu Sultan- whose ticketing rights rest with us) yet refuse to share any part of the Harappan culture merely on the basis that ticketing rights for this "non-Muslim" piece of history rests with them. The clear holes in that position can only encourage those who want to drive tanks through them (this being a defence forum & all) and should surprise nobody.

 

[KRAIT]

I'm afraid that there is no proof/evidence of any of this stuff .

Well its just theory and deduction from archaeological with Guess work, We can't trace the exact origins and transformations.

Time often erase important links and it becomes almost impossible to connects the dots. Its same like our understanding of Universe where new discoveries are made in universe and in Physics which completely change the current version of our perception regarding the universe.

Same is the case with Pre historic animals like Dinosaurs. One new fossil can change pre-existing theory.

Lack of Data is the most important blockade for more concise and accurate theory.
And this applies in all fields.

 

[Bang Galore]

Well its just theory and deduction from archaeological with Guess work, We can't trace the exact origins and transformations.

Time often erase important links and it becomes almost impossible to connects the dots. Its same like our understanding of Universe where new discoveries are made in universe and in Physics which completely change the current version of our perception regarding the universe.

Same is the case with Pre historic animals like Dinosaurs. One new fossil can change pre-existing theory.

Lack of Data is the most important blockade for more concise and accurate theory.
And this applies in all fields.

.........Specifically for the idea that central asians came to India bringing vedic Hinduism or some such. I repeat there is no archaelogical/literary evidence at all, all we have a unexplained linguistic connection.

I await that fossil........

 

[KRAIT]

There is and there is not proof - What the heck does that mean? it means our knowledge in this matter is very limited - we should be more circumspect

Well sir, to study past, we need futuristic methods. Carbon dating told us about the age and era of fossils, civilizations. May be one day we may have much better techniques to connect the dots or find new dots.

 

[muse]

@muse
Even with having such a great civilization in our region, we have lost what our ancestors provided us. We are loosing our identity and pretending that we have one.
.

This "we", at last to me, is a very loose connection - because the present idea of "we" is entirely alien to the past - We can associate with the ancient past, we can be in awe of it, we can be thrilled by it - we must be super careful to not be caught up in it, because there is ideology waiting there for any who do - I think we should avoid it, and reading some the posts from Indian friends was, well it should be cautionary - as for the 1000 yrs (see preceding sentences - the allure of ideology is like moth to the flame)

 

[KRAIT]

.........Specifically for the idea that central asians came to India bringing vedic Hinduism or some such. I repeat there is no archaelogical/literary evidence at all, all we have a unexplained linguistic connection.I await that fossil........

Well this is the Holy Grail for which we aspire. Sometimes only way to know the Right Answer is to prove all the other answers as wrong.

 

[Bang Galore]

This "we", at last to me, is a very loose connection - because the present idea of "we" is entirely alien to the past -

Well said.

 

[Bang Galore]

Well this is the Holy Grail for which we aspire. Sometimes only way to know the Right Answer is to prove all the other answers as wrong.

That hasn't worked either. The argument for is based on a unexplained linguistic connection. Literary sources have always questioned that theory as have most archaeologists, and once you add the geneticists to it , the evidence is so against that even those who were originally suggesting your theory(or some such) have all come up with more confusing & convoluted newer theories that bear no resemblance to yours.

I'm afraid you are out on a broken limb with a theory that no one wants to touch.....

 

[KRAIT]

That hasn't worked either. The argument for is based on a unexplained linguistic connection. Literary sources have always questioned that theory as have most archaeologists, and once you add the geneticists to it , the evidence is so against that even those who were originally suggesting your theory(or some such) have all come up with more confusing & convoluted newer theories that bear no resemblance to yours.I'm afraid you are out on a broken limb with a theory that no one wants to touch.....

I just posted that theory. I don't endorse it or reject it. Personally I don't have any knowledge about it. I am just explaining how research works and various aspects like you told, disproves all the possible theories.

I got it from internet and since you have more knowledge, you saved my time from reading a debunked theory.

I am just a curious boy who don't know whether to touch the hot coal or not as I have no previous knowledge what a red simmering coal means.

 

[Bang Galore]

I just posted that theory. I don't endorse it or reject it. Personally I don't have any knowledge about it..

Not to worry. All of us are in the same boat on this one. All we have is theories, all equally without evidence.

 

[thinkingcap81]

I'm afraid that there is no proof/evidence of any of this stuff .

Actually a Greek Indologist & historian, i forgot his name, had in the institute where i study, delivered a talk on the Aryan invasion theory. He was debunking this theory itself and emphatically distanced himself from any propaganda that ensues when one puts forth these ideas.

According to him there are less inconsistencies in assuming that people moved out of the region where 'Aryans' supposedly came and settled, than in assuming that Aryans actually came from elsewhere. He put forth lots of examples comparing languages of those times and so on. He talked of 'Aryans' moving out of the Indo-Pak region (hope i am right here) and traveling in search of newer lands. Of course he said that many points must be refined and redefined but nothing was as inconsistent as the Aryan invasion.

I'm sorry that i can't list these points now since i am not a historian and remember very little of his technical points.

It does not change the fact that this history is shared by both Pakistan and India. Nor should this be used to give any encouragement to wannabe Hindu/Muslim superiority myth-mongers.

Joe Shearer might be displeased about this but there is no harm in revisiting presently held notions.

 

[American Pakistani]

No logic. If Muslims were a separate nation simply because they were Muslims, then anything non-Muslim was not theirs. A good example would be Raja Dahir. He is a villain to many Pakistanis simply because of his not being a Muslim. You can have any opinion on the IVC, I'm not in the least suggesting anything different. I was pointing out the difference between Mr. Jinnah's argument & yours. If you wish to claim Tipu Sultan among others, then the logic you are applying is Mr. Jinnah's theory of Muslims constituting a nation. It automatically then follows (with the argument advanced) that anything non-Muslim including the IVC etc has but a ticketing rights sort of connection to you, nothing more.

Actually we are Muslims & we beleive in Two Nation Theory also but this doesn't mean that we forget the past history of this land of Pakistan & that history too is important for us Pakistanis to slam those who claim Pakistan as their land(or stolen land). IVC only belongs to Pakistan & it is another proof that Pakistan historically was always independent territory in this current form.

 

[American Pakistani]

@American Pakistani Dude, just to satisfy ego, don't twist history. What was the language of IVC. What practices you still follow from IVC ?

Because last time I checked Indian Hindus still follow Sanskrit, Vedas, Customs, Ayurveda, Festivals. etc. for thousands of years living in this sub-continent for so many centuries. Still following Ganges Valley Civilization.

You claiming Pakistan as IVC based nation. Where is the connection with IVC characteristics and Pakistan ?

FYI, there are some part of IVC in India too. Does that mean you have claim over that territory ?

And if Pakistan was IVC nation, then why did you wanted East Pakistan because that region wasn't in IVC.

Even your religion didn't start in this region. It was brought by few travelers whereas we were inventing, upgrading, mass producing and exporting our own religion.

Whether it was Hinduism or Buddhism.

By your logic Egypt doesn't build Pyramids anymore nor they have or beleive in Statue Gods so that Ancient Egyptian civilization is now no more Egypt's history? IVC was Pakistan's history, people of this land leave those practices as time passes & as they accept religion of light...but this doesn't means that their fore fathers became your fore fathers. You should be proud of your fore fathers even if they failed to give anything of your own which you could claim proudly by thumping your chest. But i see atleast most indians inherited one thing, that is to claim others acheivements as their own.

As you ask why Pakistan wanted E-Pakistan i.e Bdsh so let me clear your mind that it was leaders of Bdsh who opt to join with Pakistan. According to original Pakistan plan Pakistan was supposed to be Punjab, KPK, FATA, Kashmir, Sind & Balochistan, Bdsh with Assam was supposed to be another country in the east & Osmanistan a third country in South. I hope you won't bring offtopic cr@ps anymore.

 

[jbond197]

Hmm, not really - I don't anybody in Pakistan is looking to live their past (possibly some Arabs past, but not their own) - What is beginning to happen is that more and more people are taking sides - Taking sides? what are on about? Taking sides in a culture war forced on them by Islamists - By acknowledging and celebrating one of it's past heritages, they want to affirm or make some statement about the depth of their cultural heritages and therefore about themselves even as they deny space to the Islamist premise,

Now as for the bit about nation built on Muslim identity "Stealing" the non-Muslim identity from those they are divorced from - that's not just inflammatory, it's down right stupid - the so called "identity" you affirm now, is certainly not the identity of the heritage in question, "secular" India's connection with it's any heritages is best negotiated, not asserted.

Ok, now you t00k a totally different interpretation of my comments - By stealing I was merely trying to point towards people who try as hard as they can to deny Indians their historical/cultural heritage. I don't have any problem if Pakistanis want to share our common past but for sure they can not single-handily attempt to own the same. Most of the Pakistanis may have confusions about their roots but Indians don't and we loved the way we were, the way we lived, the way we developed. We may have suffered for a part of our existence but that can not give away our glorious past.

 

[INDIC]

Raja Dahir was not the king of whole Pakistan(or in simple whole IVC) & he was Hindu exteremist.

His only fault was he lost the war with Arabs, rest are fake claims, most fake claim is that he married his own sister( when Hindu even consider marrying cousin or same-gotra marriage as taboo.)