Since Earliest Historical Times Hinduism Was Never Popular in Pakistan

[Nassr]

You are coming again for the proof. Make up your mind on what constitutes a proof. I have told you earlier, you are not going to find a inscription from IVC people saying Shiva was borrowed by Rigvedic people. At one hand, you show the "proof" of Brahui migration based on loan words that are present but you refuse to accept loan gods as proof of IVC contribution. If Rigvedic people can spontaneously come up with non-IE gods, Brahui can come up with IE words themselves. Go through some of the published works, you will get most detailed answers regarding IVC remnants in Rigveda. Even linguistically, there are about 300 "loan words" in rigveda that are non IE. These same words are in use among today's dravidian people. That is a fact. This is what has prompted many people to believe IVC spoke some proto dravidian language. You call dravidian origin of Shiva a fringe theory? Asko Parpola is a "fringe theorist" to you?
Read his paper published in 2010, page 21 "http://w.harappa.com/script/Parpola-2010-Coimbatore.pdf"
Like I said, there are tons of tell tale signs. You consider things that suit you as proof and others as "fringe theory" etc. Also, I did not say Pasupati is Shiva, I added "most probably".

Whereas words may be loaned from various languages, loaning a God is indeed a new for me. Though my naivete may yet get better of me.

 

[Thirdfront]

Could you also please name some of the IVC sites that you claim have been found in Ganges valley and its adjoining plains with references.

The theories about Aryan invasion and monsoon are both discredited and I gave enough reasons. If you do not understand logic, it is not my problem.

I am neither a religious apologist, nor a cultural one and I have posted logical aspects to counter many a times even your frivolous posts and claims. You do not like to understand and express logic through seeking links to what others have written.

When you seek link and is presented with one, you decline to accept it if it goes against your pre-ordained beliefs and you do it without logical response.

All the links mentioned archeological discoveries, including Lothal.

Even for a light hearted comment, you asked for a link of Bharatvarsha defined as world. Most of the time you are off your rocker and acts like a nut.

Here you go - Rivers: Investigating the cultural and geographical transformation of northwest India between 2000 and 300 BC
None of the theories were discredited. They are modified somewhat. Aryans did come from outside, IVC did shift eastwards due to various reasons including failing mansoon and river system.
Logic and you are poles apart. Otherwise you would not have said what you said in the first post "Saivites are monotheists".
I won't accept any source most part of which you will not accept as a proof. We are talking academic so please keep your sources to academic sphere. If you can find some academic sources to back your made up facts, that is.

Whereas words may be loaned from various languages, loaning a God is indeed a new for me. Though my naivete may yet get better of me.

Glaring example is Allah. Many other examples like Jewish god being loaned by christians, many concept of Roman/Pagan religion in christianity (including dec 25th as birth date of jesus, which it is not) and so on... your naivete has got better off of you.. no doubt.

 

[Nassr]

Here you go - Rivers: Investigating the cultural and geographical transformation of northwest India between 2000 and 300 BC
None of the theories were discredited. They are modified somewhat. Aryans did come from outside, IVC did shift eastwards due to various reasons including failing mansoon and river system.
Logic and you are poles apart. Otherwise you would not have said what you said in the first post "Saivites are monotheists".
I won't accept any source most part of which you will not accept as a proof. We are talking academic so please keep your sources to academic sphere. If you can find some academic sources to back your made up facts, that is.


Glaring example is Allah. Many other examples like Jewish god being loaned by christians, many concept of Roman/Pagan religion in christianity (including dec 25th as birth date of jesus, which it is not) and so on... your naivete has got better off of you.. no doubt.

You wanted sources from academic sphere – here it is;

• Saivism - branch of Hinduism that worships Siva as the Supreme God. Followers of Saivism are called Saivas or Saivites. Saivism is a monotheistic faith. It is parallel to Vaishnavism in its monotheistic belief; its supreme God is the only difference.

Hinduism

There are many other sources of information which also identify Shaivism as a monotheistic religion.

Here you go - Rivers: Investigating the cultural and geographical transformation of northwest India between 2000 and 300 BC
None of the theories were discredited. They are modified somewhat. Aryans did come from outside, IVC did shift eastwards due to various reasons including failing mansoon and river system.
Logic and you are poles apart. Otherwise you would not have said what you said in the first post "Saivites are monotheists".
I won't accept any source most part of which you will not accept as a proof. We are talking academic so please keep your sources to academic sphere. If you can find some academic sources to back your made up facts, that is.


Glaring example is Allah. Many other examples like Jewish god being loaned by christians, many concept of Roman/Pagan religion in christianity (including dec 25th as birth date of jesus, which it is not) and so on... your naivete has got better off of you.. no doubt.

The link that you quoted does not give out any name of an IVC site in the gangetic valley or plains. Could you please quote the names and locations of those sites with appropriate links. Thanks.

 

[Thirdfront]

You wanted sources from academic sphere – here it is;

• Saivism - branch of Hinduism that worships Siva as the Supreme God. Followers of Saivism are called Saivas or Saivites. Saivism is a monotheistic faith. It is parallel to Vaishnavism in its monotheistic belief; its supreme God is the only difference.

Hinduism

There are many other sources of information which also identify Shaivism as a monotheistic religion.

Hahahahahah.....who are you trying to fool?? It is a private page of a "HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR" called Samyukta Mullangi hosted by UMICH.... I mean she might be a source of "academic sphere" for you but not really....
Let me school you little bit. Saivism say Shiva is supreme god, but NOT the only one. We still worship gods like Indra, Agni, Vayu, Surya etc etc... If it is monotheism for you, I can't help.....

You wanted sources from academic sphere – here it is;

• Saivism - branch of Hinduism that worships Siva as the Supreme God. Followers of Saivism are called Saivas or Saivites. Saivism is a monotheistic faith. It is parallel to Vaishnavism in its monotheistic belief; its supreme God is the only difference.

Hinduism

There are many other sources of information which also identify Shaivism as a monotheistic religion.



The link that you quoted does not give out any name of an IVC site in the gangetic valley or plains. Could you please quote the names and locations of those sites with appropriate links. Thanks.

Link shows the location, that is sufficient. If you want site name, check and match with google maps. I am not going to spoon feed you...

 

[Nassr]

Here you go - Rivers: Investigating the cultural and geographical transformation of northwest India between 2000 and 300 BC
None of the theories were discredited. They are modified somewhat. Aryans did come from outside, IVC did shift eastwards due to various reasons including failing mansoon and river system.
Logic and you are poles apart. Otherwise you would not have said what you said in the first post "Saivites are monotheists".
I won't accept any source most part of which you will not accept as a proof. We are talking academic so please keep your sources to academic sphere. If you can find some academic sources to back your made up facts, that is.


Glaring example is Allah. Many other examples like Jewish god being loaned by christians, many concept of Roman/Pagan religion in christianity (including dec 25th as birth date of jesus, which it is not) and so on... your naivete has got better off of you.. no doubt.

Though you are indeed an annoying person, yet at the same time you are surprisingly amusing as well. hahahahaha ------ what more can I say.

Hahahahahah.....who are you trying to fool?? It is a private page of a "HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR" called Samyukta Mullangi hosted by UMICH.... I mean she might be a source of "academic sphere" for you but not really....
Let me school you little bit. Saivism say Shiva is supreme god, but NOT the only one. We still worship gods like Indra, Agni, Vayu, Surya etc etc... If it is monotheism for you, I can't help.....

It is you who wanted an academic link. There are many other referenced sites which state that Shaivism is a monotheistic religion. You may not like to agree. Please don't.


[/quote]Link shows the location, that is sufficient. If you want site name, check and match with google maps. I am not going to spoon feed you...[/quote]

No it doesn't give out the names and other relational details which are needed for any kind of referenced discussion and discourse. I understand if you can not find one.

 

[Thirdfront]

Though you are indeed an annoying person, yet at the same time you are surprisingly amusing as well. hahahahaha ------ what more can I say.



It is you who wanted an academic link. There are many other referenced sites which state that Shaivism is a monotheistic religion. You may not like to agree. Please don't.

No it doesn't give out the names and other relational details which are needed for any kind of referenced discussion and discourse. I understand if you can not find one.

Like? I may be amusing and annoying but right. My position was late IVC was further east of Sindhu, I have given the refernce with markers. Further info like names are not required....

 

[INDIC]

Your figures are incorrect. I had posted the United Nations' figures of pre-1947 Hindu and Sikh Population in Pakistan, W. Punjab: 9% Hindu, 11% Sikh; Sindh: 10% Hindu, 5% Sikh; NWFP: 2.5% Hindu, 2.5% Sikh; Baluchistan: 3% Hindu. Over 50% of them left for India when the partition took place.

Sindh had 25% people Hindus and rest Muslims pre-1947. Even today Sindhi Hindus are more than 10% of Sindhi speaking population of Pakistan.

Like? I may be amusing and annoying but right. My position was late IVC was further east of Sindhu, I have given the refernce with markers. Further info like names are not required....

Pakistanis will always deny it, they had been given proofs many times.

Cemetery H Culture Dish or lid

The Late Harappan Period at Harappa is represented by the Cemetery H culture (190-1300 BC) which is named after the discovery of a large cemetery filled with painted burial urns and some extended inhumations. The earlier burials in this cemetery were laid out much like Harappan coffin burials, but in the later burials, adults were cremated and the bones placed in large urns (164). The change in burial customs represents a major shift in religion and can also be correlated to important changes in economic and political organization. Cemetery H pottery and related ceramics have been found throughout northern Pakistan, even as far north as Swat, where they mix with distinctive local traditions. In the east, numerous sites in the Ganga-Yamuna Doab provide evidence for the gradual expansion of settlements into this heavily forested region. One impetus for this expansion may have been the increasing use of rice and other summer (kharif) crops that could be grown using monsoon stimulated rains. Until late in the Harappan Period (after 2200 BC) the agricultural foundation of the Harappan cities was largely winter (rabi) crops that included wheat and barley. Although the Cemetery H culture encompassed a relatively large area, the trade connections with the western highlands began to break down as did the trade with the coast. Lapis lazuli and turquoise beads are rarely found in the settlements, and marine shell for ornaments and ritual objects gradually disappeared. On the other hand the technology of faience manufacture becomes more refined, possibly in order to compensate for the lack of raw materials such as shell, faience and possibly even carnelian.

 

[Fireurimagination]

If the culture didn't vanish, perhaps their writing system too should also have survived. Their language too should have survived in the area. Why hasn't this happened?? If there is no trace of a culture in these aspects, how & why would their religion alone end up influencing the Vedic culture??

Probably it did for few hundred years or so and then it died, assimilated in to Dravidian languages, who knows?

It's very likely that by the time the RigVedic tribes descended to Punjab, the great cities of IVC had already been abandoned and their people, likely Dravidians, had already dispersed into Central & southern India. Why is this scenario improbable??

How come that is likely? why would somebody just abandon their well planned cities?

The RigVedic tribes worshipped nature, they worshipped female deities, they worshipped fire, they rode chariots, sacrificed horses in ceremonies, they had knowledge of Bronze. They learnt these not in India, but before their migration. The sintashta culture on the Eurasian plains exhibits all these similarities with the rigVedic tribes and it's believed the RigVedic tribes were once part of this culture before their march southwards.

And the point is?

The thing is all are theories what you are stating and what I am stating, for every 10 researcher who say culture and religion of IVC was Hinduism, there are 10 who say it wasn't. So, until something concrete is proven I guess both theories stand ground.

 

[INDIC]

@Indischer Even Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts were lost, they were deciphered using the Greek inscription just recently. So, if Indus script got lost, that doesn't mean Vedic culture is not the continuation of Indus Valley civilization.

 

[Indischer]

@Indischer Even Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts were lost, they were deciphered using the Greek inscription just recently. So, if Indus script got lost, that doesn't mean Vedic culture is not the continuation of Indus Valley civilization.

The problem here is that scholars aren't even sure if the symbols found on IVC seals are a script to begin with. The longest sequence of symbols they've found is only about 25-30 odd characters together. Brahmi and Kharoshti had entire bundles of manuscripts coupled with equivalent translated works in living languages.

 

[INDIC]

The problem here is that scholars aren't even sure if the symbols found on IVC seals are a script to begin with. The longest sequence of symbols they've found is only about 25-30 odd characters together.

They look like Hieroglyphics.

Brahmi and Kharoshti had entire bundles of manuscripts coupled with equivalent translated works in living languages.

They could be deciphered because of the presence of Greek inscriptions.

 

[Indischer]

They look like Hieroglyphics.




They could be deciphered because of the presence of Greek inscriptions.

Yeah. But the Heiroglyphs were a writing system, as they too had entire books written in them. The symbol sequences found in IVC in most cases aren't even long enough to form a cogent sentence. No stone slab/terracotta slab with symbols enough to form at least a paragraph ought to have been found by now if the IVC symbols were at least heiroglyphs.

 

[KRAIT]

Hinduism was major religion for centuries in that region. All major findings state that. One cant change history. Islam came with invaders and forceful conversion.

 

[Indischer]

Probably it did for few hundred years or so and then it died, assimilated in to Dravidian languages, who knows?

Probably they were all killed to the last man and child by the Aryan tribes, who knows?
The onus of proof lies on the guy who comes up with a theory. Unless any proof is unearthed that can conclusively prove that IVC contributed substantially to Vedic culture, such an assumption cannot be entertained as a distinct possibility. Same goes with my question above.

 

[INDIC]

Probably they were all killed to the last man and child by the Aryan tribes, who knows?
The onus of proof lies on the guy who comes up with a theory. Unless any proof is unearthed that can conclusively prove that IVC contributed substantially to Vedic culture, such an assumption cannot be entertained as a distinct possibility. Same goes with my question above.

Oldest sample of genetic mixup of ANI and ASI is 4200 years ago, around 2200BC, there are lots of loopholes in Aryan invasion theory. Extinction of Indus script can only be possible if they have abandoned it for new writing system. Egyptians too abandoned Hieroglyphic script although their civilization continued. I read about other theory that drying of Saraswati river led to disowning urban lifestyles and later hardship due to Eastward migration.