Since Earliest Historical Times Hinduism Was Never Popular in Pakistan

[doppelganger]

It is such a shame that you are justifying a religious racist slur as a norm. I have not heard or see an Indian Muslim calling himself a Mohammaden. I have not heard or seen a Britain who started this racist terminolgy, calling the Muslims as Mohammadens in recent times.

I agree that you guys are not British, but we were never Indians. For about a 100 odd years we were British Indians. We could not have been Indians as India was a geographical area east of river Indus.

Hadd to tum logon ne kardi apnay dheeth-pan aur apni besharmi se. You lie and manipulate history with such arrogance that only is displayed by upstarts and are not even ashamed of your pitiful ignorance.

I have heard Mohameddan very often man, and never in a slurry way. It must be in your mind because first time I am hearing Mohameddan is a racial or a religious slur. Is it not true that there are many very seminal historical works that refer to what is now termed as Islam, as Mohamedanism then? Are those serious historical works also meant to be slurs? Come on man, stop being so uptight about your religion. Not everyone is out to get you contrary to what you guys have started thinking off late. The entire Muslim world is beginning to exhibit classical symptomatology of paranoid schizophrenia here.

You were not Indian then you were either Persian or you were Tibetan or you were Chinese or you were Arab or you were Turk or you were Mongol. Because there were no other types of people around. So which of these you were? Because Punjab and Sindh last I checked on the map are east of the Indus, and what is west of the Indus is to put it mildly only Pakistani in name. Balochistan and the entire Pathan belt, who wonder how the hell they got lumped with you guys in the first place.

 

[Bang Galore]

It is such a shame that you are justifying a religious racist slur as a norm. I have not heard or see an Indian Muslim calling himself a Mohammaden. I have not heard or seen a Britain who started this racist terminolgy, calling the Muslims as Mohammadens in recent times.

Then Islington (in-charge of India Office) further added: "It has been represented to me that further difficulties might arise if you put a Hindu in charge of a Mohammedan population. Do you think that a Hindu who got a few marks more than an educated and influential Mohammedan would make a better and an efficient administrator when he was in-charge of a population which was largely Mohammedan." Jinnah's response :" I say, that in this case you will be doing the greatest injustice to the Hindu...i do not see why a Hindu should not be in charge of a district where the majority happens to be Mohammedan."

Know the Known: From Jenabhai to Jinnah
JINNAH INDIA – PARTITION – INDEPENDENCE - JASWANT SINGH - Google Books

The Milwaukee Journal - Google News Archive Search

 

[Nassr]

You - a Pakistani says that 70% of rural India uses Mlecha.
Think for a second, when 50% of India is South India, who dont use Hindi, how can they use Mlecha. But then logic and sense is an alien concept to Pakistani's.


In all the the 4 religions - Dharma signifies Righteousness.
Righteousness maybe derived from teachings of Budha or from Natural Order or from Mahavira. Feel free to talk with Joe Shearer regarding this as well.

Since it means the same thing in all 4 religions - its called Dharmic Religion. It means all religions who believe in Righteousness.


I hope you finally get why all 4 are called Dharmic Religions. Dharmic religion is not 1 religion, its 4 religions which share a lot with each other. Like Abrahamic religions share a lot with each other.



Its okay. Being defensive and attacking again and again does not change reality.
Pakistan - which was almost never ruled as one region - was still always Dharmic by religion. You got conquered by the Central Asians and got converted. Today you are asked to keep bowing in front of the Arabs and their land again and again in the day. Today you live in Jahliya. There is light if you want to find it.
Stop taking out that frustration of being the first to get conquered and converted by the Central Asians.
We do feel sorry that we couldnt defend you then.


I believe my friend has already educated you about the use of the term.
Whether you believe it or not is up to you. But dont burn down another building in your next national youm e ishq.

Please stop lying and defending the indefensible. I didn’t know that Mlechha was a Hindi word, a language which the people of south India do not like to speak. There were Indians here who were rolling on ground stating that Mlechha was a Sanskrit word.

Do not reinterpret and redefine the differences in definition of Dharma in all the four religions. I highlighted it in my previous post and adherents of Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism also indicate these differences. They also state that their religions do not emanate from Hinduism and are not its sub-sects as the Indian Constitution states and Indian Supreme Court observes. And in any case, the Jains state that it is their’s is the oldest religion and not Hinduism as Indian Hindus would like to project. So would the Indian Hindus like to accept that Hinduism emanated from Jainism and not the other way around.

There are many Muslims who believe that Buddha was an Abrahamic Prophet. And there are many Sikhs who state that there are many commonalities in Sikhism and Islam. Keep your Dharmic superiority syndrome to yourself.

You are repeatedly using religion as a counter weight to an historical discourse through your bigotry and hate against Muslims. Your religiously inclined racist diatribe is nothing more than an *** kicking in the air to kill a fly. There are over 150 million Muslims in India – Ask Modi to try and burn them all away. Tinker unnecessarily with Pakistan and you all may go up in huff and puff.

 

[Contrarian]

Please stop lying and defending the indefensible. I didn’t know that Mlechha was a Hindi word, a language which the people of south India do not like to speak. There were Indians here who were rolling on ground stating that Mlechha was a Sanskrit word.

Then its upto you to learn isnt it. Words that have been incorporated in Hindi are Hindi now.
Secondly, even if it were just sanskrit and Tamil is still the only Indian language with no major root in Sanskrit. And its the backbone of South India along with Kerala since Andhra Pradesh is being assimilated more and more in Hindi.

Do not reinterpret and redefine the differences in definition of Dharma in all the four religions. I highlighted it in my previous post and adherents of Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism also indicate these differences. They also state that their religions do not emanate from Hinduism and are not its sub-sects as the Indian Constitution states and Indian Supreme Court observes. And in any case, the Jains state that it is their’s is the oldest religion and not Hinduism as Indian Hindus would like to project. So would the Indian Hindus like to accept that Hinduism emanated from Jainism and not the other way around.

It makes no difference which is the oldest. They all share the same core philosophies. You are nitpicking to make a point which initself is irrelevant.
Dharma in all 4 implies Righteousness. Where you derive that from is different. The goal is still the same.

Regardless of any being the oldest, they share a lot with each other. Thats why a Budhist is most comfortable with any of the rest 3, same for anyone in the rest.

There are many Muslims who believe that Buddha was an Abrahamic Prophet. And there are many Sikhs who state that there are many commonalities in Sikhism and Islam. Keep your Dharmic superiority syndrome to yourself.

Islam is the newest of the major religions. They claim anything good that came before them to increase legitimacy amongst others. Doesnt mean its true at all. Muslims can also claim Santa Clause is real, doesnt make it so. Budhism is Budhism. If you dont know what Budh taught, then read it. Then read up on Hinduism and Jainism. You would be pleasantly surprised.

There are similarities in Sikhism and Islam because Sikhs lived in very very close proximity to Muslims in Punjab.
Again..what is your point?
Do you know why Sikhs came to being? What their Guru's said. Who they were tasked to defend then? Hint - its Dharmic.

You are repeatedly using religion as a counter weight to an historical discourse through your bigotry and hate against Muslims. Your religiously inclined racist diatribe is nothing more than an *** kicking in the air to kill a fly. There are over 150 million Muslims in India – Ask Modi to try and burn them all away. Tinker unnecessarily with Pakistan and you all may go up in huff and puff.

Nope. You are trying to change the topic by your senseless rants.
The regions of Pakistan were rarely ruled by one kingdom. Even then, they were of the Dharmic faiths. They fell first in front of the Central Asian invaders. They got conquered and converted and today they live in Jahliya.
They have to bow down to the desert lands daily.

Back to mullah rhetoric are we?
we have not only tinkered, we have broken the damn country into two. Encircled the country, destroyed its economy. After all this, do you know hundreds and hundreds of Pakistani's still line up in front of the Indian embassy to get a visa to India to get medical treatment. And you know what? Pakistan couldnt do jack
Use these mullah rants at home while burning an American or Indian flag, I think you would get more respect then.

 

[Nassr]

I have heard Mohameddan very often man, and never in a slurry way. It must be in your mind because first time I am hearing Mohameddan is a racial or a religious slur. Is it not true that there are many very seminal historical works that refer to what is now termed as Islam, as Mohamedanism then? Are those serious historical works also meant to be slurs? Come on man, stop being so uptight about your religion. Not everyone is out to get you contrary to what you guys have started thinking off late. The entire Muslim world is beginning to exhibit classical symptomatology of paranoid schizophrenia here.

You were not Indian then you were either Persian or you were Tibetan or you were Chinese or you were Arab or you were Turk or you were Mongol. Because there were no other types of people around. So which of these you were? Because Punjab and Sindh last I checked on the map are east of the Indus, and what is west of the Indus is to put it mildly only Pakistani in name. Balochistan and the entire Pathan belt, who wonder how the hell they got lumped with you guys in the first place.

Mohammadon is religiouly inclined racist slur and most of you people who use this slur are racists.

I will be more specific for a moron like you - East of Indus river meant east of the watershed that segregated the River Indus Valley and River Ganges Valley and its adjoining plains. This watershed was and is a geographical divide between the riff-raff on the east and the landmass of Meluhha and Pakistan on the west. I hope it is now understood.

 

[doppelganger]

Mohammadon is religiouly inclined racist slur and most of you people who use this slur are racists.

I will be more specific for a moron like you - East of Indus river meant east of the watershed that segregated the River Indus Valley and River Ganges Valley and its adjoining plains. This watershed was and is a geographical divide between the riff-raff on the east and the landmass of Meluhha and Pakistan on the west. I hope it is now understood.

Stop acting like a creep dude. I am being polite, you be polite. Don't resort to typical bhindi bazaar aukat here.

We are talking races here. There were the Indians and there were the Persians. In between, there was some cross linking.

Landmass of Pakistan.

Meluha.

Which asshole did a turd like you plop out from?

 

[Nassr]

Then its upto you to learn isnt it. Words that have been incorporated in Hindi are Hindi now.
Secondly, even if it were just sanskrit and Tamil is still the only Indian language with no major root in Sanskrit. And its the backbone of South India along with Kerala since Andhra Pradesh is being assimilated more and more in Hindi.


It makes no difference which is the oldest. They all share the same core philosophies. You are nitpicking to make a point which initself is irrelevant.
Dharma in all 4 implies Righteousness. Where you derive that from is different. The goal is still the same.

Regardless of any being the oldest, they share a lot with each other. Thats why a Budhist is most comfortable with any of the rest 3, same for anyone in the rest.

Islam is the newest of the major religions. They claim anything good that came before them to increase legitimacy amongst others. Doesnt mean its true at all. Muslims can also claim Santa Clause is real, doesnt make it so. Budhism is Budhism. If you dont know what Budh taught, then read it. Then read up on Hinduism and Jainism. You would be pleasantly surprised.

There are similarities in Sikhism and Islam because Sikhs lived in very very close proximity to Muslims in Punjab.
Again..what is your point?
Do you know why Sikhs came to being? What their Guru's said. Who they were tasked to defend then? Hint - its Dharmic.

Nope. You are trying to change the topic by your senseless rants.
The regions of Pakistan were rarely ruled by one kingdom. Even then, they were of the Dharmic faiths. They fell first in front of the Central Asian invaders. They got conquered and converted and today they live in Jahliya.
They have to bow down to the desert lands daily.

Back to mullah rhetoric are we?
we have not only tinkered, we have broken the damn country into two. Encircled the country, destroyed its economy. After all this, do you know hundreds and hundreds of Pakistani's still line up in front of the Indian embassy to get a visa to India to get medical treatment. And you know what? Pakistan couldnt do jack
Use these mullah rants at home while burning an American or Indian flag, I think you would get more respect then.

No Sanskrit in Tamilian language – ah now I understand as to why the Tamils do not want to remain in India and want a separate homeland for themselves. I wish them well.

Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism do not share the core basic philosophies of Hinduism. These are separate religions having their own core philosophy and want to be officially declared as separate religions which the Indian Constitution and Indian Supreme Court decisions shamefully do not allow. Read Ambedkar and others to understand the anomalies and farce of your content. If they were so similar why would they want to be identified as separate religions and not be part of Hinduism. Dharmic is just an Indian Hindu contraption to project its superior race theory and nothing more. The respect that you have given to these religions has been displayed through centuries of persecution and murder and by institutionally denying them their right to follow identifiably separate religions. And then you have the temerity to call them Dharmic – Sharam tum ko magar nahin aati.

Geopolitical realities are not Mullah rhetoric or even Brahmin edicts. These are ground realities which are government by the existing and future environment and have nothing to do with religion. I do not know why do you want to bring in religion in anything which is being discussed here – are you a Hindu fundamentalist or an extremist who believe in the misplaced Hindu superiority syndrome as this is what your diatribe outlines.

Pakistan was never Indian and neither Hindu and it will never be – live with it.

 

[Contrarian]

Mohammadon is religiouly inclined racist slur and most of you people who use this slur are racists.

I will be more specific for a moron like you - East of Indus river meant east of the watershed that segregated the River Indus Valley and River Ganges Valley and its adjoining plains. This watershed was and is a geographical divide between the riff-raff on the east and the landmass of Meluhha and Pakistan on the west. I hope it is now understood.

Know the Known: From Jenabhai to Jinnah
JINNAH INDIA – PARTITION – INDEPENDENCE - JASWANT SINGH - Google Books
Then Islington (in-charge of India Office) further added: "It has been represented to me that further difficulties might arise if you put a Hindu in charge of a Mohammedan population. Do you think that a Hindu who got a few marks more than an educated and influential Mohammedan would make a better and an efficient administrator when he was in-charge of a population which was largely Mohammedan." Jinnah's response :" I say, that in this case you will be doing the greatest injustice to the Hindu...i do not see why a Hindu should not be in charge of a district where the majority happens to be Mohammedan."
The Milwaukee Journal - Google News Archive Search

Didnt know Jinnah was a racist against Muslims. if its good enough for the father of Pakistan, its good enough for me.

 

[Nassr]

Stop acting like a creep dude. I am being polite, you be polite. Don't resort to typical bhindi bazaar aukat here.

We are talking races here. There were the Indians and there were the Persians. In between, there was some cross linking.

Landmass of Pakistan.

Meluha.

Which asshole did a turd like you plop out from?

I am civil and you are not. It were the likes of you who resulted from the inappropriate admix of Indian Y chromosome with foreign genetic left overs.

Know the Known: From Jenabhai to Jinnah
JINNAH INDIA – PARTITION – INDEPENDENCE - JASWANT SINGH - Google Books

The Milwaukee Journal - Google News Archive Search

Didnt know Jinnah was a racist against Muslims. if its good enough for the father of Pakistan, its good enough for me.

Negro was a norm at certain times and even the blacks used the word till its racist undertones were understood. Jinnah did not use this word after he understood the racist connotation that it carried. And even if he mistakenly used it at certain times, we forgive him for what he achieved later - vivsection of gao-mata.

 

[doppelganger]

I am civil and you are not. It were the likes of you who resulted from the inappropriate admix of Indian Y chromosome with foreign genetic left overs.

BS man. My ancestors have always been Hindu. Which part of your line had the hordes dig in to?

Its truly an alternative I do not envy you for.

On the one hand admit that some female relative long gone got taken as a spoil of war, more often than not without the sanctity of matrimonial bliss to soften the post coital pangs.

On the other hand agree that all your female relatives maintained their marital chastity, and that your males just shat their pants and decided to convert rather than fight.

Feel sorry about the lies guys like you need to spin.

MELUAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Nassr]

BS man. My ancestors have always been Hindu. Which part of your line had the hordes dig in to?

Its truly an alternative I do not envy you for.

On the one hand admit that some female relative long gone got taken as a spoil of war, more often than not without the sanctity of matrimonial bliss to soften the post coital pangs.

On the other hand agree that all your female relatives maintained their marital chastity, and that your males just shat their pants and decided to convert rather than fight.

Feel sorry about the lies guys like you need to spin.

MELUAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Apparently, the Jauhar brigade did not pass by the habitat of your ancestors, did they. I do not know how can you be so sure of your Hindu ancestry.

 

[pakdefender]

Let's look at simple facts.

Pakistan had almost the same Hindu Sikh population in 1941 as the Muslim population in India.

See where are we now.

What does it point to?

Almost complete ethnic cleansing in Pakistan and an increasing Muslim population share in India.

If this hard data doesn't tell you the difference, I can't help it.



Absolutely. For you, your environment changed post conversion and that resulted in the formation of Pakistan (and you happened to be in the Western wing) in parts of India that happened to have higher Muslim population.

It had nothing to do with any past history of these Dharmic lands, just the Muslim population share and the TNT bases on Islam and how that makes one a separate nation.


BTW, I have nothing against your trying to associate with the pre-Islamic past on the part of some of you. That is an improvement over the majority Jahiliyah crowd.

Also I understand why you would necessarily have to go through stage 2 that I have outlined before some of you graduate to a stage 3 in a few decades from now.

So, we have had our say I guess.



That is because of the massive destruction wrought by primitive uncivlized barbarian invaders that indulged in massive destruction and rapine, plunder, slavery and forced conversion of your ancestors.

Did Pakistan have things like stoning people to death, chopping of limbs, rape of captured women as booty, camel piss drinking, marring and raping 9 year old girls, blowing up in market places to get your 72 earlier or did it come to you with your heroic invaders?

Have these been found at your archaeological sites?



What is sure is that none of this had anything to do with Islam.

No?

if as you say there was massive destruction of hinduism of such a scale that no trace of it is left in archelogical sites of Pakistan then that also backs the assertion that lands of Pakistan do not have much links with indian hinduism.

Not traces of monkey , elephant and other statues that indian hinduiusm has in Pakistani archeological sites means two things

a. They never existed
b. They existed , but were wiped off to such an extent that no trace is left.

Which ever on you pick , shows that hinduism as it exists in india did not exists or ceased to exist such that present day Pakistan has no links what so ever to hinduism.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

if as you say there was massive destruction of hinduism of such a scale that no trace of it is left in archelogical sites of Pakistan then that also backs the assertion that lands of Pakistan do not have much links with indian hinduism.

Not traces of monkey , elephant and other statues that indian hinduiusm has in Pakistani archeological sites means two things

a. They never existed
b. They existed , but were wiped off to such an extent that no trace is left.

Which ever on you pick , shows that hinduism as it exists in india did not exists or ceased to exist such that present day Pakistan has no links what so ever to hinduism.

Living evidence is very few now in Pakistan. But some residual architectural evidence does remain. Just like pre-Islamic architecture survives(though very few) in Persia, Mesopotamia and Misr. That does not imply that these places had no native culture before.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Forget any rods - even all phallic deities can not be classified as Lingams. Never mind...

 

[pakdefender]

phallic deities

well then every man is hindu , since every man has a "phallic deity" down there , so ALL people of the world are actaully hindus!

is that so ?