Some similarity's between India and China

[LURKER]

Nation-state and state are two different concepts, don't meddle the two.

"State" refers to a single political entity.

"Nation-state" refers to "state" with a homogeneous people and culture. (Post British era, India had become a state, but not a nation-state. Never will be, due to its diverse ethnic and cultural background)

You need not be a nation-state to be a state/a single political entity. As with the case of most ancient kingdom/empire. China has been a single political entity since 221 BC, adding or subtract Xinjiang/Tibet makes no different. If USA losing Texas or California back to Mexico, it doesn't alter the status of USA as a political entity as it ha been created in 1776. If India add Sri Lanka or loses kashmir, it doesn't changes the status of India today either.

If every ethnic or cultural group is considered as a separate nation in itself then most nations of the World would not qualify to be nation states rather be multinational states. This includes Pakistan, India and China too as all of these are ethnically and linguistically diverse countries. While State is a political entity, nation-state adds cultural identity to the state. Indian nation state concept is derived from common culture with different ancillary sub-cultures. More than 80% of Indians are Hindus and they are spread from north to south. Nation state concept of India may not be same as that in Europe.

India was also ruled by kingdoms like China. Almost half of modern day China was not ruled by central kingdoms for a large part of history. Same way central authority based in Delhi did not rule most of India for a large part of history.

Below is the Imperial Edict of the Abdication of the Qing Dynasty Emperor. The content circled in red is: Lands from Manchu, Han, Mongolia, Uyghur and Tibet continues to form an integrated China.

View attachment 375734

Qing dyansty was not a nation. During the revolt of 1857, people reinstated last Mughal ruler Bahadur Shah Zafar to the throne at Delhi and proclaimed him Emperor of India. Most princes and kings accepted him as their emperor.

 

[nature is]

If every ethnic or cultural group is considered as a separate nation in itself then most nations of the World would not qualify to be nation states rather be multinational states. This includes Pakistan, India and China too as all of these are ethnically and linguistically diverse countries. While State is a political entity, nation-state adds cultural identity to the state. Indian nation state concept is derived from common culture with different ancillary sub-cultures. More than 80% of Indians are Hindus and they are spread from north to south. Nation state concept of India may not be same as that in Europe.

India was also ruled by kingdoms like China. Almost half of modern day China was not ruled by central kingdoms for a large part of history. Same way central authority based in Delhi did not rule most of India for a large part of history.

Nation-state is defined as a state with a homogeneous ethnic core. A state/political entity can be a nation-state, city-state or multi-national state...

India is not a nation-state, it is too diverse ethnically, without a core ethnic group. Religious affiliation doesn't define ethnicity. China has various ethnic groups too, but Han Chinese formed 92%.

Territorial size doesn't define a state. When US was created in 1776, it wasn't even 10% of today's size. Rome was a tiny dot before it expanded. China as a centralized political entity was formed in 221 BC. One emperor rules all China, civil war not withstanding. India wasn't never one entity throughout most of its history.

 

[LURKER]

Nation-state is defined as a state with a homogeneous ethnic core. A state/political entity can be a nation-state, city-state or multi-national state.

India is not a nation-state due to its diverse ethnic background, I don't think there's a core ethnic group. Religion affiliation doesn't define a ethnic. China has various ethnic groups too, but Han Chinese formed the core, 92%.

Ancient china as a centralized political entity was formed in 221 BC. One emperor rule all China, civil war not withstanding. India wasn't never one entity throughout most of its history. Territorial size doesn't define what a state. Rome was a tiny dot before it expanded too.

I said India is a nation state in respect of common culture and religion notwithstanding different ancillary sub-cultures. India's religious affiliation is unique because it is hardly found outside of India. Hindus form 80% of the population and in that sense India is a nation-state with a common chord of culture/religion.

I don't understand what central authority you are talking about. There were a plethora of dynasties which ruled modern day China simultaneously. You need to study more about Indian history and empires which ruled India before we can discuss on this matter any more.

 

[nature is]

I said India is a nation state in respect of common culture and religion notwithstanding different ancillary sub-cultures. India's religious affiliation is unique because it is hardly found outside of India. Hindus form 80% of the population and in that sense India is a nation-state with a common chord of culture/religion.

I don't understand what central authority you are talking about. There were a plethora of dynasties which ruled modern day China simultaneously. You need to study more about Indian history and empires which ruled India before we can discuss on this matter any more.

You can invent your own, but I go with proper academic definition, as with the rest of the world.

 

[LURKER]

You can invent your own, but I go with proper academic definition, as with the rest of the world.

Which academic paper claims China was a centralized political entity since 221 BC. Please refrain from CPC publications.

 

[nature is]

Which academic paper claims China was a centralized political entity since 221 BC. Please refrain from CPC publications.

Article from Ivy League Columbia university. Plenty more from academic books if you look.

http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/main_pop/kpct/kp_qinhan.htm

• The Qin (221- 206 BCE) and subsequent Han (202 BCE- 220 CE) dynasties unify China and establish a centralized empire, which endures and evolves down through 20th century. The imperial structure draws on elements of both Legalist and Confucian thought. (Note: the Western word for “China” probably comes from the Romanized spelling of Qin, which is pronounced and also spelled “Ch’in,” while the Chinese refer to themselves as “the people of Han.”)
• The Chinese empire is founded when the state of Qin unites the other Chinese states in 221 BCE and establishes a centralized system of government; Qin Shi Huangdi (Ch’in Shih Huang-ti), or the First Emperor of Qin, rules for a very short time (221-206 BCE) but lays the foundation for China’s imperial structure and begins construction of the Great Wall for defense to the north. At his death, an army of life-sized terra cotta warriors is buried near his tomb.

 

[LURKER]

Article from Ivy League Columbia university. Plenty more from academic books if you look.

http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/main_pop/kpct/kp_qinhan.htm

• The Qin (221- 206 BCE) and subsequent Han (202 BCE- 220 CE) dynasties unify China and establish a centralized empire, which endures and evolves down through 20th century. The imperial structure draws on elements of both Legalist and Confucian thought. (Note: the Western word for “China” probably comes from the Romanized spelling of Qin, which is pronounced and also spelled “Ch’in,” while the Chinese refer to themselves as “the people of Han.”)
• The Chinese empire is founded when the state of Qin unites the other Chinese states in 221 BCE and establishes a centralized system of government; Qin Shi Huangdi (Ch’in Shih Huang-ti), or the First Emperor of Qin, rules for a very short time (221-206 BCE) but lays the foundation for China’s imperial structure and begins construction of the Great Wall for defense to the north. At his death, an army of life-sized terra cotta warriors is buried near his tomb.

'Qin dynasty established a centralized empire which evolves down through 20th century' does not translates into China has been a centralized political entity since the Qin dynasty. Qins laid the foundation of centralization of China as the Muaryas did for India. Qin were replaced by other empires like Mauryas were and whoever assumed the central role attempted to bring all of India or China under their rule.

 

[punit]

Buddha was from Nepal.

And Nepal was not even a part of British India when it was created from the hundreds of independent countries in the subcontinent.

THE PLACE WHERE THE prince Sidharth of Kapilvastu became Budhha is very much in India !!

 

[nature is]

'Qin dynasty established a centralized empire which evolves down through 20th century' does not translates into China has been a centralized political entity since the Qin dynasty. Qins laid the foundation of centralization of China as the Muaryas did for India. Qin were replaced by other empires like Mauryas were and whoever assumed the central role attempted to bring all of India or China under their rule.

You wanted a source, I provided. Now you want to play shifting goalpost.

As I said, you can delude and invent your history. I go with academically validated one, as with the rest of the world.

 

[LURKER]

You wanted a source, I provided. Now you want to play shifting goalpost.

As I said, you can delude and invent your history. I go with academically validated one, as with the rest of the world.

Multiple dynasties ruling different parts of China does not make it a unified political rule throughout its history. China had its history of integration and disintegration with intermittent rule of non Han dynasties. If dynasties claiming succession of previous dynasties qualifies as politically unified entity then by that definition anyone assuming the throne of Delhi was also considered the King of India. Each dynasty that ruled Delhi succeeded the previous one as the ruler of India, the extent of their territorial rule varied as in case of Chinese dynasties.

Vishnu Purana has defined the extent of India centuries ago :
उत्तरं यत्समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् ।
वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र संततिः ।।
Translation:
"The country (varṣam) that lies north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountains is called Bhāratam; there dwell the descendants of Bharata."
Bharata is another name of India. However, this is not a historical text hence I didn't bring it into discussion.

 

[Gibbs]

Philosophical and religious ideas (reincarnation, karma, various deities) especially with Buddhist Chinese -- mind you there are hundreds of millions of Chinese around the world who are worshipping an Indian guy, which shows the extent to which the countries have shared/imposed/propagated/traded ideas with each other

Buddhists don't worship Lord Buddha, He isn't a deity to be worshipped

 

[ashok mourya]

Lot of similarities between marriages too.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_marriage
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arranged_marriage_in_the_Indian_subcontinent

I could not with hold my surprise, of the similarity between their wedding and our desi one , in terms of similarity of rituals, elaborate celebrations and expenditure.

“Our weddings are extremely elaborate and interesting.” remarked my friend.

Exactly like us desis, Chinese believe that marriages are arranged in Heaven, and merely completed on Earth. They believe the predestined couple is tied with red string in the Heaven, long before the marriage occurs on Earth.

For them too, it is a union between two families, not just two individuals.

The traditional Chinese too have elaborate rituals of sending marriage proposals to the girls family. Once decided, it is a must for the two families to consult the fortune teller ( as a Jyotishi in Hindu wedding) about the auspicious date for the wedding.

The invitation cards are as elaborate and showy as ours.




Red color is overwhelmingly predominant in every Chinese wedding, as it represents luck and happiness.

The celebrations begin days before the actual ceremony.

Days before the wedding, the bride is expected to stay away from the eyes of the general public, in isolation.

The groom’s family brings gifts to the bride’s home days before the wedding, while the bride’s family returns the gifts along with clothes and gifts to the groom, his parents and unmarried siblings.







Like us desis, the bride’s side is also expected to deliver dowry and money to the grooms home, the amount of which states the dignity and position of the bride’s family.

On the day of the wedding day, as she gets ready, the bride goes through a hair combing ceremony where a ‘lucky’ woman,mostly a married woman ( = our suhagan) combs her hair 4 times. Each stroke carries a special meaning. The first combing blessed the marriage to last a lifetime; the second, a harmonious marriage; the third, many children and grandchildren ; and the fourth, good health and fortune.


The bride adorns a red gown, red shoes and covers her face with a red veil.

However, the groom, unlike our groom, wears red robe, red sash.A capping ceremony like our ‘sehra bandi’ takes place where his head is covered with cypress leaves by the father.






Amidst the banging of gongs, drums and firecrackers, ( like an Indian baraat), the groom leaves for the bride’s house in a procession.




As the groom steps in the brides house, the brides sisters & friends stop his way and bargain for entry towards the bride.

The bride leaves her home for the wedding arena under a red umbrella to ward off evil.

However the basic difference between the desi and Chinese wedding is the main ceremony.

They do not have any written contract or chanting of verses.
The couple goes on its knees and bows thrice- for the Heavens, the ancestors and their parents. They even bow to each other in a gesture of promising faithfulness to each other. There are no spoken vows.






Like us desis, the banquet is extremely elaborate, with 9 or 10 course meals.

However unlike us, each meals signifies something. First course is pig which signifies virginity, followed by others eg fish & seafood for wealth and abundance, pigeon for peaceful marriage, and whole chicken head for togetherness.

Buddhists don't worship Lord Buddha, He isn't a deity to be worshipped

Budhha is deity ...Hindus consider him an incarnation of lord Bishnu, that's how Buddhism merged in Hinduism in India .https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha_in_Hinduism

 

[faithfulguy]

Multiple dynasties ruling different parts of China does not make it a unified political rule throughout its history. China had its history of integration and disintegration with intermittent rule of non Han dynasties. If dynasties claiming succession of previous dynasties qualifies as politically unified entity then by that definition anyone assuming the throne of Delhi was also considered the King of India. Each dynasty that ruled Delhi succeeded the previous one as the ruler of India, the extent of their territorial rule varied as in case of Chinese dynasties.

Vishnu Purana has defined the extent of India centuries ago :
उत्तरं यत्समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् ।
वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र संततिः ।।
Translation:
"The country (varṣam) that lies north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountains is called Bhāratam; there dwell the descendants of Bharata."
Bharata is another name of India. However, this is not a historical text hence I didn't bring it into discussion.

China was a political entity as successive dynasties claim the throne of the previous dynasty. When you said that whoever rule Dehli rule India, this is using today's political perspective to view history, which is none factual.

After China first unified, there were time of disunity. But those kingdoms are aware that they were not unified. For example, even after Han dynasty, when China was split into competing kingdoms. Each of the kingdoms know that the country is split and they just rule portions of an empire. Some of the kings would claim as being the emperor and regard the other kingdoms as in rebellion. Fast forward to today, both Taiwan and China claim to be the legitimate ruler of China. So China today, as well as two thousand years ago, have awareness that it's one country.

India nation is a new concept that existed after Britain created India. Did the Chola empire realized that it rule only part of India and ever claimed north India as being in rebellion? Did the Gupta rulers regard itself as the successor of the Mauryan rulers. Fast forward to today, if India regard itself as one nation before British conquered it, than it would never split into two based on religion. But because India was none existent prior to Britain created it, it make total sense to split into two to create a new nation that will bring the benefit to each individual new entities.

 

[Viet]

maybe not India, but with Pakistan. I remember of statement of many Chinese posters here, who say Chinese people have deep love toward Pakistan. not only because of many similarities between the nations. a Chinese poster even claims he will huge all Pakistanis if he sees them in public. tears come to my eyes.

 

[Gibbs]

Budhha is deity ...Hindus consider him an incarnation of lord Bishnu, that's how Buddhism merged in Hinduism in India .https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha_in_Hinduism

Well thats what Hindu's think, Basically because of their hegemonic intentions towards other Dharmic faiths, But Buddhism is the very anti thesis to Hinduism, And Buddha never declared himself a deity he actually dismissed the notion of god and Buddhist's as the followers of Gautama Buddha's philosophy doesn't consider him to be a deity and does not worship him.. What Hindu's think doesn't matter