Ummah Yearnings

[muse]

The "truth" depends on one's opinion. The facts however must be proven. Example. Hence I find it puzzling when Indians claim King Porus as their hero whilst Pakistanis seem oblivious to his historical feat of taking on the world's then most powerful army. The fact of the matter is that King Porus was ruler of territory which is now incorporated into Pakistan. That is clearly not dogmatic but purely an indisputable fact.

The point in contention is the precursor to the Hindu bit -- but yes, we all take your point about porus

 

[Vinod2070]

my friend. what was the prevalent culture in the subcontinent when alexander came to the subcontinent.

we know that the nanda dynasty existed in the gangetic plains. we also know that a couple of decades later chandragupta established the gupta empire with the help of chanakya. from all this knowledge we can conclude that the prevalent religion at the time in the subcontinent was hinduism or one of its sects.

so it isnt illogical in any way to assume that porus was a hindu. at worst he was the follower of a 'pagan' religion.

If one doesn't know these basic facts, there is no point trying to explain.

Anyway, this thread is about the Ummah. Most of these people are confused about their identity and history.

Was it Jahiliyah before the invaders? If yes, how can there be any glorious history to be claimed? If no and there was a glorious history, why worship the invaders that destroyed it all?

In fact it is so mixed up, it won't even make sense for them if they tried to examine it. They dare not do it.

Reality is, the very few who try to show some kind of connection to the pre Jahiliyah history do it for all the wrong reasons, for reasons of hate, rabid hate spewing out from the ears.

Hate is what defines them and they don't matter. Not to us, not to their own fellow Pakistanis and not to the world.

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

I might be taken as a stupid in mentioning this, but our problem has always been looking for an own-able heritage. Pakistan came into being on “do qaomi nazriya” but after becoming an independent country it was still distributed logically into “do qaomi nazriya”.

One side puts its heritage to Islamic lineage and other deems it towards IVC or such. Both sides are so hell bent in proving it that in the process they have forgotten their own identity.

Just a question.. Why not just accept that we are majority Muslim country and own whatever is in the legal boundaries of Pakistan as our past heritage. (including Muslim and non-Muslim history) and then forget about it and start developing our country.

For those “ummah” lovers, here is a prediction for you. The moment you become more developed and well-off than your Arab, Turks and Persian counterparts, you won’t need them to “accept” you as “ummah”, they will “come to you” to join.

So forget about begging and crying.. Work for the betterment of your own country..

Just my two cents..

The Arabs are just asking to taste a beating from us Pakistanis... dont worry... its the regimes that is the problem... not the people...

As for those who oppose the concept of "Ummah" for whatever reasons... be careful... you are clashing with the very words of the Quran which addresses Muslims as Ummah Wahida (one nation)...

Enough of Musharaf's deception of Pakistan First... We have seen what he did to Pakistan... Khalas!!!

 

[T-Faz]

what a joke... why not we all become a Hindu...

No one is asking anyone to become a Hindu, even then, much of the area called Pakistan today used to be a Buddhist state.

and TFaz... heres a sincere warning... be very very careful when you approach History... You ll find it full of lies and propaganda... I am only saying this because I know how history is used by opposing forces...

As far as my post goes, I did not state anything wrong or in opposition to factual history.

Mohammed Bin Qasim was killed by the Caliph, there are two version, one being that he did not present Dahirs daughter to the Caliph for his harem and he was punished for it while the other states that he was killed because the new Caliph wanted to remove all people related or allied with the old caliph.

Now who would want a hero whose task is to collect girls for harems and what kind of Caliph kills his opponents allies/relatives.

This is not what Islam teaches us, to collect girls in harems or kill opponents.

Don't you think this is all wrong.

Raja Dahir was our hero... gimme a break...

He is a hero, he helped the family of the Prophet (SAW).

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Pioneer

check out what the author has to say, pretty much like yourself:

The author of this article who thinks that unified ummah is not a realistic goal needs to get over his agoraphobia and visit some other Muslim countries...

I swear I thought I was reading a donkey's dhainchoo dhainchoo reading his article...

 

[muse]

Was it Jahiliyah before the invaders? If yes, how can there be any glorious history to be claimed? If no and there was a glorious history, why worship the invaders that destroyed it all?

In fact it is so mixed up, it won't even make sense for them if they tried to examine it. They dare not do it.

Reality is, the very few who try to show some kind of connection to the pre Jahiliyah history do it for all the wrong reasons, for reasons of hate, rabid hate spewing out from the ears.

Hate is what defines them and they don't matter. Not to us, not to their own fellow Pakistanis and not to the world.

This is exactly the point the author of the lead article is making --- Why is it that Pakistan do not seek to distance or mark themselves as unique in relation to Iranian or Arbi or Turki? -- because the truth is that for long, "Muslim and not India" has been the official line. With the Mullah's Islam, culture and history become the property of ideology, in this case the ideology of pan-islamism, and of course the ever present, "not India" -- so what it does is isolate Pakistanis from their history, from their cultures and aligns them to the culture of invaders -- Arabs were muslims and Pakistan are Muslims, does that mean arabs invading Pakistan is OK? Even today, this is going on and so many are confused, Bin laden, an Arab, but prayers are offered no no arabs instead by pakistines.

 

[T-Faz]

Taxila​

A bureaucrat, mutated into an ‘intellectual’, hogs the waves of an Urdu television channel and tells the ignorant television viewing public what it wants to hear. One of his not-so-recent gems was about the country that is now Pakistan being a wild and savage land until illuminated by Islam in the early 8th century. That, until that time, this land had no culture or sophistication. The man is a liar and a charlatan.

In April 326 BCE, Alexander arrived in Taxila and it is from that time we get the first real notice on this wonderful city. Several members of the Macedonian’s staff wrote diaries that were subsequently published. Some of those works are lost entirely, others preserved by later historians. Whatever the case, they provide a fantastic window into the city.

Taxila was a city of Buddhists and Brahmans and of yet another class that did not bury its dead. They exposed them in isolated places for the bones to be picked clean by the birds. This was a clear reference to the followers of the great Zartusht or Zoroaster — the people we today know as Parsees. We are told that the Brahmans were a very powerful class, actively engaged in the political life of the city and serving as counsellors to the court.

As for the Buddhists, Greek writers refer to them as ‘sramanes’. Clearly this was a mispronunciation of ‘sramanera’, or a new entry training to be a monk. Though there is no dearth of ruins of post-Alexander Buddhist monasteries in town, we can take this as proof of Taxila being a centre of learning even before the westerners descended upon it.

There is no notice of animosity between followers of the various religious persuasions who lived in total harmony. Taxila, if we are to believe Alexander’s general Nearchus, was a city of peace and the rule of law. Nearchus notes, with evident awe, the rectitude and decency of the townspeople who made all monetary transactions without “either seals or witnesses”. Yet the courts of law were without any cases of fraud! Mendacity was unheard of and when folks went away, either for work or pleasure, they left their homes unlocked and unguarded for theft was not known in Taxila!

The people of Taxila were admirers of physical beauty and never left home improperly dressed or made up. The men wore their beards either in white or in punk shades of bright red, green or purple. The dress, as described by Nearchus, was “an under-garment of cotton which reaches below the knee halfway down to the ankles, and also an upper garment which they throw partly over their shoulders, and partly twist in folds around their heads.”

Their shoes had thick soles to make the wearer seem taller and the clothing of the rich men was worked in gold thread and studded with precious stones. When they went about their business out of doors, attendants shaded them from the harsh Punjabi sun with broad parasols.

Polygamy was common among the rich. But parents with daughters of marriageable age and unable, because of poverty, to wed them off, exhibited the damsels in the town square. There the champions of Taxila fought boxing matches and the winner’s prize was the hand of the girl in marriage.

Arrian called Taxila “the largest [city] between the Indus and the Jhleum” and we can tell from the above description of its richer classes that it was indeed so. Sitting at a spot that made it an important staging post for caravans, it picked off large amounts in custom duties. But much of its wealth also came from its rich agriculture. According to Nearchus, there was no shortage of food in Taxila.

But the noblest aspect of Taxilian society was the respect it bestowed upon its learned men. The philosophers, whose fame had reached Alexander months before he got to Taxila, were held in the highest possible esteem by the Taxilians. They lived outside town, but whenever they wandered in, people mobbed them, oiling their hair and massaging their limbs, begging them to come into their homes so that they could hear their discourse.

Taxila was a city of high culture that valued true learning. And we have a mendacious bureaucrat pretending to be an intellectual who tells us otherwise.

Taxila – The Express Tribune

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

No one is asking anyone to become a Hindu, even then, much of the area called Pakistan today used to be a Buddhist state.



As far as my post goes, I did not state anything wrong or in opposition to factual history.

Mohammed Bin Qasim was killed by the Caliph, there are two version, one being that he did not present Dahirs daughter to the Caliph for his harem and he was punished for it while the other states that he was killed because the new Caliph wanted to remove all people related or allied with the old caliph.

Now who would want a hero whose task is to collect girls for harems and what kind of Caliph kills his opponents allies/relatives.

This is not what Islam teaches us, to collect girls in harems or kill opponents.

Don't you think this is all wrong.



He is a hero, he helped the family of the Prophet (SAW).

Muhammad Bin Qasim... may Allah be pleased with the noble soul is one of the greatest (and youngest) generals of human history... at the age of 17 he led a tiny army of a few thousand annihilated the army of Dahir using tactics and strategy... Not only was he a great leader of the campaign of Sindh but also a brilliant administrator and negotiator...

I dont know what books you are reading... but the story about the concubine is so preposterous that even our enemies wont accept it... The reason why the Muslim Army was sent to Sindh was because Hajjaj wanted to secure the trade routes to Sri Lanka whose king had befriended the Muslims and trade had begun flourishing between Muslims and Sri Lanka as well as lands beyond Sri Lanka i.e Indonesia and Malaysia... The reason why the routes had to be secured because Debal pirates used to raid the Muslim trade ships and were a constant annoyance... It was then when some traders were killed and women captured that Hajjaj lost all patience and ordered the Army to move into Sindh... So it was to free those women and to secure the trade routes that Qasim came to Sindh... Not for some bloody concubine... Where did you get that from anyway? Wikipedia?

The reason why Qasim was killed because one of the sons of Abdul Malik was mad.. .When Sulayman came to power he started killing all those that he did not like... and since Hajjaj was a particularly unpleasant character for most Muslims, Sulayman ordered persecution against all relatives of Hajjaj... He recalled Qasim and killed him... The bravery of Qasim is in the fact that he was warned by his loyal troops that this Caliph is mad and is going to kill you because you are the nephew of Hajjaj and Qasim replied saying that the Caliph has to be obeyed and kept the discipline of chain of command instead of rebelling against the centre (he could ve easily stayed in Sindh... he had great support amongst his own troops as well as natives)...

The issue of crazy Caliphs is off topic but if it helps, we are in no mood for a Caliphate on the method of Ummayads or Abbasids or even the better than both of them Ottomans... Our model is the Rashideen... that is what we shall follow... History is for learning... we dont learn from our mistakes and moan about useless things... what happened to Qasim should never ever be repeated... Caliphate has to be representative and the Ameer elected by people... no family is to be held above the institutions of Islam... any attempt of the repeat of what Mawviya did to us shall be harshly crushed inshaAllah... because of the stupidity of Sulayman, progress on the eastern front of the Islamic State (as well as the Spanish front) halted...

and Dahir never helped any family of the Prophet... you are talking like the enemies of Pakistan i.e Awami National Party goons...

On the contrary... The Prophet saw has blessed the Muslim Army that attacks Hind and does Jihad against the Hindus... what are you on about man?

 

[BlueDot_in_Space]

Chanakya got his education in taxila (Takshashila)

 

[Moorkh]

Your claim is weak and we as a people of this land strongly identify it as a precursor to our culture.

we can share it then. we both have taken parts of that culture to form our current culture. some more than others.

 

[Moorkh]

Because you dont have a proper reply.

very well then. lets have a go at it.

Do you know why there is no founding father of Hinduism because brits are the real founding fathers, Hinduism became world religion in 19 century, The term hind was only used for geographic location not for any religion, This religion was created for their divide and rule policy, play one religion against the another and it will be easier to control people. We do not find the word “Hindu” in any ancient Hindu (Aryan) literature. The very term Hinduism was coined by brits in 18 century, Santana dharma another term created to replace the word Hindu by given by Muslim invaders.

If the british wanted to divide and rule using religion as the basis of division, wont it have been more convenient to let the several sects remain separate instead of uniting into a single 'hindu' block?

Do you know how manyy times the name of Pharaoh Kufu is mentioned on the great pyramid of Giza? Once. So I dont see how not mentioning the word 'hindu' is such a big deal. Also would you kindly tell me the names of the religions followed by the Romans and the Greeks? They havnt named their religions either my friend.

Whenever the question is asked who the Hindus are, the familiar reply is the Hindus are none other than the Aryans. If asked what is the evidence to claim that they are Aryans, then they will produce their Rig-Veda to prove that they are Aryans.

We dont claim to be aryans. We just claim their cultural heritage which we have preserved better than you have. Texts from the time are not limited to the rig veda. There are three more Vedas, each compiled closer and closer to the Gangetic plains. There are Upnishads and then there are texts like Ramayna and Mahabharata which are both written by 'Aryans' and almost entirely set in India.

Now the question is, do Hindus look like Aryans? We know Rig Veda hymns delineate the Indus and its tributaries from Punjab in the east to Afghanistan in the west. The river to which all these rivers hasten – ‘like mothers crying to their sons’ is the Sindhu (Indus). Rig Veda is about Punjab, principally; its vision also encompasses what is now eastern Afghanistan and North West Pakistan. Sind and peninsular India are unknown. There are rare mentions of rivers in the east (Bharti Rivers). The Yumna which runs through Delhi is invoked a handful times, The Ganges no more than twice at the most and the Saraswati, a fabled eastern river that dried up around 1000 BCE is only praised in later layers of text. To the sorrow of the Hindus, The Rig Veda has its heartland in Pakistan.

read above again. "hinduism" isnt limited to Rig Veda. There is no monolithic book which everyone follows. The Rig Veda is set in Pakistan/Afganistan does not mean the people didnt move into the Gangetic plans and south India later.

Another question is, did the Rig Vedic Aryans worship idols? No they did not, in fact they denounced idol worshipping, Idol worshipping is a Dravidian religion not an Aryan religion and it is indigenous only to Bharat. The Rig-Veda consists of 1028 hymns. The 1028 hymns are arranged in ten books or mandalas, are a paen to the mystifying power of Nature. Rig Vedic Aryans were nature worshippers. The gods of Hinduism are consolingly anthropomorphic; but those in the Rig Veda are natural phenomena: Agni (fire), Aditi (dawn), Indra (thunder) and Sindhu. Bhartis should change the names of their missiles which they named after ancient Pakistani gods. Those Aryans who migrated to Ganges valley later denounced the Aryans of Indus valley. Mountains and deserts of Indus valley even the lush Punjab were vilified fit only for Mlecchas. Now why should I accept my ancestors were Hindus when the very religion they hated was the idol worshipping, I have no doubt that Porus was not a Hindu, he must a nature worshipper.

Firstly what proof do you have for or otherwise that the Aryans were not idol worshipers? The chances are they were. Almost all ancient religions had idol worshiping in one form or another.

As for the current hindu gods, you need a crash course. Indra is still there among them as the king of 'devtas'. The rest of them are present as well with various names. Pawan(wind), Agni(fire), Kaam(lust), varun(water). With over 33 million gods we can account for every force of nature and most other metaphysical phenomena.

When NW Pakistan and Punjab was made part of Pakistan fake archaeological material was concocted to prove Rig Vedic had its heartland in Ganges Valley which was a much later phenomena just as all the major cities of Indus Valley civilization came in Pakistan, The sad Hindus of Bharat concocted fake archaeological materials in Gujarat, Khalistan and Rajasthan but still most of historian to come to Pakistan for archaeological evidence this is why the name of civilization is INDUS VALLEY NOT BHARTA VALLEY.

conspiracy by hindus again? they must have had a lot of time on their hands to plant the evidence. They didnt have any poverty in India at all to concern themselves about. Oh wait.

Bharat has started a campaign of renaming cities back to the local name from an English/Persian/Arabic names, They have changed names of Bombay, Calcutta, Bangalore, Chennai, dozen others and dozens of other cities names are about be changed Ahmadabad to Karnavati.

I dont see how this is relevant. Anyways
So you say that Bombay Chennai and Kolkata were pre existing cities? However the historical evidence says otherwise. These were all cities founded by the British to rule india from. they did not have any pre existing names because they did not exist. The names they have been given now are just what the cities were called by the locals.

 

[Truth Teller]

The Arabs are just asking to taste a beating from us Pakistanis... dont worry... its the regimes that is the problem... not the people...

Ask the Pakistanis living in Gulf Countries about how your arab brothers treat them.

The author of this article who thinks that unified ummah is not a realistic goal needs to get over his agoraphobia and visit some other Muslim countries...

The Muslim world is too diverse for a unified ummah... culturally, linguistically, historically.

 

[Rig Vedic]

Actually the Vedic chronology is from east to west. The oldest books of the Rig Veda are set in the Ganga-Yamuna-Saraswati region (A great book about the Great Book).

The father of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, although the grandson of a Gujarati Hindu, was very clear that his civilization was different from and in conflict with the civilization of his ancestors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Nation_Theory). How can you claim a claim a civilization after you have converted to a conflicting civilization.

And Pakistan was created as a Bengali majority nation, so it is not linked to the Indus Valley per se.

Not to mention the fact that for most of the last 2500 years, the Indus Valley has been ruled from capitals located in the modern-day India like Patna, Thanesar, Delhi and Agra.


Map of Vedic India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_period):

I am not saying that Pakistanis cannot be proud of King Porus of the Yaduvanshi clan (i.e. Krishna's clan), or of Taxila. In fact, I would welcome it if Pakistanis go back to the culture of the Vedas, Sanskrit and Buddhism. But the attempt to divorce that history from that of the rest of India is very artificial.

 

[muse]

I am not saying that Pakistanis cannot be proud of King Porus of the Yaduvanshi clan (i.e. Krishna's clan), or of Taxila and so on. But the attempt to divorce that history from that of the rest of India is very artificial.

Actually, it's your claim of a single continuum of linear history, that is, artificial -- the philosophy of history and religion in the service of the State is as flawed and dangerous in India, as it has been elsewhere. These are Creations - pay attention to the words, in particular, CREATIONS - we must show these creations the respect they deserve and not which the ideologies of the state, command, if we want to be thinking persons.

 

[RazorMC]

The question: Since secularism implies separation of state and religion, what happens to the Sharia and the people in Pakstan who want to see it implemented (the real version without bearded armed men forcing it on people)?

The law applies to everyone and no-one is exempt, be he a judge, a religious leader or the Caliph himself.
I can not see where state and religion mix in Islam.
Many Muslim scholars don't have the long beard and some only have a moustache. Doesn't this imply that the law and state are different?

As for ownership, we should not shun something out of our text books just because it is unrelated to Islam or pre-dates it.
Someone else is using the culture that originated in Pakistan. Look at Egypt. It has started demanding Pre-Islamic Egyptian artefacts back from countries who plundered it.