What is 'Civilizational Continuity'?

[Rusty]

See, it's a work in progress.

In 1947, in a new nation, created on the basis of the Islamic identity, and with a Bengali majority, the notion of Pakistan as a successor of the Indus Valley civilization would have appeared quite far-fetched.

This inner struggle between conflicting identities will continue, that is the cross you have to bear. You are not the same as you were in 1947, and doubtless in another couple of decades, you will not be where you are today. The changes are a cumulative result of the thoughts and choices of millions of individuals.

Your argument is as silly as saying that Indians have an identity crisis with their caveman ancestors.
I am sorry to burst your wet dreams but there is no "inner struggle" or "conflict in identity" in Pakistan.
We Pakistanis are Muslim, full stop.

Being Muslims does not mean that we are not proud of our ancestors. Same as Europe is proud of Greek/Romans, Egyptians are proud of Ancient Egypt, etc etc.

The "problem" with Pakistan is that we have a neighbor who is still bitter and angry that we left their faith.
They still have dreams of re-converting us to Hinduism and bringing us back to our old ways.

They may not say it in words but their motives are made clear by discussions like this.

 

[Developereo]

It is one of the possibilities, though not the likeliest. Known and accepted history says different. The features of the girl and the priest say different.

Most Pakistanis from what I have seen here would be aghast at even the thought of being the natural gentic inheritors of those lips, the nose, and those cheekbones. And would point west instead with great chest thumping and thumbing of their aquiline "Aryan" noses.

Joe has already pointed out why it is dangerous to read too much into facial features of statues, but let me repeat my wild speculation: there is every possibility that there was trade between the IVC and South India -- certainly the linguistic links are there -- so it is not impossible that the IVC people might have seen and modeled some South Indian individuals.

South Asia is a modern political term. It is also a term of refuge, of convenience for Pakistanis and Bangladeshis not comfortable with links to anything Indian - though still wanting their share of heritage pie.

Any Indian using such must do so at the altar of political correctness - cause I cannot fathom any other reason to so readily forfeit one's civilizational birthright.

Usage of the term 'South Asia' is an indication of sharing the heritage, to disambiguate from claiming exclusivity for Republic of India. While in normal conversation the generic word 'Indian' is used by all of us, the extra clarification here is only in context of this thread.

living in a multi-faith soceity along with the Hindu majority

Is that the new metric of civilizational continuity now? To live in a multi-faith society?
What international precedents or authorities can you provide to justify this new rabbit out of the hat?

 

[Rig Vedic]

We Pakistanis are Muslim, full stop. ...

The "problem" with Pakistan is that we have a neighbor who is still bitter and angry that we left their faith.

Everybody can have their point of view.

I am not angry or bitter at anything.

It is up to each individual to discover what appeals to him.

 

[Developereo]

created on the basis of the Islamic identity

I think this angle has already been discussed and rejected by us as a valid objection to Pakistan claiming our ancient history.

 

[vsdoc]

I believe the point made here is really the one I have the most difficulty understanding, and have attempted to argue against, in an attempt to understand the reasoning behind it ...

As I argued in response to KS, I do not see the 'modern Political Nation State' as either supporting or negating the argument of 'civilizational continuity' - whether secular or theocratic, the 'modern Political Nation State' provides a constitutional framework of laws preventing the nation from sliding into 'lawless chaos' - KS himself argued that there was a distinction between the 'modern Nation State' and 'culture', with the latter being more indicative of 'civilizational continuity'.

So, returning to your point quoted above, what part of modern Pakistani culture somehow represents a 'tectonic civilizational shift', outside of religion?

I am saying much the same then as which was argued by KS.

We need to separate the political nation state of the present from what we mean by the dominant civilization and its continuity.

As I just responded to Developer, we have it. You are on your way to losing it.

Some indicators of civilizational shift?

Besides the fact that Pakistan needed to exist in the first place????????

Intolerance to other faiths. That is not Indian. Never has been. Everything else pales in comparison but I will continue.

Religious fanaticism, fundamentalism, widespread anarchy, violence, bloodshed, killing in the name of religion. That is not Indian.

Your faith and your holy script. Not Indian.

Circumcision - male or female. Most definitely not Indian.

Religious indoctrination in the form of the predominant education at the level of the masses (madrassas). Not Indian.

The burqa and your treatment of and views towards women (property, inheritance, marriage, working, etc.). That is not Indian.

Celebrating foreign invaders and associating strongly (historically, spiritually, culturally, militarily, socially) with alien people, be they Arab or Iranic or Turkic. That is not Indian.

Proudly proclaiming that you ruled Indians for a thousand years, as slaves, etc. That is not Indian.

Waging wars against India and Indians and calling them your blood enemies. Definitely not Indian man. Even if you may believe that you are waging war against all Indians (Hindus, Sikhs, etc.) but the 170 odd million Indian muslims.

But, from a genetic perspective, if the majority of the IVC population had shifted East, the genes of the current inhabitants of the Indus Valley would be significantly distinct from those to the East, would they not?

Not East, but deep South. I believe Joe has already elaborated on this point in a previous post of his.

How do you tangibly define 'Hinduism as a way of life', for the multiple and disparate religious communities in India?

By Hindutva as our nationalistic cultural identity as a people as against Hinduism as a religion and a faith.

Even we Parsis who had no links to this land til 1300 years ago, have adopted the culture and the ethos of the land. In the way we think. In the way we engage with people of different faiths. In the way we speak. In the way we eat. In the way we dress. In the way we celebrate, what we celebrate. Even in some of our religious rituals.

Why should it be alien to people that have been on this soil and of the same genetic racial stock for millenia before that?

 

[Rusty]

Everybody can have their point of view.

I am not angry or bitter at anything.

It is up to each individual to discover what appeals to him.

Then why do you people spend countless hours on this forum yapping about "identity crisis" this, and "inner conflict" that?

I don't sit around and question other peoples faith and culture with my free time.
Why do you people do it?
The answer is quit obvious, as I pointed out before.

 

[Rig Vedic]

I think this angle has already been discussed and rejected by us as a valid objection to Pakistan claiming our ancient history.

Nobody is objecting to anything ... everything is entirely a matter of your choices.

 

[Developereo]

Then why do you people spend countless hours on this forum yapping about "identity crisis" this, and "inner conflict" that?

It's one of those stock responses that people give when they run out of material.

For China, its democracy and human rights.
For India, its toilets and poverty.
For Pakistan, its foreign aid and identity crisis.

 

[Rig Vedic]

Then why do you people spend countless hours on this forum yapping about "identity crisis" this, and "inner conflict" that?

Obviously there are conflicts between the Islamic and Dharmic world-views. The Dharmic part of your heritage has been purged, so you personally may not feel any conflict at all.

In a free society, it should ultimately be an individual matter. Although under Sharia law, certain individual choices can be capital offences.

 

[Rusty]

I am saying much the same then as which was argued by KS.

We need to separate the political nation state of the present from what we mean by the dominant civilization and its continuity.

As I just responded to Developer, we have it. You are on your way to losing it.

Some indicators of civilizational shift?

Besides the fact that Pakistan needed to exist in the first place????????

Intolerance to other faiths. That is not Indian. Never has been. Everything else pales in comparison but I will continue.

Religious fanaticism, fundamentalism, widespread anarchy, violence, bloodshed, killing in the name of religion. That is not Indian.

Your faith and your holy script. Not Indian.

Circumcision - male or female. Most definitely not Indian.

Religious indoctrination in the form of the predominant education at the level of the masses (madrassas). Not Indian.

The burqa and your treatment of and views towards women (property, inheritance, marriage, working, etc.). That is not Indian.

Celebrating foreign invaders and associating strongly (historically, spiritually, culturally, militarily, socially) with alien people, be they Arab or Iranic or Turkic. That is not Indian.

Proudly proclaiming that you ruled Indians for a thousand years, as slaves, etc. That is not Indian.

Waging wars against India and Indians and calling them your blood enemies. Definitely not Indian man. Even if you may believe that you are waging war against all Indians (Hindus, Sikhs, etc.) but the 170 odd million Indian muslims.



Not East, but deep South. I believe Joe has already elaborated on this point in a previous post of his.



By Hindutva as our nationalistic cultural identity as a people as against Hinduism as a religion and a faith.

Even we Parsis who had no links to this land til 1300 years ago, have adopted the culture and the ethos of the land. In the way we speak. In the way we eat. In the way we dress. Even in some of our religious rituals.

Why should it be alien to people that have been on this soil and of the same genetic racial stock for millenia before that?

what a bunch of utter nonsense.

1. There is no intolerance of religion in Pakistan. That is just your fantasy. Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, and Hindus leave peacefully with each other for the most part (yes there are a few incidences here and there)
And I know that India for the most part tolerates other religions, but since you chose to make a stupid comment, I a want to know what you think of this thread
http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/183662-congress-govt-persecuting-hindus-like-hitler-persecuted-jews-4.html#post2991740
Seems to be a lot of hate for minorities from Hindus on this very forum

2. No one is killing in the name of religion, people are killing for their own motives (revenge, greed, power, etc)
And I know for the fact that people in India have killed each other in the name of religion, are you denying this?

3. agreed, Quran is not Indian

4. agreed

5. Again a stupid claim. We liberated the women of South Asia, where Hindus in the past (and even some today) view women as a burden or property, Muslims gave them their rights. India has one of the highest levels of female infanticide in the world, and those innocent girls only crime was to be born a girl. So I guess by your logic, murdering baby girls is a very Indian (and thus good?) thing.

6. This is the funniest one yet. Your whole religion and language hinge on a foreign invasion. The Aryans invaded you and forced their langue of Sanskrit. The Vadas are stories about how the (good) Aryan invaders killed and triumphed over the (evil) indigenous Dravidian. And this is your Holy book!!


7. Really pride is not Indian? have you read any comments by any Indian members here?

8. and this is topping on the cake.
YOUR ENTIRE HISTORY HAS BEEN STATES FIGHTING EACH OTHER.
India has never been united historically. The history of India has been war and blood, and not just by invaders but by indigenous kingdoms.


I knew that you people were living in lala land and what not but this just takes the cake.
I am speechless, I don't know what else to say to this delusion you have posted.

Obviously there are conflicts between the Islamic and Dharmic world-views. The Dharmic part of your heritage has been purged, so you personally may not feel any conflict at all.

In a free society, it should ultimately be an individual matter. Although under Sharia law, certain individual choices can be capital offences.

Right it is a personal matter, and when we see people like you, who have no problems telling lies about thing you clearly know nothing about that we become thankful that our ancestors got enlightened by Islam.

And yes, your insinuation is a lie, so tell me, why should I consider a faith that has no qualms about lying?

 

[vsdoc]

Is that the new metric of civilizational continuity now? To live in a multi-faith society?
What international precedents or authorities can you provide to justify this new rabbit out of the hat?

I was explaining to AM how inspite of sharing the same FAITH and the same BLOOD as the same people, living on essentially the same LAND (disregarding current political boundaries), within 60 odd years (not even the blink of an eye by civilizational standards) how a perceptible change was already occuring between Indian muslims and Pakistani muslim society.

Given time that difference will only grow. Till such time as the two groups would be unrecognisable from each other regardles of their common past.

A different civilization.

The muslims who chose India and lived on as Indians retain their link to their civilization in spite of an alien faith (like other alien extra-civilizational Indian faiths) because of their continuation as part of a society which maintains its unbroken civilizational links thanks mainly to the majority that still practices the ancient faith.

Were that to be lost or displaced from its majority status, that link would be lost.

In Pakistan's case, it was only more cataclysmic because of the nature of the formation of your state and the basis for it.

Namely Islam. Out of and separate from Hindu predominant India.

You CHOSE to break the civilizational link. You are welcome to take it back. We are not the ones who will be standing in your way.

 

[Rig Vedic]

Right it is a personal matter, and when we see people like you, who have no problems telling lies about thing you clearly know nothing about that we become thankful that our ancestors got enlightened by Islam.

And yes, your insinuation is a lie, so tell me, why should I consider a faith that has no qualms about lying?

What lies? Are you talking about the punishment of apostacy under Sharia law? You may find this useful:

Legal opinion on apostasy by the Fatwa committee at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the highest Islamic institution in the world, concerning the case of a man who converted to Christianity: "Since he left Islam, he will be invited to express his regret. If he does not regret, he will be killed pertaining to rights and obligations of the Islamic law." The Fatwa also mentions that the same applies to his children after they reach maturity.

 

[Rusty]

What lies? Are you talking about the punishment of apostacy under Sharia law? You may find this useful:

Legal opinion on apostasy by the Fatwa committee at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the highest Islamic institution in the world, concerning the case of a man who converted to Christianity: "Since he left the Islam, he will be invited to express his regret. If he does not regret, he will be killed pertaining to rights and obligations of the Islamic law." The Fatwa also mentions that the same applies to his children after they reach maturity.

Do you know what a fatwa is?
A fatwa is a non binding ruling by a scholar.
Fatwas are not part of Sharia. They are just the opinions of people.

So once again, does your faith tell you to lie on purpose or are you simply lying due to ignorance ?

 

[Big Boss]

Some general questions on this issue of 'civilizational continuity':

-What constitutes 'civilizational continuity'?

Its the culture, traditions, belief and practices. Perfect example = India

- Do increasing numbers of people speaking English better than their native tongues (which are themselves evolving) constitute 'continuity'?

Its about perspective............. If India have 100 million english speakers and their number will grow to 200-300 even then their number will be far lesser then the Hindi speakers. So the fact remains that the native language remain the language of the majority.

- Do increasing numbers of people wearing 'Western clothing' the majority of the time constitute 'continuity'?

Same argument as the language, already answered.

- Do increasing numbers of people leaning towards 'agnosticism, atheism' constitute continuity?

No that's not correct Indians are more religious then they were in 1960s or 70s. And Hinduism believes that there are hundreds of ways to reach the god.

The phrase is bandied about a lot, but what does it actually refer to?

It means that the people are living civilized on a piece of land for the thousands of years and still practicing those beliefs, practices, traditions and cultures like India.

 

[Rig Vedic]

Do you know what a fatwa is?
A fatwa is a non binding ruling by a scholar.
Fatwas are not part of Sharia. They are just the opinions of people.

So once again, does your faith tell you to lie on purpose or are you simply lying due to ignorance ?

I would think the scholars of Al-Azhar know a lot more about Islam than you do.

Obviously exercising free speech under Sharia can lead to the death penalty, as we know from the laws that are on the books today in Pakistan.

Anyway, we are going off-topic.

My only point is that in a free society, people have the freedom to express themselves and make individual choices. Pakistan is not there yet, but as and when it gets there, it will facilitate its socio-cultural evolution.