Why is great philosopher Kautilya not part of Pakistan’s historical consciousness?

[Narcissist]

Kushan first pakhtun empire lol you are funny.

K buddy... if you say so. Kushans are "punjabi tribes" apparently. What sounds more realistic.

This:

Early historians (i.e. Herodotus i.e. father of History) mention Pactyans as being in Gandhara, and Kushans came in, made it a great city, the "crown jewel" of Bactria, made a massive Stupa i.e. (possibly the biggest) monument, that was visible from afar, and essentially built an empire centered from that city. They did this by boosting the Greco-Buddhist traditions of the Indo-Greek kingdom (i.e. Pakhtuns).

Or this:

Kushans are modern day Punjabi tribes from Taxiilllaaaaaa

 

[Kabira]

Curious question, Why do Pakistanis think Brahmins are evil? Whats the narrative there in Pakistan?

Could be something to do urdu literature post 1947. Narrative is that brahmins have forced dalits to remain their slaves among other things.

 

[padamchen]

@Narcissist

A further note to your point of corruption of message.

This is a theory I do not buy into at all. I personally believe it is a man-made narrative pushed to explain inorganic growth of a faith through conversion.

Especially by those faiths which came later. Seeing as they came in at a time when there already existed major world faiths.

How else to capture the mind and spread one's own?

That's where the "corruption of message" narrative stems from.

Faith is not Windows, where you have successive Versions V1.0, V1.1, V1.2, then a V.2.0 and so on.

I stick by our ancient view on faith. The message is always there.

If man corrupts it, then it is man's duty to look for it and find it.

Instead what has been happening is other men coming and telling him not to bother. That they have the better, clearer, purer message.

Men who got the message a few millennia later.

I mean, how does that even work in terms of completely alien civilizations?

I repeat. These are my personal views and are open to challenge, acceptance, or outright rejection.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Kal Muah]

Could be something to do urdu literature post 1947. Narrative is that brahmins have forced dalits to remain their slaves among other things.

Post 47 how come dalits become an important thing for Pakistanis? Since dalits are also hindus, and I presume pakistanis were never hindu friendly during partition

 

[Kabira]

K buddy... if you say so. Kushans are "punjabi tribes" apparently. What sounds more realistic.

This:

Early historians (i.e. Herodotus i.e. father of History) mention Pactyans as being in Gandhara, and Kushans came in, made it a great city, the "crown jewel" of Bactria, made a massive Stupa i.e. (possibly the biggest) monument, that was visible from afar, and essentially built an empire centered from that city. They did this by boosting the Greco-Buddhist traditions of the Indo-Greek kingdom (i.e. Pakhtuns).

Or this:

Kushans are modern day Punjabi tribes from Taxiilllaaaaaa

I didn't say they were punjabi tribes lol Kushans were pastoral nomads who came from western China and spoke unknown language. As it happen with all nomads who settle they adopted dominant local culture which wasn't pashtun. As pashto came around 700 years ago or later from south/Balochistan. Its hard to pin point current day decedents of Kushans but some their genes likely survived in local population till today.

Post 47 how come dalits become an important thing for Pakistanis? Since dalits are also hindus, and I presume pakistanis were never hindu friendly during partition

Pakistanis learned dalit word from Indians. Dalits are not hindus, they are outside dharma sharma. Anyway brahmins declaring every non-brahmin inferior to them isn't a lie, its fundamental part of hindu religion. Like fairness and equality is part of Islam.

In Pakistan British converted chuhra comunity in to Christianity and gave them sanitation jobs all over Pakistan. But now being christian in Pakistan is associated with sweeper and people blame Pakistani muslims for it and say look they follow caste system. You can find them even in remote areas of FATA who speak pashto now. This is not caste system, sorry.

 

[Kal Muah]

I didn't say they were punjabi tribes lol Kushans were pastoral nomads who came from western China and spoke unknown language. As it happen with all nomads who settle they adopted dominant local culture which wasn't pashtun. As pashto came around 700 years ago or later from south/Balochistan. Its hard to pin point current day decedents of Kushans but some their genes likely survived in local population till today.



Pakistanis learned dalit word from Indians. Dalits are not hindus, they are outside dharma sharma. Anyway brahmins declaring every non-brahmin inferior to them isn't a lie, its fundamental part of hindu religion. Like fairness and equality is part of Islam.

In Pakistan British converted chuhra comunity in to Christianity and gave them sanitation jobs all over Pakistan. But now being christian in Pakistan is associated with sweeper and people blame Pakistani muslims for it and say look they follow caste system. You can find them even in remote areas of FATA who speak pashto now. This is not caste system, sorry.

Wrong Dalits are hindus, they are a segment of Shudra caste. Regardless, Dharma Shastra has nothing to do with caste, it applies to everyone irrespective of their caste, creed, religion or sex. Brahmins declaring themselves higher then other castes is never a part of Hindu religion, they used to enjoy high status in society since they were the learned ones, just like how we respect scientists and professors more than army jawans or buisnessmen or carpenter, this is just plain ignorance, hatred and bias from your part which is clear from this holier than thou statement of yours "Like fairness and equality is part of Islam." If Islam is so fair and equal how come Sunnis hate Shias so much and why did bangladesh break off from Pakistan?

 

[xairhossi]

Early historians (i.e. Herodotus i.e. father of History) mention Pactyans as being in Gandhara, and Kushans came in, made it a great city, the "crown jewel" of Bactria, made a massive Stupa i.e. (possibly the biggest) monument, that was visible from afar, and essentially built an empire centered from that city. They did this by boosting the Greco-Buddhist traditions of the Indo-Greek kingdom (i.e. Pakhtuns).

The Indo-Greeks = Pashtuns? lol

Kushans originated in the Bactria-Sogdiana region, East Iranics of the vicinity like Pamiris, Yaghnobis etc. would have the most derived ancestry from them however other people from the former regions of their kingdom, with high steppe ancestry may have Kushan blood as well.

 

[Mian Babban]

I have read in Afghanistan's books that Kuchi of Pashtuns is derived from Kushan........but this is non-sense and pesudohistory......Kuchi is simply the Kuch of Farsi (کوچ کرنا) which means migration.....the proper word for Pashtun nomads is in fact Powanda'h (پونده)

I believe a distinct identity of Awghan or Afghan (Pashtun) already existed in the Kushan period, and they were contemporaries of Kushans.......we come across a mention about Abgans (or Awgans as 'b' and 'w' are often interchangeable in iranic languages) in 3rd century CE......Who knows, may be Afghans were resisting the 'foreign' Kushans

 

[django]

Kushans are (possibly the earliest) ancestors of Pakhtuns. They made Gandhara aka Peshawar the Capital, and expanded to become a large empire encompassing all the territory of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and chunks of India. There's a strong argument that they were the very first Pakhtun empire.

Please punju, stop trying to steal heritage. Stop acting like Gangadeshis. I'm sure you have something that you can brag about, without trying to rip off your superiors.

Kushans are not Pashtuns PERIOD! Sure Kushans ruled Afghanistan and what is now Pakistan however their is nothing to indicate they are Pashtuns, do study some history young fellow!

Wrong Brahmins pretty much was all over India and not just Gangatic plains. Infact one of the oldest Rishis Known as Adi-Shakracharya was from south India itself

You should study his work, his four mathas of so-called Bharat, then you will come to the realization that Indus is not and never was part of your Ganga nation.

The Indo-Greeks = Pashtuns? lol

Kushans originated in the Bactria-Sogdiana region, East Iranics of the vicinity like Pamiris, Yaghnobis etc. would have the most derived ancestry from them however other people from the former regions of their kingdom, with high steppe ancestry may have Kushan blood as well.

@Narcissist will probably say Mahmud was a Pashtun lol, no point with arguing with dogmatic folks like him, I would say a Gujjar from Punjab has more of a case to claim Kushan heritage than say a Yousafzia.

Who knows, may be Afghans were resisting the 'foreign' Kushans

A more likely explanation.

 

[Solomon2]

I was discussing this with @Solomon2 yesterday about his America and Canada. He failed to explain why there is the "Derby Line" running through North America creating Canada and USA...A straight line drawn with a ruler. Which separates what. One bunch of English settlers from another bunch of English settlers.

I didn't reply for two reasons: one, it appeared too far off-topic, and two, your characterization of the settlers is oversimplified: Canada was settled by the French before the English won it from France in war, the French were not kicked out, so Canada's character is different.

Those who want to know why the Colonies split from the British Crown can read the U.S. Declaration of Independence. Why Canada did not is Canada's story.

The most important lesson of the U.S.-Canadian border? How peaceful it is. Learn from that! Just imagine if the military on either side was running foreign policy instead of the politicians. Military men are concerned with capabilities: of course, the U.S. has the potential to launch military operations against Canada, as well as vice-versa. But there is no intent on either side for doing so. Both countries have sufficiently efficient law enforcement that violent escapees over the border isn't much of a concern. So the border is mostly unmarked and unguarded, save on major transit routes. And there has been peace between the U.S. and Canada for two hundred years, even before the two became allies in WWI and WWII.

 

[Nexus]

Pakistan doesn't have only Hindu past that was also gone with people how migrated to India after partition

one of them was my Great Grandfather,a businessman from Karanchi who had to leave that city for some "Historical Reasons."

say hi to him if you go down before me.

 

[xairhossi]

I believe a distinct identity of Awghan or Afghan (Pashtun) already existed in the Kushan period, and they were contemporaries of Kushans.......we come across a mention about Abgans (or Awgans as 'b' and 'w' are often interchangeable in iranic languages) in 3rd century CE......Who knows, may be Afghans were resisting the 'foreign' Kushans

'W' doesnt really exist in Indo-Iranian languages (both Iranic and Indic), only 'V' does and the interchangeability of v and b exists in almost all Indo-Iranian languages.
Do you have more info about these Abgans? afaik, Afghan is a foreign term used by Persians or Arabs for Pashtuns, sometimes only specific Pashtun tribes are called Afghan whilst others are not.

@Narcissist will probably say Mahmud was a Pashtun lol, no point with arguing with dogmatic folks like him, I would say a Gujjar from Punjab has more of a case to claim Kushan heritage than say a Yousafzia.

Interestingly, many Yusufzais I've known were adamant in saying that they were descendants of Greeks (Indo-Greeks of Alexander?).

 

[django]

Interestingly, many Yusufzais I've known were adamant in saying that they were descendants of Greeks (Indo-Greeks of Alexander?).

Perhaps this Narcissistt fellow is one of them, all the Yousafzais I know claim descent from indigenous Pashtun Afghans.Kudos sir

 

[xairhossi]

Perhaps this Narcissistt fellow is one of them, all the Yousafzais I know claim descent from indigenous Pashtun Afghans.Kudos sir

It's not that they don't consider themselves Pashtuns, but that they said that they were descendants of Alexander's army and still considered themselves Pashtuns. Some Dardics like Kalash claim such descent as well, but that's because they don't have much written records and are very isolated and were influenced by British colonial writings.

 

[django]

It's not that they don't consider themselves Pashtuns, but that they said that they were descendants of Alexander's army and still considered themselves Pashtuns. Some Dardics like Kalash claim such descent as well, but that's because they don't have much written records and are very isolated and were influenced by British colonial writings.

Modern day Pashtuns themselves are a mosaic of different ancient tribes who had settled in South and East Afghanistan as well as KPK, so who knows, but one thing I can say with a fair degree of confidence is that the ancient Kushans were not Pashtuns yet their may be a some Pashtun or Pashtunised tribes who have Kushan genes flowing through their their blood.Kudos sir