Ancient History not Appreciated by Pakistanis?

[Khajur]

Originally Posted by Milind

Well, I went through the thread pages & was amazed like anything.
I was wondering why pakistanis are so ignorant of established historical facts. But, when I found what history pakistanis are taught in their schools, I realized the problem.
I know that it is unusual for Islamists to use reason ( Don't take it otherwise), but please try if you are really seeking truth. I'm not an expert but can help a bit. I believe so...

I start with the following-
* Some people calling absurd things like India never existed before 1947 etc . To them, true, India as it was just before 1947 partition, was not under a single central rule (except the latest british) as a whole. But unlike 'Pakistan', the term 'India' was not invented in the 20th century AD, it was always there. The ancient outside world always referred to the region ( or part of it) from Hindukush mountanis to the river brahmaputra & down south up to the tip of the peninsula as one nation, one civilisation - by the name India & likes. Proofs are just so many. Some of them in chronological order are-

Proof: * The 5th century BCE Naqsh -e-Rustam eddict of Parsi king Dariyhu ( Sanskrit: Drayhu, Greek: Darius I) refers to his victory over regions of modern balochistan-pakistani punjab as victory over India. (India as Farsi 'HIND')

*Ancient greeks refer to the region as INDIA. The professional historians who came with the armies of Alexander in 326 BCE , to them crossing Mountain Hindu kush (mentioned as 'Indicus caucasus') is crossing into INDIA, Gandhara- Arachosia as first INDIAN provinces won, Hemphis ( Sanskrit: Ambhi) of Taxila as INDIAN Traitor, Porus( Sanskrit: Puru) of modern Lahore-sialkot -Mirpur area as a brave INDIAN King, Kingdom of Gangetic planes(mentioned as Gangadirai) as the most powerful INDIAN kingdom, mallis of Malva ( modern Multan) as a deadly INDIAN tribe whose leader Singhran critically injured Alexander. To the invading Macedonians- from Kalinga in the far east to the lower Indus valley, all was INDIA.
All subsequent Greek-Roman-Arab documents refer to any part of the subcontinent as INDIA.

Likewise, the chinese travellers, whether they entered into Assam in the east or Swat in the west, they wrote that they had entered into INDIA. Professional Arabian historian Al Baruni who came with the armies of Turk Sultan Mehmood Ghajani referred to punjanb sindh gujrat gangetic planes all as Hindu civilised HIND(= India). At the time all these regions were independant kingdoms & no one was called hind, so what was HIND that applied to all? He titled his book as 'Kitab UL HIND'. Also, at closure of 15th century AD, Europeans arrived at Malabar in the far south kerala, but declared that they had arrived INDIA.

Continuously, throughout recorded history, to the outside world the subcontinent was one nation- INDIA. And to the residents, it was always Jambudweep(Divine ancient Land)or Bharata Varsh(Land of Bharatas) or Aryavarta (land of Aryans)or Hindustan(Land of Hindus).

Pakistan was never there before the radcliff line was drawn. There never was a cultural or even political separation between the areas today called pakistan & rest of india before 1947 along the radcliff line. So all things prior to that in modern Pakistani areas were Indian & must be properly referred to as India & Indian.

One last thought, I'm a so happy that despite all the Mullah Islamist propaganda , some pakistanis openly accepting the obvious that their forefathers were not Arabians or Turkish. Their blood is like a drop in ocean.

One can even add the name of navigator like Christopher Columbus to the list who, though failed to reach his desired destinaion "the Indies"(latin for india/hindustan) and instead landed in the Bahamas,still mistook the North-American island for the indian subcontinent, he referred to its inhabitants as "Indios".

[manishmaithani]

India's caste system 'is thousands of years old', DNA shows - Telegraph


Everyone should read this new development.

[advaita]

It is common understanding that every person following non-Abhramic religions of the subcontinent is a Pagan (mushrik / kafir - your choice) obviously because they are still following the traditions of IVC and even pre-IVC periods almost in-toto.
However if Pakistanis want to acknowledge their non-muslim history, it should not be a big deal for non-muslims of the subcontinent esp since we have a huge muslim+christen populations who obviously cannot be denied there history to which they have as much ownership as a non-muslim.

[advaita]

Originally Posted by manishmaithani

India's caste system 'is thousands of years old', DNA shows - Telegraph


Everyone should read this new development.

It also says something about Arya-Dravid divide actually not being a real one.

IMO, the hugely analogous ideas in Thirukural and Upanishadic teachings, inspite of nil relationship between Tamil and Sanskrit, would already have laid the Arya-Dravid question to rest. Or at least for the knowledgable people of India.

I personally have a hunch that upanishads were attached to the ritulistic vedas through gyan khand of vedas primarily because the ideas of upanishads existed even before Vedas. These older ideas could have been compositions like Thirukural. The apparent difference in time can easily be explained through the fact of the smriti traditions of the ancient Indians (something to which pagans would have been better disposed).

Thirukural English Translation and Commentary - by Rev Dr G U Pope, Rev W H Drew, Rev John Lazarus and Mr F W Ellis

[eastwatch]

Originally Posted by manishmaithani

India's caste system 'is thousands of years old', DNA shows - Telegraph
Everyone should read this new development.

You have termed the articles message as a new development, but in reality it is not. Arya immigration and the subsequent caste system was not an invention by the British. In reality, the caste system was always there among the Hindus since historical times.

During the first one thousand years after the Arya arrivals from the central asia, there were mixing of bloods among different groups of people. After this period, the Arya supremacists introduced the caste system to preserve their own lineage. This is the history of creation of Hindu caste system.

After this introduction, there were very little mixing of bloods, because every one married within his/her own caste. However, in this modern age this system should be discouraged and discontinued. A religion should be there to unite people and not to divide them.

[Milind]

Originally Posted by eastwatch

You have termed the articles message as a new development, but in reality it is not. Arya immigration and the subsequent caste system was not an invention by the British. In reality, the caste system was always there among the Hindus since historical times.

During the first one thousand years after the Arya arrivals from the central asia, there were mixing of bloods among different groups of people. After this period, the Arya supremacists introduced the caste system to preserve their own lineage. This is the history of creation of Hindu caste system.

After this introduction, there were very little mixing of bloods, because every one married within his/her own caste. However, in this modern age this system should be discouraged and discontinued. A religion should be there to unite people and not to divide them.

What the hell? There is nothing racial about the caste system. What you told as facts are now proven frauds. Aryas never arrived in India. Everything from archaeology to anthropology confirms this. Update your antique mindset

[RobbieS]

Originally Posted by Milind

What the hell? There is nothing racial about the caste system. What you told as facts are now proven frauds. Aryas never arrived in India. Everything from archaeology to anthropology confirms this. Update your antique mindset

Dude, I'd disagree on that. Genetic evidence suggest a link of the Indian population (above the Satpuras) with that of the Central Asians. And AIT simply cant be ruled out even though it is debatable as to what led to the end of the Harappa culture.

But I'd say the word invasion is a misnomer. There was more of an amalgamation of the Aryans with the local population whose culture was already in decline.

I'd agree with you on the point that the caste system cant entirely be classified as racialy discriminatory. The shudras/dasa/dasyus comprised of both early Aryans as well as the native Harappans.

[Milind]

Originally Posted by RobbieS

Dude, I'd disagree on that. Genetic evidence suggest a link of the Indian population (above the Satpuras) with that of the Central Asians. And AIT simply cant be ruled out even though it is debatable as to what led to the end of the Harappa culture.

But I'd say the word invasion is a misnomer. There was more of an amalgamation of the Aryans with the local population whose culture was already in decline.

I'd agree with you on the point that the caste system cant entirely be classified as racialy discriminatory. The shudras/dasa/dasyus comprised of both early Aryans as well as the native Harappans.

Mind You. The genetic evidence that relates North Indians to Europeans is based on mitochondrial DNA analysis & simply states that the separation of Indians & Europeans took place 40,000 years back. Obviously, nowhere near the archaelogical Harappan culture And indeed, the genetic evidence throws the AIT in the dustbin.

[mosnsg]

Also regarding caste system, one can read stephen knapp, easy to find and one article by swami vivekananda, which is not easy to find online.

[s6demon]

Originally Posted by Khajur

One can even add the name of navigator like Christopher Columbus to the list who, though failed to reach his desired destinaion "the Indies"(latin for india/hindustan) and instead landed in the Bahamas,still mistook the North-American island for the indian subcontinent, he referred to its inhabitants as "Indios".

oh really? does it also mean that the U.S. exited throughout centuries because the U.S. adopted the name "America?"

Truth and reality, an Indian's worse enemy.

[gangwar]

oh really? does it also mean that the U.S. exited throughout centuries because the U.S. adopted the name "America?"

Truth and reality, an Indian's worse enemy.


That was lame from ur side......do u even know why its called America.......what is the reason behind the name west indies.....

go find urself.......dont prove the statement.....

Pakistani truth is the truth....rest all is illusion.........

:india:

[mbaqurashi]

Dear All,
I've came across an information that there are Photos available of those solders which are kept by India in 1971's indo-pak war and yet India didn't release them or not found.

If any of you have any information that where i can find those photos, please let me know on my ID 'mbaqurashi@gmail.com' or at least post the info here. I'd be very obliged if anyone could provide me some web link.

Thanks and best regards.
Bilal Aziz
Lahore.

[neo4moss]

What is the meaning of a nation??? lots of people who were born in either sides went to become famous personalities.. even our PM is born in Pakistan and opposition leader too.. so obviously they have pakistani parents.. but nobody talks like that as there was no nation like that.. of course there were more than 100 of kingdoms both in india and pakistan.. and if u asked them which nation are u at that time will they be saying i am from pakistan or INDIA/// there was no country called india or pakistan until 1947 .. thats a reality