Re: Is South Asian unity between Pakistanis and Indians possible?
^
read my post! Every Religion claims to be the one true Religion. The Muslim claim Islam to be the chosen Religion, the jews think it's their religion, christians think their religion is the one, the hindus believe their religion to be the one, the list can go on! Different opinion lead to to wars!
^
read my post! Every Religion claims to be the one true Religion. The Muslim claim Islam to be the chosen Religion, the jews think it's their religion, christians think their religion is the one, the hindus believe their religion to be the one, the list can go on! Different opinion lead to to wars!
I agree that different opinions lead to wars but religion does not. I believe that Indians and Pakistanis have much more closer opinions (except religion maybe) than Pakistanis and Europeans for example!
Only religion cannot explain wars.
Can it explain Ist and 2nd world wars involving christian states on both sides?
Can it explain Greeks waging wars against fellow Pegans?
Can it explain battles fought between afghan factions throughout 19th and 20th century?
Can it explain why people of different faiths are living harmoniously in states like Malaysia?
Re: Is South Asian unity between Pakistanis and Indians possible?
Most Pakistanis are Indians who practice Islam anyway. Who are you kidding? The majority of Pakistan is Punjabi + Sindhi whose forefathers accepted Islam yet still continued to practice the Indic culture. As for the Urdu speakers, their culture is much more Indian,despite SOME foreign ancestry. A few centuries of Mughal rule has Indianized the Persian, Pakhtun, and Central Asian bloodlines.
Go to any 'Pakistani' event or function change around the names and they looks lndian. In many cases its hard to tell the difference between the two. Especially Punjabis.
Baluchis, Pakhtuns and SOME Kashmiris (not 'Mirpuris' who are really pseudo Punjabis) are truly distinct from "Indian" cultures. This is isn't a point of pride, just has to do with the geographic demarcations. Interestingly Kashmiris also have a hindu heritage not too different from Punjabis and Sindhis, yet their cultural evolution was on a very different trajectory than what is now considered Indian culture. If you proscribe to the Aryan Invasion theory, perhaps Kashmiris are purest in that sense.
The bottom line fro Pakistan is Islam. Without Islam as the state religion you might as well merge Punjab and Sindh with India, no difference to me.
Most Pakistanis are Indians who practice Islam anyway. Who are you kidding? The majority of Pakistan is Punjabi + Sindhi whose forefathers accepted Islam yet still continued to practice the Indic culture. As for the Urdu speakers, their culture is much more Indian,despite SOME foreign ancestry. A few centuries of Mughal rule has Indianized the Persian, Pakhtun, and Central Asian bloodlines.
Go to any 'Pakistani' event or function change around the names and they looks lndian. In many cases its hard to tell the difference between the two. Especially Punjabis.
Baluchis, Pakhtuns and SOME Kashmiris (not 'Mirpuris' who are really pseudo Punjabis) are truly distinct from "Indian" cultures. This is isn't a point of pride, just has to do with the geographic demarcations. Interestingly Kashmiris also have a hindu heritage not too different from Punjabis and Sindhis, yet their cultural evolution was on a very different trajectory than what is now considered Indian culture. If you proscribe to the Aryan Invasion theory, perhaps Kashmiris are purest in that sense.
The bottom line fro Pakistan is Islam. Without Islam as the state religion you might as well merge Punjab and Sindh with India, no difference to me.
Pakistan from 3000 BC to the present:
Indus Valley Civilization: 3000-1500 B.C. i.e. about 1500 yrs. Independent, separate from India.
Aryan period: 1500-522 B.C. i.e. about 978 yrs. Independent, separate from India.
Small semi-independent states: 522-326 B.C. i.e. about 196 yrs. Under the suzerainty of Iran's Kayani (Achaemenian) Empire.
Conquered by Alexander and remained under his successor: 326-300 B.C. i.e. about 26 yrs. Under Greek rulers, not part of India.
Province of Mauryan Empire which included Afghanistan: 300-200 B.C. i.e. about 100 yrs. Part of India, mostly Buddhist rule.
Graeco-Bactrian period: 200-100 B.C. i.e. about 100 yrs. Independent, not part of India.
Saka-Parthian period: 100 B.C.- 70 A.D. i.e. about 170 yrs. Independent, separate from India.
Kushan rule (1st phase): 70-250 A.D. i.e. about 180 yrs. Pakistan-based kingdom ruled over major portion of north India.
Kushan rule (2nd phase): 250-450 A.D. i.e. about 200 yrs. Independent, separate from India.
White Huns and allied tribes (1st phase): 450-650 A.D. i.e. about 200 yrs. Pakistan-based kingdoms ruled over parts of north India.
White Huns (2nd phase--- mixed with other races): 650-1010 A.D. i.e. about 360 yrs. Independent Rajput-Brahmin Kingdoms, not part of India.
Ghaznavids: 1010-1187 A.D. i.e. 177 yrs. Part of Ghaznavid empire, separate from India.
Ghorid and Qubacha periods: 1187-1227 A.D. i.e. about 40 yrs. Independent, not part of India.
Muslim period (Slave dynasty, Khiljis, Tughlaqs, Syeds, Lodhis, Suris and Mughals): 1227-1739 A.D. i.e. about 512 yrs. Under north India based MUSLIM govts.
Nadir Shah and Abdali periods: 1739-1800 A.D. i.e. about 61 yrs. Iranian and Afghan suzerainty, not part of India.
Sikh rule (in Punjab, NWFP and Kashmir), Talpur rule in Sind, Khanate of Kalat in Baluchistan: 1800-1848 A.D. i.e. about 48 yrs. Independent states, not part of India.
British rule: 1848-1947 A.D. i.e. about 99 yrs (1843-1947 in Sind). Part of India under FOREIGN rule.
Muslim rule under the nomenclature of Pakistan: 1947-present. Independent, not part of India.
The above table reveals that during the 5000 years of Pakistan's known history, this country was part of India for a total period of 711 yrs of which 512 yrs were covered by the MUSLIM period and about 100 years each by the Mauryan (mostly BUDDHIST) and British (CHRISTIAN) periods. Can anybody agree with the Indian 'claim' that Pakistan was part of India and that partition was unnatural? It hardly needs much intelligence to understand that Pakistan always had her back towards India and face towards the countries on her west. This is true both commercially and culturally.
its a shame that some pakistanis want to be friendly and cordial with the muslims while the muslims are killing muslims in punjab, sindh and other places
Even if there are some muslims who are killing other muslims. So what?? that is our internal matter
Throughout history, it is europeans themselves who have killed the most europeans. But do you really think that europeans would ever tolerate the killings of europeans by a non-european??
Pakistan from 3000 BC to the present:
Indus Valley Civilization: 3000-1500 B.C. i.e. about 1500 yrs. Independent, separate from India.
Aryan period: 1500-522 B.C. i.e. about 978 yrs. Independent, separate from India.
Small semi-independent states: 522-326 B.C. i.e. about 196 yrs. Under the suzerainty of Iran's Kayani (Achaemenian) Empire.
Conquered by Alexander and remained under his successor: 326-300 B.C. i.e. about 26 yrs. Under Greek rulers, not part of India.
Province of Mauryan Empire which included Afghanistan: 300-200 B.C. i.e. about 100 yrs. Part of India, mostly Buddhist rule.
Graeco-Bactrian period: 200-100 B.C. i.e. about 100 yrs. Independent, not part of India.
Saka-Parthian period: 100 B.C.- 70 A.D. i.e. about 170 yrs. Independent, separate from India.
Kushan rule (1st phase): 70-250 A.D. i.e. about 180 yrs. Pakistan-based kingdom ruled over major portion of north India.
Kushan rule (2nd phase): 250-450 A.D. i.e. about 200 yrs. Independent, separate from India.
White Huns and allied tribes (1st phase): 450-650 A.D. i.e. about 200 yrs. Pakistan-based kingdoms ruled over parts of north India.
White Huns (2nd phase--- mixed with other races): 650-1010 A.D. i.e. about 360 yrs. Independent Rajput-Brahmin Kingdoms, not part of India.
Ghaznavids: 1010-1187 A.D. i.e. 177 yrs. Part of Ghaznavid empire, separate from India.
Ghorid and Qubacha periods: 1187-1227 A.D. i.e. about 40 yrs. Independent, not part of India.
Muslim period (Slave dynasty, Khiljis, Tughlaqs, Syeds, Lodhis, Suris and Mughals): 1227-1739 A.D. i.e. about 512 yrs. Under north India based MUSLIM govts.
Nadir Shah and Abdali periods: 1739-1800 A.D. i.e. about 61 yrs. Iranian and Afghan suzerainty, not part of India.
Sikh rule (in Punjab, NWFP and Kashmir), Talpur rule in Sind, Khanate of Kalat in Baluchistan: 1800-1848 A.D. i.e. about 48 yrs. Independent states, not part of India.
British rule: 1848-1947 A.D. i.e. about 99 yrs (1843-1947 in Sind). Part of India under FOREIGN rule.
Muslim rule under the nomenclature of Pakistan: 1947-present. Independent, not part of India.
The above table reveals that during the 5000 years of Pakistan's known history, this country was part of India for a total period of 711 yrs of which 512 yrs were covered by the MUSLIM period and about 100 years each by the Mauryan (mostly BUDDHIST) and British (CHRISTIAN) periods. Can anybody agree with the Indian 'claim' that Pakistan was part of India and that partition was unnatural? It hardly needs much intelligence to understand that Pakistan always had her back towards India and face towards the countries on her west. This is true both commercially and culturally.
You're misunderstanding what I wrote. I was referring to culture and the fact that two eastern, most populous provinces of Pakistan are both Indian in heritage and culture. Mauryan or some random British rule does not change the fact that Ramlal Bhatti became Raheem Bhatti and continued to live the same (indian) life.
You're misunderstanding what I wrote. I was referring to culture and the fact that two eastern, most populous provinces of Pakistan are both Indian in heritage and culture. Mauryan or some random British rule does not change the fact that Ramlal Bhatti became Raheem Bhatti and continued to live the same (indian) life.
What percentage of india's population is punjabi or sindhi?? Definitely not more than 5%
Read my previous post again. Punjab and sindh have nothing in common with india when it comes to culture
What percentage of india's population is punjabi or sindhi?? Definitely not more than 5%
Read my previous post again. Punjab and sindh have nothing in common with india when it comes to culture
Does it matter? There is a Punjab + Haryana + Delhi states in India. Many of the Indian members posting here are Punajbi Indian, obviously they comfortable enough to be part of this community. As for Sindhis, they linked to Punjabis/Rajasthanis/Gujaratis of India. Sindhi hindu community is largest in Pakistan and many who migrated to Indi,play an influencial role there.
Now lets look at the Kashmiris, they a relatively self enclosed due to the geographic isolation. Pakhtuns have obvious links to Pakhtuns in Afghanistan. Same can be said about Baluchis with regard to Iran, Afghanistan. Besides Pakhtuns and Baluchis are Eastern Iranian peoples while Sindhis and Punjabis are mixed Indic in their background.
Again its not religion thing but a culture thing. It just so happens that Punjabis, Sindhis.Pakhtuns, Baluchis and Kashmiris are all heavily Muslim which makes the foundation of Pakistan solid.
Even if there are some muslims who are killing other muslims. So what?? that is our internal matter
Throughout history, it is europeans themselves who have killed the most europeans. But do you really think that europeans would ever tolerate the killings of europeans by a non-european??
Two wrongs dont make a right.
Isnt it funny? We dont need Indians to hate Muslims, kill Muslims, etc. We do it quite well all by ourselves.
Regardless, I believe its our responsibility towards Muslims all over the world - including (ohmygod) India - to initiate friendship and improve relations with non-Muslims.
Two wrongs dont make a right.
Isnt it funny? We dont need Indians to hate Muslims, kill Muslims, etc. We do it quite well all by ourselves.
Regardless, I believe its our responsibility towards Muslims all over the world - including (ohmygod) India - to initiate friendship and improve relations with non-Muslims.
What kind of logic is that? All blame and responsibility on muslims?
Re: Is South Asian unity between Pakistanis and Indians possible?
Did you not read the entire post? Where did I say the word BLAME?????????????
I specifically said RESPONSIBILITY...which is different.
pak-one
Your statement is as stupid as someone saying Urdu-Hindi and Punjabi speaking people in India are Pakistani in culture and identity.
You have a very extremist Hindu Akhand-Bharat mentality.
Who says Punjab and Sindh are "Indian in culture"? Punjab is Punjabi in culture, and Sindh is Sindhi in culture.
The presentday Republic of India is just an artificially created country (much like our Pakistan).
India today is just the name of a republic, it does not represent any culture or group of cultures outside India.
If anything Pakistan is more ancient than India, we were created before India on the 14th of August whilst they were created a day later on the 15th.
In the past India or Hind was simply a geographical label synonomous to the term South-Asia today, it did not refer to a country and culture in those days as even today both these countries are very culturally and ethnically diverse.
There is a difference between the presentday Republic of India and the Empires which ruled these areas in the olden days, all the empires which united this area politically in the past were mostly foreign, some even say Chandragupta Mauraya was from Nepal or Swat (in Pakistan) and not from presentday India.
As hellraiser pointed out presentday Pakistani lands were only part of the same Empires as presentday Indian lands for only 711 yrs out of which 512 yrs were under Muslim rule the remaining under Buddhist and Christian rule.
Whatever history falls in their lands is their history, whatever falls in our lands is our history and some history we both share.
Some Pakistanis might have followed a Vedic religion (ancestor of Hinduism) in the past for a period of time but even that did not originate in presentday India, it was brought from outside by Aryans just as Christianity and Islam were introduced to the region from outside.
The only similarities we Pakistanis have with India are linguistic similarities with Indian occupied Khalistan (East Punjab) and the Urdu/Hindi speaking regions.
We have nothing to do with Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, Assamese or even Gujarati, Bengali cultures in India.
Regardless, I believe its our responsibility towards Muslims all over the world - including (ohmygod) India.
What kind of logic is that? All blame and responsibility on muslims?
U knw Diwana, when i read her post..my question was the same! "Why the hell every responsibility should be on Pakistan?" Why is it always Pakistanis responsibility towards Muslims everywhere? inc India???
Did you not read the entire post? Where did I say the word BLAME?????????????
I specifically said RESPONSIBILITY...which is different.
I read your post!..... I dont know why you have so much love for the indians, when those same ppl hate Pakistan, call pakistan a terrorist nation, wants Pakistan to be declared a Terrorist State....
These are the same ppl whom u want friendship/love with! And yes Muslims are included in this!...Infact they themself admit they have nothing to do with Pakistan and they hardly give a damn about Pakistan!
Must be a B'Wood Influence!
How about you go back to your country instead of bringing your ethnic baggage in your adopted homeland?
And Westerners ask if Muslims can live amongst them in their own countries. 
^
read my post! Every Religion claims to be the one true Religion. The Muslim claim Islam to be the chosen Religion, the jews think it's their religion, christians think their religion is the one, the hindus believe their religion to be the one, the list can go on! Different opinion lead to to wars!
Did you deliberately miss Ahmadiyat in the list ? or you think It's same as Islam ?
These are the same ppl whom u want friendship/love with! And yes Muslims are included in this!...Infact they themself admit they have nothing to do with Pakistan and they hardly give a damn about Pakistan!
What connection would you expect Indian Muslims to have to Pakistan?
Did you not read the entire post? Where did I say the word BLAME?????????????
I specifically said RESPONSIBILITY...which is different.
Do you even know what responsibility leads to?
Responsibility and blame go hand in hand.
If I have to explain it then I think I should rather not!
U knw Diwana, when i read her post..my question was the same! "Why the hell every responsibility should be on Pakistan?" Why is it always Pakistanis responsibility towards Muslims everywhere? inc India???
Its just a pathetic comment by this person. Funny thing, she is trying to back off now.
I read your post!..... I dont know why you have so much love for the indians, when those same ppl hate Pakistan, call pakistan a terrorist nation, wants Pakistan to be declared a Terrorist State....
These are the same ppl whom u want friendship/love with! And yes Muslims are included in this!...Infact they themself admit they have nothing to do with Pakistan and they hardly give a damn about Pakistan!
Must be a B'Wood Influence!
So, if I say we have a responsibility towards Muslims all over the world...that automatically means I love Indians? By the way.........what do you have against Indian Muslims? Its so annoying to see people being so nationalistic when their priority SHOULD be Muslims first. It doesnt matter what country they're from...Muslims first.
But you dont seem to get that.......must be an immature teenage thing........