Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

ssingh · May 9, 2006, 12:12am

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

cool man....even if you deny your 'indian origin' it's okay with 'me'. about atrocities you mentioned, no comments. you link yourself to arabs or not, what difference will it make?...

what's that hijacking of harappa/mohanjadaro civilization by indians?....

system · May 9, 2006, 10:43am

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

First of all I am muslim first and then Pakistani.

Pakistanis are a mixture of Indian-muslim, Iranian,Arab and Central asian races.Many people in this discussion seem to think that all Pakistanis come from India..wrong!India itself was ruled and owned by Moughul-muslims for 800 years.They gave so much to India which non-muslims label them as barbaric.India's history is etchecd in stone by muslims.

Now if Pakistanis want to claim themselves as former Indians that is fine because India itself was a muslim country back then.there is no problem coming from a muslim country into another muslim country.

Alot of hindoos and sikhas claim that Pakistanis are ex-hindu who were converted by force from moughuls.That is only true to a certain degree.
Muslims are not only found in India and ex-India but before they even existed in India they were already in MIDDLEAST!.From the mileast they moved onto the Indian subcontinent and far east.Egyptian civilization is older than Indian or haraappa or anthing crap...and Egypt is a prt of mideast!

Iconoclast · May 9, 2006, 11:35am

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

Did your grandmother tell you that they accompanied local muslims safely to the border or they kept their belongings for safekeeping till they came back few years later to collect.

mulz · May 9, 2006, 4:29pm

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

FYI, They are in Pakistan and not India.. and Indus valley civilization was begining of Pakistani culture and now part of Pakistan's great past. ancient Pakistanis were good mathematicians and scientist.. India uses Indus Valley civilization so freely despite the fact its not in India.

ssingh · May 9, 2006, 5:56pm

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

okay.....then why do many of you guys associate yourself with these mogul emperors of india?....if any hindu tells against aurangzeb over here many of you guys get agitated calling him a "pious" muslim. Why should you get agitated?...he was an indian emperor....when hindus blame any indian emperor,then you should not get angry because he was not a pakistani. right?...

mulz · May 9, 2006, 6:07pm

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

Mogul empire was spread in both the countries much before they were born- Lahore was the center of their focus as long as they ruled. Aurangzeb was by far the best ruler Mughal empire ever had.. When he ruled, he ruled the land to the east of Persia.. India was NOT there..Hence he wasnt an Indian King.. India and Pakistan came into being in 1947.. So, India is only like 58 years old.. a young nation and ppl tend to have myths associated with lot of things like Rajputs/Jats are Indian(Hindu) tribes and that Sikhs are real Punjabis... Not everyone can learn Waris Shah and Bulleh Shah Poetry and become a Punjabi.. :D

ssingh · May 9, 2006, 6:38pm

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

Yeah, like this even indus valley civilization had spread to india also…read below. Besides they were all “rig-vedic” people. followers of rig veda are hindus. what wrong if we associate ourselves with them?

The Indus Valley Civilization
The Indus Valley, or Harrapan, civilization was discovered in 1920-21 when engraved seals were discovered near present-day Sahiwal in Pakistani Punjab at a place called Harappa. excavations at Mohenjodaro in Sind discovered the buried remains of a civilization with a pictographic script. This civilization extended to the Yamuna along the bed of the river Ghaggar in Rajhastan, Gujrat and upto the mouths of the rivers Narbada and Tapati. Most of the the major sites of this civilization are in Pakistan.

Tariq Rahman “PEOPLES AND LANGUAGES IN PRE-ISLAMIC INDUS VALLEY”

http://www.saxakali.com/COLOR_ASP/harappa.htm
http://www.harappa.com/har/har1.html
http://www.harappa.com/har/gif/harmap2.jpg

Shoor · May 10, 2006, 5:38pm

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

Cos when u put it like that - "Indian" heritage - maybe they will reject it , maybe we can say the subcontinental heritage or something.

SyedAbduallah · May 11, 2006, 12:43am

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

It might have something to do with:

**PAKISTAN RARELY PART OF INDIA

**But, as the following discussion will prove, during the Hindu period it was the people of the Indus Valley in the West and the Padma-Meghna Delta in the East that mostly emerged triumphant. Both the wings remained independent of Gangetic Valley and in fact Pakistan-based governments ruled over northern India more often and for much longer periods than India has ruled over Pakistan territories. What is more important, Pakistan as an independent country always looked westward and had more connections ------ cultural, commercial as well as political ---- with the Sumerian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek and Central Asian civilizations than with the Gangetic Valley. It was only from the Muslim period onward that these two wings became subservient to northern Indian governments. Even this period is not devoid of revolts and successful assertion of independence by the two wings. In the pre-Muslim period, India’s great expansion covering large portions of the sub-continent took place only during the reigns of the Mauryas (3rd century BC), the Guptas (4th century AD), Raja Harsha (7th century AD), the Gurjara empire of Raja Bhoj (8th century AD) and the Pratiharas (9th century AD). It is important to note that except for the Maurya period lasting barely a hundred years, under none of the other dynasties did the Hindu governments ever rule over Pakistan. They always remained east of river Sutlej. I shall quote a few passages from history to substantiate my statement.

“At the close of Samudragupta’s triumphal career (4th century AD) his empire — the greatest in India since the days of Asoka — extended on the north to the base of the mountains, but did not include Kashmir…. Samudragupta did not attempt to carry his arms across the Sutlej or to dispute the authority of the Kushan Kings who continued to rule in and beyond the Indus basin.” (Oxford History of India, By VA Smith).

“Harsha’s subjugation of upper India, excluding the punjab, but including Bihar and at least the greater part of Bengal, was completed in 612 AD.” (Ibid)

“The Gurjara empire of Bhoja may be defined as, on the north, the foot of the mountains; on the northwest, the Sutlej; on the west the Hakra or the ‘lost-river’ forming the boundary of Sind.” (Ibid).

“The rule of the Pratiharas had never extended across the Sutlej, and the history of the Punjab between the 7th and 10th centuries AD is extremely obscure. At some time, not recorded, a powerful kingdom had been formed, which extended from the mountains beyond the Indus, eastwards as far as the Hakra of lost-river, so that it comprised a large part of the Punjab, as well as probably northern Sind.” (Ibid)

“Politically during the time when Hellenism in the south Asian sub-continent was decaying and the centuries afterward, the north-west remained separate from northern and central India. The Gupta empire, which at its height in the middle of the 4th century AD, and the empire of Harsha in the middle of the 7th century AD barely reached into the Punjab and included none of Sind.” (Pakistan and Western Asia, by Norman Brown)

The above quotations amply prove that none of the periods of its greatest expansion did India succeed in occupying Pakistan. The only exception is the Maurya period in the 3rd century BC when Asoka’s empire is said to have extended up to the Hindu Kush, north of Kabul. Even in this isolated case of the Mauryas, historians are aware that Chandragupta Maurya, the founder of the Maurya dynasty who hailed from Pakistan (Punjab), did not get Pakistan by conquest but by diplomacy from the Greek rulers who had succeeded Alexander.

As pointed out by more than one writer, the five thousand year history of Pakistan reveals that its independence had been a rule while its subservience to or attachment with India an exception. “Throughout most of the recorded history the north-west (i.e. Pakistan) has normally been either independent or incorporated in an empire whose centre lay further in the west. The occasions when it has been governed from a centre further east (India) have been the exception rather than the rule; and the creation of Pakistan which has been described as a geographer’s nightmare is historically a reversion to normal as Pakistan is concerned.” (A Study of History, by AJ Toynbee)

During its five thousand-year known history, Pakistan has been subservient to Central Indian governments only during the Maurya, the Turko-Afghan and British periods who were Buddhist, Muslim and Christian respectively. While the Mauryan (300-200 BC) and British (1848-1947) periods lasted barely a hundred years each, the turko-Afghan period was the longest covering a span of 500 years.

Here we come across an important ideological point. All the three religions i.e. Buddhism, Islam and Christianity which succeeded in uniting the sub-continent under the Maurya, Turko-Afghan and British rulers stood for universal brotherhood and were spread all over the world. In the context of ideology, the implications are obvious i.e., only people believing in universal brotherhood could unite and hold this sub-continent together. Otherwise Pakistan’s independence could never be challenged nor its people subdued by India’s Hindu Governments.

It is of these celebrated lands and of their intrepid people that we shall narrate the story here. In this article we shall give a brief historical background and the contribution made by each of the groups that inhabit it: We shall begin with a general account of the entire country first and then take up the history of each group.
http://www.geocities.com/pak_history/

Also, the indus valley civilization was dravidian not aryan. Its like saying turks(animals) created constantinople because they occupy it.

picoico · May 11, 2006, 2:41am

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

We have much more in common with the rest of India? Hunh?

Culturally I have little in common with a South Indian (never mind the fact that I respect South Indians more than North Indians despite my being of North Indian stock). Yet I as a Muslim have a hell of a lot more in common with a Muslim south Indian than a Hindu north Indian.

Religion is a huge part of our identity, and so if I proclaim that I have more in common with a south Indian Muslim than a North Indian Hindu...what on earth does that say about a Punjabi/Sindhi?

Pakistani culture is heavily influence by Islam, as Islam provided the reason d'etre for Pakistan in the sense that it was a homeland for Muslims...of course that history will begin with the first appearence of Muslims on Indian soil...

ssingh · May 11, 2006, 3:29am

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

So Mr. Nicols John, you have your answer, including mine and by now you should be sure about the answers you get from us and them.

Str8pak4romaus · May 11, 2006, 10:02am

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

pakistanis are way different to Indians. You can quite apparently see dat in terms of heights, pakistanis are taller, and color. Yeh obviously thr are similarities cause we were da same country but pakistan has got a lot of persian, turkish and arab influence in it. And the religion has a big affect on the personal identity.

expatobserver · May 11, 2006, 3:05pm

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

Iconoclast:

The problem with Hindus is that they cannot accpet that locals can accept a religion of foreigners. Hence the rioting and killing of muslims and to a lesser extent against christians.

There is hardly anyone here among Pakistanis who claims an Arab identity. Rather if u search this forum many are against arabs. It is the inferiority complex of hindus that they think accepting another religion is betraying indian culture.

I am a Punjabi and in UK i have met Sikhs and Hindus of India, who beong to same tribe/zaat as i am. But if we look 50 years back, the same people massacred muslims in 47, how can then, we identify ourselves with them. We are distinct from hindus and from arabs. We have our own identity.

Again I really do not care if Pakistanis consider themselves whatever. But ask any doctors. In the ways that really matter, like heart attack rates, breast cancer rate, prostate cancer rate, Pakistanis are a lot closer to Indian than they are to other ethnicities. To the extent that when they immigrate to US or UK, they both show the same alarming increase in all these rates. Only Hunzas show a different rate for all these things.

SyedAbduallah · May 11, 2006, 7:36pm

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

[QUOTE]
pakistanis are way different to Indians. You can quite apparently see dat in terms of heights, pakistanis are taller, and color. Yeh obviously thr are similarities cause we were da same country but pakistan has got a lot of persian, turkish and arab influence in it. And the religion has a big affect on the personal identity
[/QUOTE]

Yup thats true. Most pakistanis are ethnically central asian.

[QUOTE]
Again I really do not care if Pakistanis consider themselves whatever. But ask any doctors. In the ways that really matter, like heart attack rates, breast cancer rate, prostate cancer rate, Pakistanis are a lot closer to Indian than they are to other ethnicities. To the extent that when they immigrate to US or UK, they both show the same alarming increase in all these rates. Only Hunzas show a different rate for all these things.
[/QUOTE]

You can take your science schience and shove it. Everyone knows that us pakistanis are more related to central asians. Our ethnicity, culture, religion, cuisine and architecture. All central asian.

parissenoor · May 13, 2006, 11:44am

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

because they both eat the same too heavily sugary food;)

it’s all about biryani, chapati, naan, daal, aloo muslim may eat more meat than hindus…but most hindus (except some traditional strict brahmin) eat meat as well:D…plus some religious folk don’t eat meat in west because of shortage of available halal meat…

parissenoor · May 13, 2006, 11:50am

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

the biggest joke of the day:D…are you saying that afghans are making up most of pakistan population:clown:

Pakistani are in denial of their hindustan cultural identity, cause they fear that pakistan country has no disctinct identity from India…it’s sad! really sad, cause in the end pakistan is the looser, as it let go all of its past history and glory to indians…people in the west know only about india…and what is pakistan?? the country that host Bin laden and a few other terrorsist:D

and a lot of what people are saying about india is false…just go there by yourself and see how muslim live there they have same clothes, same masjid , same everthing compare to pakistan!
what is the difference between a pakistani from the east pakistan and a muslim north western indian??? passport color;)…bas!

parissenoor · May 13, 2006, 11:52am

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

great article! but if people would say Hindsutan heritage instead of Indian;) that would maybe help clearly state than india as no more right over the Hindustan history than pakistan cause these two countries were united under tha same divided provinces in the past;) and the same conquerors;)

a lot of pakistani feel “insulted” by people who like me are rather unifyin btw india and pak, than dividing…cause they feel the blood of their ancestors who fought for a separate pak is kinda becoming worthless in this case…
BUT al that hate btw hindu and muslim was and is still real, pakistan was due to be a peacefull heaven for muslims…but they failed cause muslim had no more hindu to fight with, so they begin fighting each other…reason why pakistan is no more safe than india for muslims…

Hum_Hain · May 13, 2006, 5:40pm

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

i like u yaar

chak de phatte

Hum_Hain · May 13, 2006, 5:42pm

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

Faruk Khan:

Pakistanis don't reject their Hindu past but they feel indifferent to it (like a Sikh on here said just because somebody's parents are doctors does not make the child a doctor by default), we accept that the majoirty of our country was once Hindus (just as Arabs were once pagans) and we accept that the vast majoirty of Pakistanis are culturally Indic/South Asian not Arab/West Asian and when it comes to secular cultural habits Pakistanis are just as Desi as Indians but Pakistanis have foreign Muslims as national heroes because for us Muslims nationalism is based on religion instead of racism, ethnicism or tribalism (these things are tolerated but considered personal and equal) and you have to accept that culture is a changing thing and we can't be stuck in the past forever, South Asian society has been enhanced by Muslim contributions and had it not been for foreign Muslim influences Indian culture wouldn't be half as glamorous as it is.

I do agree with one thing though less Pakis need to claim false foreign descent (because it doesn;t make them better) and just be content (not proud or ashamed) with being Paki which is Desi/Indic/South Asian, fair enough our religion is not Hinduism anymore but the country's culture is still Indic, no point in denying our lands heritage, no need to be haughty and proud about it but accept it for what it is and accept that we made an improvement on the religious side by accepting Islam.

Indians need to make a distinction between Hindu (religion) and Indic (ethnicity/culture/language/secular heritage), the former is something Paki people have left for something better and they accept our ancestors followed it but we're not retrogressive and stuck in the past with what our ancestors were millions of years ago and the latter is still the same but obviosuly as with all things it has evolved.

exactly!!

why deny n who denies?!?

my ancestors were hindus and indians!!! so what?! thats cool

SyedAbduallah · May 13, 2006, 5:45pm

Re: Why Do Pakistanis Reject their Indian heritage?

:rotfl: the biggest joke of the day:D…are you saying that afghans are making up most of pakistan population:clown:

Pakistani are in denial of their hindustan cultural identity, cause they fear that pakistan country has no disctinct identity from India…it’s sad! really sad, cause in the end pakistan is the looser, as it let go all of its past history and glory to indians…people in the west know only about india…and what is pakistan?? the country that host Bin laden and a few other terrorsist:D

and a lot of what people are saying about india is false…just go there by yourself and see how muslim live there :rolleyes: they have same clothes, same masjid , same everthing compare to pakistan!
what is the difference between a pakistani from the east pakistan and a muslim north western indian??? passport color;)…bas!

Then why is it that it is you alone that is laughing?

These last names speak volumes of the origin of the Urdu-speaking people. It is generally alleged that the people who use the words Syed, Qureshi, Alvi, Siddiqi, Farooqi, etc. are not the genuine descendants of the Prophet or his Companions; that their use is spurious and unreliable. This may be true of only a few cases but, by and large, they are genuine. As already proved, large number of Muslim families of noble birth and high pedigree migrated from various parts of the Muslim world to this sub-continent and settled mostly in the northern Indian belt from Panipat to Patna or in the Deccan which were centres of Muslim governments and of their cultural activities. They could not have failed to leave their progeny nor could their descendants have vanished from these areas. Their claim is mostly genuine.
http://www.geocities.com/pak_history/muhajirs.html

Pakistanis are of noble birth and higher pedigree then the natives of india. Most pakistanis are descended from arabs, persians, turks, afghans and other central asians that conquered the feminine like indians and took their women as right hand possessions. So the majority is mixed central asian and native while a minority of pure bred ashraf exist.

Edit: Historically, there are alot of pakistanis that are ethnically greek as well.