9 Responses to “An historic realignment–China-Pakistan”

1. arun says:

   September 21, 2008 at 6:49 am

   hi guys its truth that indus civilization was hindu civilization ,in those days hindu religion was dominant from uzbekistan to malaysi ,indonesia.dont beleive these guys from camel country,who are made mad in madrassas

   Reply
2. Moin Ansari says:

   September 21, 2008 at 10:17 am

   Contrary to what is taught in the elephant country’s story books, the people of the Indus Valley Civilization were definately not Hindu–they ate beef, were not vegetarian, wrote from right to left, buried their dead, and did not worship the Hindu pantheon.

   Reply
3. aurovind says:

   September 23, 2008 at 5:06 pm

   Once again you are making mistake moin you guys are Tribals from arabia who came via Indus valley to our subcontinent .

   How can you claim the hindu neat and hygenic indus valley civilisation to yours .
   there is no proof that anybody ate beef at Indus becoz it was worshipped as god.
   And you [abuse edited out. Last warning on violating Rupee News code of conduct] cannibals who just drank blood of humans and also animals

   Reply
4. Moin Ansari says:

   September 23, 2008 at 8:38 pm

   Funniest post on our site yet. So the Arabian cannibals trasported themselves to 3500 BC so that they could eat each other.

   You just proved your IQ level.

   The Rabs never came via the Khyber pass, they sailed to Sindh. The Arabs actually never crossed the Indus. Mohammad Bin Qasim made a brief trip to Sindh and had to leave becuase of a change in goverment. the Arabs never returned.

   The Indus people of Pakistan ae beef (see Kennoyer, Dale, Mughal, Ahsan etc), buried their dead, lived in non-stratiifed society ( no caste sytem) and wrote a pictographic language right to left…as opposed to the ganges basin people who followed he Hindu pantheon etc etc etc.

   http://rupeenews.com/2007/11/27/the-geographic-two-nation-theory-pakistan-existed-5000-years-ago/

   Any abuse or name calling violates our policy on comments. Any further abuse will get you banned (under any aliass or fake id name).

   Reply
   • anshuman1979 says:

     April 13, 2009 at 11:04 am

     The Indus people were definitely Hindu……….any one who had a brief knowledge about the Indus life style, social pattern, architecture can conclude this…………..you can refer Banister-Fletcher (Both are English authors), a primary history book about world architecture for details.

     Also I am quoting here few lines from WIKI

     “In view of the large number of figurines[50] found in the Indus valley, it has been widely suggested that the Harappan people worshipped a Mother goddess symbolizing fertility. However, this view has been disputed by S. Clark.[51] Some Indus valley seals show swastikas which are found in later religions and mythologies, especially in Indian religions such as Hinduism and Jainism. The earliest evidence for elements of Hinduism are present before and during the early Harappan period[52][53]. Phallic symbols resembling the Hindu Siva lingam have been found in the Harappan remains.[54][55]
     Many Indus valley seals show animals. One famous seal shows a figure seated in a posture reminiscent of the Lotus position and surrounded by animals was named after Pashupati (lord of cattle), an epithet of Shiva and Rudra.[56][57].[58]
     In the earlier phases of their culture, the Harappans buried their dead; however, later, especially in the Cemetery H culture of the late Harrapan period, they also cremated their dead and buried the ashes in burial urns, a transition notably also alluded to in the Rigveda, where the forefathers “both cremated (agnidagdhá-) and uncremated (ánagnidagdha-)” are invoked (RV 10.15.14).”

     So do you need any further clarification.

     What i am quoting also from world wide accepted facts not so called fabricated facts.

     Again with proper respect to your religion ………i am telling you that HINDUISM is not a religion dictated by a person…………….its a evolved way of living………you can’t even date back to its history.

     Reply
     • Moin Ansari says:

       April 13, 2009 at 12:08 pm

       ON IVC============
       There is no proof whatsoever that the people of I.V.C. practised what is called today Hinduism. It is a known fact that Hinduism (also known as Brahmanism) evolved in the Gangetic Valley in a much later period with its inseparable Caste System and other taboos! Finding toys does not mean that they were worshipped or had any holy status; these are only assumptions/theories by some due to lack of evidence! Besides, we all know that I.V.C had an extensive trade with Mesopotamia, India, Arabia and Central Asia; so it is natural that large number of foreign traders and their artifacts should reside within I.V.C. Many features found in the I.V.C have also been found in other civilizations, e.g. the significance of bull in Minoan Crete, etc; so that doesnt mean we should label them Hindu! And there are many other pictorial seals and artifacts found in the I.V.C which has nothing to do with Hinduism, should we in the same manner assume that they were worshipped or had any holy status! I am sure that Hinduism has some influences from the religion of I.V.C; just like Catholism has influences from Roman Paganism; but claiming that the religion of I.V.C was Hinduism is completely absurd and factless!

       Wiki is not an authentic source for archeology. Becuase of the large number of a certain natioality it has lost its crdability and become irrelevant to intellectual discourse. It presents a false point of view and fails to represent a middle of the road view.

       50 toy-dolls/figurinesis not a large number. What is important that no figurines represent Arjun, Indira, Ganesh, laxmi or Kali Devi etc. A toy doll does not represet any religious significance. “Widely suggested” is not authentication of anything. “Some” seals may show the Swastika. Of course animal symbols, and the Swastika was used by the Amazon Indians and the Aborogines of Austraila. Were they also Hindu? Little stones elongated in length have been used as symbols in all ancient cultures–they do not represent any religion. There is no evidence of Harappans burying their dead. We do not want to use religious texts in any discussion of archeology. With all due respect, poems from Iran-Persia and using Zorastrian Gods do not represent Indus Culture. The Rig Veda had nothing to do with Moenjodaro and Harappa. Agni and Mithra were Zorzastrain Gods. The ‘Rig Veda’ describes its Gods as ‘destroyers of cities’. This is commentary on the Vedic as a primitive non-urban culture that destroys cities and urban civilization. Rig Vedas mention oceans: The ‘Rig Veda’ itself has nearly 100 references to ocean (samudra), as well as dozens of references to ships, and to rivers flowing in to the sea. Vedic ancestors like Manu, Turvasha, Yadu and Bhujyu are flood figures, saved from across the sea. The Vedic God of the sea, Varuna, is the father of many Vedic seers and seer families like Vasishta, Agastya and the Bhrigu seers.

       A few universal symbols do not make a thesis. The best source of the IVC culture and religion is the language and the script which was NOT Sanskrit, not vedic in any sense. The Indus and the Brahmi scripts are totally different, the Indus language was a pictographic script, Sanaskrit on the other hand is a written language, — any commonality can be explained by the simple fact that Indus script was adopted by the invading culture…..just like Hindi (in spite of 50 years of anti-Islamic purges and ethnic cleansing) today still has thousands of Arabic and Persian words.

       Iron was not known to the IVC, but it was known to the Aryans. No iron was discovered in Indus valley sites.

       The symbols of the Bull are not used in Hindu mainstream.

       ===========================================ON HINDUISM============
       The Indian constitution recognizes Hindusim as a religion. The Nepali constitution also does the same. According to most Hinduism is a Dharam and a religion. See Hinduunity.org, VHP, RSS, and the bjp site> Pronouncements made to the contrary has no bearing on facts.

       Explanation II is notoriously flawed. Its intent is obvious: the individual members of Sikh, Jain, and Buddhist religions will be referred to as Hindus, and Sikhism, Jainism, and Buddhism are to be considered merely sects of Hinduism. Therefore, the state can interfere with their religious institutions as it sees fit, under the guise of procuring “social reforms.”

       Please see Article 25-2 (b).
       b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus. Explanation I – The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion. Explanation II – In sub-Clause (b) of clause (2), the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly.
       =============================ON HINDUISM============
       http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761555715/hinduism.html
       Hinduism, a religious tradition of Indian origin, comprising the beliefs and practices of Hindus. The word Hindu is derived from the river Sindhu, or Indus. Hindu was primarily a geographical term that referred to India or to a region of India (near the Sindhu) as long ago as the 6th century bc. The word Hinduism is an English word of more recent origin. Hinduism entered the English language in the early 19th century to describe the beliefs and practices of those residents of India who had not converted to Islam or Christianity and did not practice Judaism or Zoroastrianism.

       In the case of most religions, beliefs and practices come first, and those who subscribe to them are acknowledged as followers. In the case of the Hindu tradition, however, the acknowledgment of Hindus came first, and their beliefs and practices constitute the contents of the religion.

       Hindus themselves prefer to use the Sanskrit term san?tana dharma for their religious tradition. San?tana dharma is often translated into English as “eternal tradition” or “eternal religion” but the translation of dharma as “tradition” or “religion” gives an extremely limited, even mistaken, sense of the word. Dharma has many meanings in Sanskrit, the sacred language of Hindu scripture, including “moral order,” “duty,” and “right action.”

       The Hindu tradition encourages Hindus to seek spiritual and moral truth wherever it might be found, while acknowledging that no creed can contain such truth in its fullness and that each individual must realize this truth through his or her own systematic effort. Our experience, our reason, and our dialogue with others—especially with enlightened individuals—provide various means of testing our understanding of spiritual and moral truth. And Hindu scripture, based on the insights of Hindu sages and seers, serves primarily as a guidebook. But ultimately truth comes to us through direct consciousness of the divine or the ultimate reality. In other religions this ultimate reality is known as God. Hindus refer to it by many names, but the most common name is Brahman.

       ==============================ON IVC============
       There is clear evidence that I.V.C was not Aryan! Horses were a vital part in Aryan culture and daily life; but all the excavations in the Indus sites have not been able to find any horse remains nor any pictures depicting them! All the archaeological and scriptural evidence shows that Aryans started coming to
       the sub-continent around 1700 BC, i.e. when the I.V.C. was already in decline!

       “The hypothesis of Indus civilization being Aryan is difficult to reconcile chronologically with the date of the Indus civilisation (about the second half of the third millennium B.C.) and antecedent Early Harappan neolithic cultures which were responsible for its creation. Comparison of the Vedic texts with the Avesta and with the West Asian documents relating to the Aryan kings of Mitanni suggests that the Vedic Aryans entered the South Asian subcontinent from Northeast Iran and Central Asia in the second millennium B.C. Moreover, it is abundantly clear that the early Aryans were nomads and that the horse played a dominent role in their culture, as it did in the culture of their Proto-Indo-European-speaking ancestors. The horse is conspicuously absent from the many realistic representations of animals in the art of the Indus civilisation. Comprehensive recent bone analyses have yielded the conclusion that the horse was introduced to the subcontinent around the beginning of the second millennium B.C. Horse-drawn chariots made the Aryan-speaking nomads a superior military force which gradually subdued all of North India” (By Asko Parpola).

       Another thing about the Aryans is that when they came to the Indus Valley they were not Hindus for centuries:

       “It may be of interest to mention here that so long as the Aryans stayed in the north-western subcontinent, they did not evolve that particular religion called ‘Hinduism’ with its caste system and other taboos. It was only when they crossed the Sutlej and settled in the Gangetic Valley that this abomninable system was evolved. The evidence of the Rig Veda shows that during the centuries when the Aryans were occupying the Punjab and composing the hymns of the Rig Veda, the north-west part of the subcontinent was culturally separate from the rest of India.

       The closest cultural relations of the Indo-Aryans at that period were with the Iranians, whose language and sacred texts are preserved in the various works known as the Avesta, in inscriptions in Old Persian, and in some other scattered documents. So great is the amount of material common to the Rig Veda Aryans and the Iranians that the books of the two peoples show common geographic names as well as deities and ideas” (Pakistan and Western Asia, by Norman Brown).

       “The outstanding characteristics of early Aryan society in the Indus Valley was its basic difference from the later Hinduism. Cows were not worshipped but eaten. Intoxicating spirits were not forsaken but joyously consumed.

       There were classes but no castes, and the priests were subordinate to the nobles rather than at the top of the social pyramid. In short, Aryan society resembled much more the contemporary Indo-European societies than it did the classical Hinduism that was to develop in later centuries” (The World, A Global History, by L.S.Stavrianos).

       “From geographical information in the Rig Veda, the Vedic Period (1500-500BC) was confined to the northwest. The hymns composed by Vedic mystics/poets of northwest (Saptha Sindhva) tell that the Vedic people worshipped non-Brahmanical Gods (Indra, Varuna, Mitra), ate cows, elected their chiefs,
       drank liqour, and refer to people living to the south in the gangetic region as “Dasyas”! None of the Gangetic Brahmanical gods (e.g Ram, Krishna, Vishnu, Brahma, etc.) are mentioned in Rig Veda hymns nor do they appear in connected Aryan Avestan texts and Hittite tablets. Avestan terms for soldiers
       rathaestar and citizens vastriyo are similar to Vedic-derived terms (ksatriyas, vasihyas) but the Avestan term for priest athravan is not even close to “Brahmanas”.

       Moreover, central Gangetic religious texts like the Mahabharta and Varna Ashram Dharma of Manu call the Vedic Aryans in Saptha Sindhva mlechas, sudras and vratyas; “forbid” Brahmins from even visiting the northwest country Vahika-desa; and depict dark Dravidian gods like Krishna fighting and defeating Vedic Aryan gods like Indra. Similarly, the Rig Veda contains taboos and injunctions against the dasya-varta region to the south of Saptha Sindhva and praises Indra (god of thunderbolt) for victories over dasya-purahs (dasya cities). Both early Rig Vedic and Gangetic Puranic sources clearly point to ethnic, cultural and religious differences and a “clash of civilizations and nations” at the Ganges indicating that the Vedic
       people and culture of the northwest did not accept the Gangetic priests, their gods, shastras, religion and Brahmanical caste ideology.

       The Gangetic heartland is not only historically a separate region, but geographically stretches over 1500 miles to the southeast of the Saptha Sindhva country. A few Vedic tribes from Saptha Sindhva broke Rig Vedic norms and migrated southward. These numerically outnumbered groups expanding into the
       trans-Gangetic region near the end of the Vedic period (8-6th century BC) tried to use the indigenous Dravidian priesthood to entrench themselves as the new ruling order. Within a few generations of acquiring control over the foreign Gangasthan, the minority Vedic tribes were usurped by the indigenous
       “borrowed” priesthood; their Aryan religion, gods and customs mostly deposed and supplanted with indigenous Gangetic gods and mythologies; and their new social order (varna or color based) replaced with the pre-existing profession jati based Brahmanical caste system (chatur-varna).

       Through religious manipulation and intrigue, the Vedic in-comers to Gangasthan were made to surrender their political rule and soon pigeon-holed into becoming the loyal obedient chownkidars of their “superior” dravidic Brahmanas till the rise of Buddhism two centuries later. The religious and political revolt against
       Brahmanical hegemony started by Rama (Bhagwatism) and the Buddha (Sakamuni)__Vedic and Saka princes__in the 7-6th century BC checked Brahmanical hegemony in Gangasthan and provided the masses relief from its perversions (e.g. Manu’s code and laws) until its revivalism and expansion by
       Shankarcharya of Malabar and cronies between 8-11th century AD. Later attempts were devised to “absorb” both movements into Brahmanism and eliminate them as threats by claiming both Rama and Buddha to be reincarnations of Vishnu.

       The oldest Brahmanical Ramayana dates to the 11th century AD while the older Buddhist Ramayanas (e.g. Tibetan, 8th century) have vastly different storylines. Despite the colonial racial complexes
       developed by Poorbia Brahmanists during British rule and their revisionist and fantastical 19th century “One Hindu Nation” imperialistic propaganda, there is overwhelming historical and archeological evidence of Brahmanism (so-called “Hinduism”) being of Dravidian origin from the historically and geographically separate Gangetic region (Gangasthan). Social customs, dress, cuisine, dance, ethnicity, cultural heritage, ethos and political history of the two regions are very different” (Clash of Civilizations, by Saka Chella)

       Reply
5. Dr abdul jamil khan says:

   May 29, 2010 at 10:36 pm

   Pak -chinese alliance in Ancient history;
   Chinese inflence in PAK /IVC has a deep history; in
   continuity;
   – Indus grave reveals ” chinese type skeletons ” as well.
   - South Kashmir area BERZHOM, ( ~2000 BC) reveals
   chinese ” cultigens”, grave types etc.
   –recent past have/had 2 famous chinese travellers/smbassadors, Fa hian, hwang swang and others unknown.
   - Harsh vardhan ( 7th cent) a king of pakistan area plus
   western UP was a well known ” chinese tributary”–
   He was mudered by a NON buddhist ? brahman;
   -Chinese ambassador raised a local army and defeated the rebells.
   -Assasin was arrested and taken to Beging, tried and hanged,
   - Some think that Budhdha ( unknown dates) of south Nepal in fact was chinese like many still living in
   from laddakh to assam and nepal etc;
   WHAT is historicall and well documented is that
   Indian culture arose as integration of 2 types of farmers; from the west mideast farmers brought wheat/barley ( 7000 Bc) plus their sciences/math/zodiak etc, FRom the east came ” rice farmers ” from south china/burma etc
   along with their culture/pagoda style temple etc, India
   thus is not ” original foundational culture”;
   WILL give only 4 examples from my book( urdu/hindi anartificial divide) based on liguistic loans into Sanskrit
   and hindi/urdu; these are still believed to be INDIAN,
   by religious faithfulls.
   Words like, GANGA is a china-indo china loan, meaning RIVER, in bangla/tamil it means river; perhaps it came with rice farmers
   Ghora, Is Dravidian and came from central asia,
   checnia area ;they call it Ghora ( horse), in telgu it is
   Ghurram
   GA-ey( cow) straight from sumerian iraq , it was gu,
   - Krishna birth story is a copy of Sargon of iraq (2800BC); Bible too copied it for Moses.
   Goddess ISH-TAR of Babylon meant ISH=life( in aramic/arabic) tar -means to eliminate; this lady part of GIlgamesh epic is copied every where;In India we got words such as ISH-WAR ( life giver), IShtiri ( lady),
   Sitara ( stars); Ishtar became Venus in greece But
   gave us ISHWAR ;Sanskrit dictionaries dont tell any thing abr word’s sources/origin;
   IT is no wonder that Pak-china just have historical replay; nothing new; EVEN indian President is paying
   respect to chinese. HISTORY repeats only if basics dont change; Indian caste system has not changed
   nor is likely to change– defends ” human inequity”
   AND Indian’s habit of “self praise” has not changed;it has gone worse even.,
   South Asia has been repeating history, like cycles of
   reincarnation in its religion,; more on the way for sure,

   Reply
   • The Editors says:

     May 31, 2010 at 9:01 pm

     Dr. Ahmad Hasan Dani goes into a lot more detail then what has been written here–and he backs it up with facts and actual archeological evidence.

     Reply

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

1. Pakistan China relationship a two way street « Pak Alert Weblog says:

   October 18, 2008 at 8:42 pm

   [...] Pakistan-China-Russia:- An historic realignment [...]

   Reply

Leave a Reply