Pakistan ,Two Nation Theory and a few lies

**Samudra** · 30th September 2004 04:29

More on IVC

In fact, there seems to have been another large river which parallel and west of the Indus in the third and fourth millenium B.C. This was the ancient Ghaggra-Hakra River or Sarasvati of the Rig Veda. Its lost banks are slowly being laid out by researchers. Along its bed, a whole new set of ancient towns and cities have been discovered.

Is the Hariyupiyah mentioned in this Hymn from the Rig Veda (XXVII, 5) the Harappa of the Indus Valley? The Vedas contain the oldest recorded history of the subcontinent. The gap between the demise of Harappa and Vedic history has been traditionally estimated at 1,000 years. Yet new work suggests that the Vedas could be much older.

this from harappa.com

Vision
Your claim that IVC is not at all a part of Indian Civilisation is utter BS and , no reputable history scholar would accept that.

**Samudra** · 30th September 2004 04:33

224 AD, Ardashir the first becomes the first king of the Sasanid empire.
240 AD, Shapur the first becomes Sasanian emperor.
c.213, Kanishka II (Kanishka III?) becomes Kushan emperor at Mathura.
c.232, Vasishka II becomes Kushan emperor at Mathura.
c.246, Vasudeva II becomes Kushan emperor at Mathura.
c.256, Kanishka III (Kanishka IV?) becomes Kushan emperor at Mathura

From your very own link www.kushan.org
See the word "Mathura" ... They ruled from india too.
They came , they ruled us for some time and they have become a part of our culture today.I dont see any Kushan , going around claiming a Kusanistan today.

You claim for a seperate identity under the banner of Kushans is totally unaccpetable because in course of time , Kushans became a part of us indians and patronised buddhism which is undeniably a indian religion.

**Samudra** · 30th September 2004 04:52

What vision says about peshawar and another pakistani city being the capital of kushans , was fabricated by a , you guessed it , a Pakistani.
His paper is availble here . The very same website provided by vision.The brave soul does not want to display his own name.

" A point of considerable significance to be noted here is that though the Gupta Empire is considered one of the most glorious in the annals of Hindu history covering a vast area of this sub-continent, yet it could not bring Pakistan under its tutelage"

Obviously the agenda behind the article is well known thus.What a fool he is.

Some unbiased history about kushans is here
The map betrays how both good parts of india and pakistan were under kushans.Also a google on Kushan turns out that Mathura was one of the capitals of Kushans contrary to the propaganda ridden articles vision provides links to.

Perhaps the above link is a propaganda agaisnt pakistan and its 70000 years of glorious history.Hence we look for more links like this
which also betrays that mathura was one of the capital of Kushan.

Yet another link from here also says that his empire extended into the gangetic plains , which is contrary to what you have said vision.Gosh according to the maps , most of gangetic plains is under kushans.

**Samudra** · 30th September 2004 05:37

Originally Posted by visioninthedark

Guys ... I have stated my views based on historic fact ...

I don't think its me going in circles here .... but those who repeatedly use the word "no" ...

I leave it to the impartial reader to read our posts and make his own decisions ...

They can even check what I have written from any Historical source ...

Naturally ... I don't expect Indian gentlemen to agree with me ... but that is only natural ... it is expected ...

Vision
Be a brave person . Dont try to run away from the arguments.
For example you claimed something on Kushans , i have given you enough facts to prove that Kushans were part of India as much as they were part of Pakistan.

Do you have the courage to accept it ? Tell me , once we finish up on Kushans , lets go towards the Parthians ,Shakas , Indo-Parthians(who ran away into afghan) and all.

If i was wrong somewhere i am brave enough to accept the wrong.
You know it takes courage to accept the wrong on your shoulders.

But you seem inclined to whine about our replies and run away from the argument.

Did i provide some non-factual , un-historic fact ?
Or did you take the endeavor to prove what i said as wrong by provinding quotes/links/sources anywhere ?

BTW if i had some flaming stuff in the previous post , ignore them please.

**roshan** · 30th September 2004 06:04

BTW, the latest news about the Kushans is that Kushan ruins depicting the buddha have been found in central nepal.

**Samudra** · 30th September 2004 06:12

hey R
I wonder where you have been...
id expect a bit more from you than a news tidbit.(intresting news although)

**Hari_Om** · 30th September 2004 10:57

At the level of symbolism, perhaps the greatest manifestation of the failure of the “two nation” theory is that :

A. The descendents of the Mughal’s, the greatest Muslim dynasty of the Indian sub-continent, opted to remain in India :

http://www.the-south-asian.com/May2004/last_mughals_of_india_in_hyderabad.htm

B. The descendents of M.A. Jinnah opted not to live in Pakistan or have anything to do with it. I am referring to Jinnah’s only child, his daughter, Dina?, who lives in New York and her only son Nusli Wadia who is firmly ensconced in India as the head of a large business empire.

**visioninthedark** · 30th September 2004 11:26

Chandragupta ... judging from the number of repeated responses you made in sequence .... you seem very disturbed at my last reply ...

about the Kushans ... please read history ....

identifying them as "indian" is totally unfair ....

and their capitals can be found in any history book ...

Peshawar (winter) and Bagram (summer) capital ...

sure ... their influence spread far ....

BUT AS I ALWAYS SAID ... they PERIPHERY CAN'T CLAIM TO REPRESENT THE CENTER ...

there have been many many nations .... "India" as it is know within its present boundaries was through out the overwhelming part of its history made up of competing nations .... and states .... only exceptionally did it come under one rule .... two or three time ONLY within the past 10000 years ... and that only for relatively short periods of time ...

now .... if you look at the states and peoples that existed in what is today known as Pakistan .... you cannot fail to notice that throughout most of its history it was either a centrally controlled unit with its capital based within present boundaries or it was a more or less cohesive unit under influence of empires to the west ....

it was never part of the states to the east ....

religion does divide us ....

but what divides us even more is HISTORY .... 7000 years of it ....

and chandra .... if your claim that Kushans are indian despite the fact that their capital was nowhere near present day India and the limits of their state EXCLUDED 99% of India ... if you claim is based ONLY on their religion .... thats absurd ... Nepal is hindu yest a SEPERATE state ... always has been .... there are many BUDDHIST states in asia .... there are many muslim states in asia ....

we can't use religion to claim that someone from another state is one of us ....

**Samudra** · 30th September 2004 11:40

VISION

PLEASE GOOGLE SOMETHING ON KANISKA , VISIT MY THE LINKS I GOT YOU , INCLUDING THE ONE FROM THE WEBSITE YOU REFERRED , AND IF YOU DONT FIND MATHURA TO BE ONE OF KUSHAN CAPITALS , I WILL QUIT POSTING HERE.

SWEAR ON ALLAH IF YOU ARE A TRUE MUSLIM YOU DID NOT FIND MATHURA TO BE KUSHAN CAPITAL.

others : i know i am shouting , but i never knew dumb people could so balantly refuse the facts even when i could prove links and un-biased sources/links of information.I do not want to be talking to a deaf dumb.

**Samudra** · 30th September 2004 12:14

To Others who can hear , see and understand facts which are unbiased.

The last kushan emperor vasudeva , was a hindu.But we know that there wasnt a seperate religion called hindu then.But how come he called himself vasudeva ?
Because the indian culture and then religion had embraced the kushans and they had become a part and parcel of indian history,culture and everything indian.
Also Mathura was also capital to the Kushans.There are enough links , which i have posted above .People , as i said , who can hear,see and understand facts can easily click (i.e left click with your mouse button ) on the link and find out if what i claim is true or not.

as i have promised to some people to whom i had to shout , i will quit posting if anyone can prove me wrong.( i.e. mathura was not one of the capitals of kushans )

The rule of Kanishka I, the third Kushan emperor, who flourished from the late 1st to the early/mid-2nd century AD, was administered from two capitals: Purushapura (now Peshawar in northern Pakistan) and MATHURA , in northern India.

The above statement is from wikipedia

Kanishka and his inscriptions (c.110?): Kanishka, the greatest Kushan emperor, is also the most INDIANISED. Like others of his dynasty (*asianart*), he is a patron of sculpture. In this image, a Sanskritic inscription on his robe reads: "King of kings (maharajadhiraja), great king (maharaja), son of god (devaputra), Kanishka." His two capital cities are MATHURA and Peshawar; this statue is from a temple near Mathura. In one inscription he refers to his language, Bactrian (*N. Sims-Williams*), as "an Aryan language."

The above statement is from a columbia university website (?)

Obviously people who are not dumb can understand that MATHURA was the capital of Kaniska...

Those who claimed that Kushans never crossed into present day india , what do you wanna do ?

your claim that Kushans are indian despite the fact that their capital was nowhere near present day India and the limits of their state EXCLUDED 99% of India ...

- by vision

The were NOT BASED in what is known as India ... they were NOT Indian ...

- again by vision

More pearls of visidom from vision like north india was not aryanised and stuff...
People who know history will understand.Yea they shouldnt be dumb too.

**visioninthedark** · 30th September 2004 12:26

Originally Posted by chandragupta

VISION

PLEASE GOOGLE SOMETHING ON KANISKA , VISIT MY THE LINKS I GOT YOU , INCLUDING THE ONE FROM THE WEBSITE YOU REFERRED , AND IF YOU DONT FIND MATHURA TO BE ONE OF KUSHAN CAPITALS , I WILL QUIT POSTING HERE.

SWEAR ON ALLAH IF YOU ARE A TRUE MUSLIM YOU DID NOT FIND MATHURA TO BE KUSHAN CAPITAL.

Mathura was an administrative center for that part of the extended sphere of Influence ...

IT WAS NOT THE SEAT OF THE THRONE ....

check it out yourself ....

by the way .....

the center of this empire was based in PAKISTAN .... it ruled portions of India and it spread its INFLUENCE even further ...

it can therefore be said to be a PAKISTAN-BASED EMPIRE that ruled parts of India ...

let me give you an example .... The center of the Roman Empire was Rome .... and although the ruled over the whole of Europe nearly and their influence was global .... YET NO ONE IN FRANCE CAN CLAIM THAT THE ROMAN EMPIRE WAS FRENCH ....

do you get what I'm saying .... and EMPIRE IS KNOWN BY ITS CENTER AND CANNOT BE CLAIMED BY ITS PERIPHERY ....

Geographically it encompasses the north of India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Central Asia, and Western China (in particular the Tarim Basin).

Note that the sphere of Influence was far greated than where the CENTER AND CAPITALS OF THE EMPIRE WERE ...

If I use your logic ...... than the Chinese can Claim the Kushans to be Chinese .... since a part of China came within their empire .... just like only a part of India was within the empire ....

about Vasudeva ....

HE WAS THE ONE AND ONLY KING WHO ALONE AMONG THE WHOLE LONG DYNASTY ADOPTED A "HINDU" NAME ....

YOU ARE USING ONE PERSON AS AN EXAMPLE FOR THE WHOLE KUSHANS???

**Hari_Om** · 30th September 2004 12:39

Chandragupta,

That Mathura was a capital of Kanishka of the Kushan Dynasty, is as you have said, a correct statement.

That the Kanshika ruled parts of what is today Northern India including portion of the Gangetic plains is as you have said, also a correct statement.

From the Met Museum :

The rule of Kanishka, the third Kushan emperor who flourished from the late first to the early/mid-second century A.D., was administered from two capitals: Purushapura (now Peshawar) near the Khyber Pass, and Mathura in northern India. Under Kanishka's rule, at the height of the dynasty, Kushan controlled a large territory ranging from the Aral Sea through areas that include present-day Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan into northern India as far east as Benares and as far south as Sanchi.

There is also a map on the link posted.

Trust this will contribute in a small way to demonstrate the correctness of your case to Visioninthedark who will cease claiming that the Kushan's had no connections with what is present day India.

**visioninthedark** · 30th September 2004 12:45

Hari OM .... your link isn't working ....

guys .... check this out ...

Chronology of Kushan History

c.209BCMao-tun kills his father and gains control of the Hsiung-nu
c.320 BC, Alexander conquers the Persian empire but dies shortly afterwards leaving his empire to his generals (the Diadochi).
304 BC, Seleucos signs a peace treaty with Chandrgaupta Maurya.
281 BC, The Greeks cede the Punjab and Afghanistan after the death of Seleucos I Nikator.
c.250 BC, Bactria secedes from the Seleucid empire and the Parthians invade Persia. 1

c.200 BC, Mao-tun defeats the Yu-Chi, possibly bringing them into alliance with the Hsiung-nu.
176 BC, The king of the Yu-Chi is killed by the yu-hsien-wang, sent by Mao-tun, who reports that "All the people who draw bows have been united into one family".
c.140 BC, The Yu-chi are attacked and defeated by the Hsiung-nu again.
c.130 BC, The Yu-Chi overrun Bactria and settle as five tribes. 2

c.120 BC, Menander, the most famous of the Indo-Greek kings is engaged in wars against opponents in the Kabul valley.
c.75 BC, Maeus begins a dynasty of Indo-Parthian Kings.
58 BC, Azes the first begins an era at the date of his ascension.

c.30BC, 'Heraios' or Sanab becomes Kushan Yabgu (Prince)
c.10AD, Kajula Kadphises becomes Kushan Yabgu
c.20 BC, The last Greek king Hermaues dies, and his tiny kingdom becomes the last of Alexanders successor states to come under foreign domination. 3
c.30 AD, Kajula Kadphises unite all the tribes of the Yu-Chi and become the first of the Kushan emperors.

c.60 AD, Wima Taktu becomes the second Kushan emperor.
c.80 AD, Wima Kadphises becomes the third Kushan emperor.
c.115 AD, Kanishka the fourth Kushan emperor ascends the throne. (For a taste of the debate on this date see the section The date of Kanishka.
c.60 AD, Vima Takto the son of Kajula becomes the second Kushan emperor.
1st Century ADThe artistic schools of Mathura and Gandhara develop the first images of the Buddha
c.68 AD, Wima Taktu using the name Soter Megas (Great Saviour) conquers northern India.
c.80 AD, Wima Kadphises the son of Vima Takto ascends the throne.
c.80 AD, Marriage alliance between Kushans and the royal family of Sogdia
84AD, An envoy from the Kushans asking for marriage to a Han princess is refused.
c.90 AD, Kushan emperors begin to encroach on the Han sphere of influence in the Western Regions.
c.115 AD, Kanishka becomes Kushan emperor.
c.116 AD, Kushans put a puppet king on the throne of Ch'en-p'an.
c.120AD, The first image of the Buddha on a coin appears on the coins of Kanishka.

c.139 AD, Vasishka becomes emperor, and rules for only a few years.
c.143 AD, Huvishka becomes Kushan emperor.
c.155 AD, Kanishka II joint ruler? usurper?
c.180 AD, Vasudeva becomes the first Kushan to take an Indian name and the last of the great Kushan emperors.
2nd Century AD, Asvagosha writes a number of important Buddhist works and fourth great Buddhist council is held.
224 AD, Ardashir the first becomes the first king of the Sasanid empire.
240 AD, Shapur the first becomes Sasanian emperor.
c.213, Kanishka II (Kanishka III?) becomes Kushan emperor at Mathura.
c.232, Vasishka II becomes Kushan emperor at Mathura.
c.246, Vasudeva II becomes Kushan emperor at Mathura.
c.256, Kanishka III (Kanishka IV?) becomes Kushan emperor at Mathura
c.213 AD, Vasudeva dies and the Kushan empire is divided into a western and eastern half.
c.224-240 AD, The Sasanians invade Bactria and Northern India.
c.270, Kushan control of the Gangetic plain is lost.
277-286 AD, Hormizd I Kushanshah launches a rebellion against Bahram II of Iran.

307-379 AD Shapur II, Sasanid Emperor.
359 AD, A Kidarite Kushan fights alongside Shapur, against Rome, at Amida.
c.360 AD, The last Kushanshah Varahran II is overwhelmed by the Kidarites.

as u can see ..... northern India was conquered by the Kushans based in what is Pakistan .... it was a conquered land ...

as I said .... Rome conquered France .... but can the French claim that the roman empire was French???

No ....

a conquered peripheral land cannot claim to be the originators of an empire ....

**visioninthedark** · 30th September 2004 12:49

By the way ..... in my opinion if the Brits had been fair in doing the partition .... Dehli which was adjoining Punjab .... and surrounding lands would have been within Pakistan ....

Pakistan today is not what it should have looked like .... we were robbed of many areas that should have rightfully been ours ...

even this claim about Mathura .... only reinforces our claim .... if partition had been fair .... all these Pakistani lands would have been within the boundaries of Pakistan ... but was stolen from us ...

**Samudra** · 30th September 2004 12:58

vision in the darkest

get rid of me will you ?
i dont want to be talking to an ignorant fool who will make statements which are self contradictory and apparently so foolish who would even want the whole of india for pakistan and kill the hindu kafirs one by one.

get rid of me will you ?
i would want to talk to humans who are not racists.... on that score asim is far better.

Thread: Pakistan ,Two Nation Theory and a few lies

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Rate This Thread

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Similar Threads

Pakistan 'is a top failed state'

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions