Indo-Pak History via Mail

its a wonderful topic

gr8 amount of interacts

all intellectuals

i wonder had there been no partition what these intellectuals would have done ?

one says...........we (india & pak) are similar...........other says pakistan has no identity..................another one says...........pakistan has an identity, but quite new and is building up.......................you people keep discussing histories, geographies, terrorism, politics, religion, identity, etc. and do it on chowk.com which i guess not even 1% of india-pakistan-bangladesh is visiting

and while you live your life doing this mind-boggling exercise, intellectuals among you, of higher caliber and better persuasive skills become leaders, then what..........they rule you ................ and you become just headcount................. voters in a general election or in a plebiscite.

wake-up...................... histories are to take lessons................ and are made by not more than 1 in crores of population..........

what u do today will be discussed tomorrow...........

while discussing you are making a history............. see what is it (discussion/history) giving you, your beloved, the good and law abiding citizens, the soldier who is giving his life for you ?,

don`t let yourselves to be used by selfish people/politicians. dont just become a headcount............. please............. please.........

teshah#556:

Shahji, people like you and I have to accept that what was there 60 years ago is gone forever. Indians are unwilling to extend dual citizenship to Pakistanis and Bangladeshis -as is the case for Pakistan - because of an unfounded fear that it will lead to a deluge of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis wanting to migrate to India. I believe that you have always belonged to West Panjab, but even those Pakistanis who or whose parents left India for Pakistan are not allowed this priveledge.

The best one can hope for is a SAARC union on the pattern of Europe where everyone can freely move from one SAARC country to another. This will probably happen, though not necessarily in your and my lifetime. In the meantime, one has to be thankful that it is easier to get a visa to the other country than was the case a few years ago.

re:#555 by dost-mittar

India of the past was very different from India of today. The very word has a different origin. This is from a website:
(The name, derived from the Indus River (from Sanskrit sindhu, ``a river``), goes back to antiquity. Alexander the Great referred to the Indus (Indos), and to the region`s inhabitants as Indikoi, as early as the third century B.C. The name passed from Greek into Latin and thence into other European languages, the earliest citation in English being in 893 A.D. by King Alfred the Great. At the time of Columbus`s voyage, ``India`` or ``the Indias/Indies`` was often used to refer to all of south and east Asia. Columbus carried with him a passport from Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, written in Latin and dispatching him ``toward the regions of India`` (ab partes Indie) on their behalf. Martin Beheim`s globe of 1492, which predated the voyage, clearly labels the region as ``Indie.`` ``Hindustan,`` also derived from the Indus River, is a much later term, not appearing in English until 1665. In any case, in Spanish that name is not Hindustan but Indostan.)

It occurred to me that much of the civilizational confusion that we see on Chowk happens because the word ``India`` which, until British ruled, included the whole of South Asia, was literally hijacked by Nehru and other politicians of that time to be used exclusively for the ``geopolitical India`` that took shape after the British left. In other words, Pak gave up the use of the word ``India`` in a civilizational sense and is now busy creating a culture for itself quite distinct from the ``Indian culture``.
This of course is a foolish thing. Everything that Pak has is in a sense ``Indian`` from POV of the older definition of ``India``.
Jinnah should have insisted that the word ``India`` should be used only in a historical and civilizational sense by people of the subcontinent and not in a political sense. But Jinnah did not have a sense of history as did Nehru. What Pak lost, India gained.
Sridhar

Re: # 555

dost-mittar

Hear is a letter of mine published in the Daily News of Pakistan on 30th August, 2005, somewhat relevant to the subject:-



``Dual citizenship

I saw a report in the press which read, ``Pakistan excluded from India`s new dual citizenship laws``.

It raised many questions in my mind about the citizenship of those who were born on either side of India before Partition. According to the international law all such people should have primarily been treated as citizens by birth of India, the mother country. No option was taken from such individuals at the time of Partition whether they wanted to adopt citizenship of Bharat or Pakistan. In fact, a lot of people who migrated on the eve of Partition and even sometimes afterwards to either side of the Divide, were treated, ipso facto, as citizens of the country whereto they had migrated. I don`t know when this chapter was closed.

However, even today Kashmiris are enjoying dual, or perhaps, triple citizenship - of Azad Kashmir, of the Indian Kashmir and the third one virtually of Pakistan.

There arose the question of the stranded Biharies in Bangladesh who wanted to retain their Pakistani citizenship. The government of Pakistan agreed to accept their claim in principle and even arranged to settle a sizeable number of them in Pakistan. Even then a lot of Biharies are still suffering in Bangladesh due to the muddle of citizenship laws.

I think that among the plethora of issues consequential to the partition of India which defied solution the question of citizenship is the one which has not been given due attention commensurate with its importance. And that is why we now hear this paradoxical report about the exclusion of Pakistan from India`s new dual citizenship laws, despite the fact that of all the world, Pakistan is the most closely related country to India, geographically, historically, culturally, politically etc.

In fact, the grant of dual citizenship to the people of all the states in the Indian sub-continent would evidently prove to be the key-solution of all the problems resulting from the partition of India. It would in fact render even the core issue of Kashmir as irrelevant, as with dual citizenship, the people of Kashmir would be able to go to either side without any visa.

It, therefore, defies one`s comprehension why India as a mother country should take such a negative step, which, prima facie, is opposed to its current avowed policy of establishing friendly relations with Pakistan and its people.``

Surprisingly the concept of `Dual Citizenship` which can be taken as a very antithesis of the `Two-Nation Theory` evinced no reaction, not even a negative one, which I most expected. I took it as a positive reaction to my idea of Dual Citizenship. But I would like this idea which in my view knocks out the very basis of national identity, which is bedevelling Pak-India relationship, may be discussed by Chowky friends, especially by my friend dost-mittar.

Romair:

``You tend to avoid debates, which may highlight issues you are uncomfortable with. One cannot simply avoid such debates. One has to engage in them and prove one`s point.........``

No one is avoiding any debate but I also do not see any point in rehashing arguments that have been made several times. And what is to debate with someone who says that
``No one has, ``universally`` accepted the Sub-Continent as a civlizational entity! Other than some Indian commentators.``

Please google under Indian civilization and you will find millions of entries, several of them by non-Indians and they are not devoted to demolishing the myth of Indian civilization but to celebrate and discuss it. There is no reason for Muslims not to accept it because they have contributed significantly to this civilisation, including language, arts, culture, cuisine and music. But if Muslims want to reject the Pre-Islamic Indic (not Hindu, as Mahenjo-Daro inhabitants were in all probability not Hindus) heritage, then it is their prerogative.

Indians do not have to discuss or debate their civilization. They are quite comfortable with their heritage, with all its diversity and colourful mosaic. As for what geographic area it covers, I would suggest that this would encompass the modern SAARC area. If you feel more comfortable, you may call it a South Asian civilization.

re:#553 by kaalchakra
Good thinking.
Even Egypt is forced to be secular. With a great civilizational history (much of which is beyond the grasp of most Egyptians anyway, IMO), Egypt has no choice. If it gave up its rich heritage, some other nation would gratefully inherit it.
Jinnah did not have a sense of history like Nehru did. To him, all that mattered was to somewhow carve out a nationstate on the basis of religion. He perhaps hoped everything else would take care of itself. Nehruvian socialism in its early days ensured at least one good thing (though it was an economic disaster) which is to bring in a sense of Indianness among its population. Nothing was rejected. Even the evil Aurangzeb is still an Indian muslim. Today, most Indians would be amused at the sight of Pakis arguing whether they belong to South Asia or Middle East, etc etc. Indians do not have that problem.
Sridhar

``Indian stopped trying to portray present day India as some sort of a unified hisotrical civilization that everyone in the Sub-Continent should consider themselves a historical member of..............``

One more time. Present-day India is the true descendant of the historical Indian civilization by DEFAULT.

Pakistanis have (foolishly, IMO, because they have lost a lot of money because of this) gifted the entirety of this rich and ancient civilization to the present-day Indians by consistently denying its very existence, let alone respecting it.

One can not have it both ways. One can not reject the historical civilization by flatly denying its reality, and then complain that the present day India lays full claim to all of it.

Of course Indians are proud of the fact that one of the earliest and the greatest linguists of all time, Panini, was an ancient Indian. So what if he lived in an area which has now been occupied by Pakistanis - people who do not wish to burden themselves and their children with knowledge about Panini.

Even Ethiopeans celebrate their ancient civilization. Indian civilization is something else altogether. Indian pride in their historical civilization will consistently rise. It will certainly not diminish because someone else can`t see it, doesn`t like it, or thinks nothing of it. He or she is most welcome to find something else sufficiently real and appealing.

But mother nature has her laws. It is far easier to break things than to make things. Easier to deny the reality of things than to build real things.

``such a point of view, that claims India to be some sort of a civilizational entity, without feeling the need to provide facts to back it up, is what alienates Muslims in the region.``

There is another possibility. Some or most or all (that`s uncertain and immaterial) Muslims can `t see the civilizational entitity because they deliberately alienated themselves from the region and its peoples.

---

This particular debate is so senseless that one side must be completely off their rockers.

There are only two possiblities. Either India exists and existed and Muslims wilfully blinded themselves to it. Or India didn`t/doesn`t exist, and the rest of the world, including the Greeks, the Persians, the Chinese, and Indians themselves, have been all hallucinating for the last five thousand years.

---

The notion of India as Hindu umma is among the silliest ever floated. But if people could swallow that Ram Rajya meant Hindu sharia, then anything is possible.

re:#527 by behram1 on November 15, 2005 2:24pm PT

(When will they become humans?)
The bigger question is: when will beharam aatish-mein-g@@nd become human.
sugarcane respectfully submitted up beharam`s rear end
Sridhar

re:#530 by Salim_Chauhan
Thanks for your post.
Sometimes i wish i had more time as some people in chowk seem to have, so i could write more posts.
You say:
(Either I am dense or this old man was already senile)
More likely the latter.
Give the devil its due. The senile megalomaniac did carve out a seperate muslim nation. Now, his unworthy successors are defending him to no end in chowk! What a contrast!
As i have already said before, partition on the basis of religion is pure evil. Partition of India displaced people who had lived together in the same cultural communities for centuries. Pakistan is no wonder having such a hard time forging a seperate identity for itself.
Sridhar

#648 that is a funny one...espe #5..watch out for the ganna though.

BREAKING NEWS - posted due to urgent action required.

OK my Indian and Pakistani friends on this website, after reading many articles including this one and having reviewed many posts by all posters, I came to conclusion that Indians and Hindu civilization are far superior to Pakistanis and their civilization. Therefore, I contacted Indian Embassy in Ottawa to find how to go about converting back to Hinduism. I have received a letter from them stating the following amongst other things:

Quote:

1. Applications forms are now available to all Pakistanis for applying to Hinduism through the Embassy.

2. The Government of India is pleased to announce that it will reimburse the cost of un-circumcising all of us men. In this regard, stem cell technology developed at IIT Madras
will be utilized.

Following conditions apply:

1. Because of their active and passive traits in an unmentionable area, converted Pathans will be awarded the caste of Kashtriyas and deputed to northeastern India to fight Maoists. A handsome hardship allowance of 1 pound of niswaar per day and free cassettes of Rahim Shah will be given to them.

2. Converted Punjabis subsequently found to be hobnobbing with Sardar jees will be re-circumcised and dispatched to Tamilnadu for teaching Hindi to the Tamils. No hardship allowance will be given.

3. Converted Mohajirs will have to remain in quarantine for 1 year due to the evidence of presence of avian flu carriers in the migratory birds. Biharis should note that they will not be allowed to feed themselves for this period for their own benefit and for the benefit of the humankind.

4. Since they are accustomed to persecution in Pakistan, converted Qadianis will be assigned schedule castes status initially. No Nobel Prize won by them will be recognized. However, they will be trained to work their castes upwards.

5. Pakistani cab driving Parsees (including those living in Texas) will be given a stipend to learn to drive rickshaws in Bombay in order to earn their living in a respectful manner.

Government of India also notes that there is a likelihood that as soon as Pakistani Muslims convert back to Hinduism, existing fundamentalist Hindus, especially from this site, will convert to Islam due to the hatred they hold against Muslims. They are forewarned not to do that. If they do, they will immediately be classified as Dushts and Atungwads, arrested and deported to Al Ghuraib and Guantanamo Bay through the strategic alliance that the Government of India has in place with our international friends.

Unquote.

Please hurry. I have learnt that there are limited allowances available.

Also #546 Arjun {``I, for one, am planning to print ``Not a Pakistani`` t-shirts(with American flags)..the next time there is a terrorist attack, there`ll be a lot of customers for it(mostly pakis``}

Arjun,
While you are printing T-shirts, can you print one for me that reads:

``I look Iranian because of my Iranian mother in Pakistan and not because I am a Paki mother who wants to look Iranian.``} :) LOL

#545, Arjun {``I, for one, am planning to print ``Not a Pakistani`` t-shirts(with American flags)..the next time there is a terrorist attack, there`ll be a lot of customers for it(mostly pakis ``}

Arjun,
Don`t bother to get one for Romair. He needs one that says ``I may look Mexican, but I was born in East LA.`` :)

WTF are Indians doing? You should be running from any association with the pakis...Didn`t 9/11 and the London Bombings teach you anything?

Stop calling yourself south asian..As it is, I`ve heard brit-Indians are against the term south asians...it lumps them with the pakis and the bangladeshis..

I, for one, am planning to print ``Not a Pakistani`` t-shirts(with American flags)..the next time there is a terrorist attack, there`ll be a lot of customers for it(mostly pakis but a few afghans and middle easterners too)...

Romair #543, {``... then do tell me what is common between me and someone from Kerela or Tamil Nadu or Gujrat? You can tell us apart from a mile.....I have been confused for an Afghan, an Irani (or even a Mexican) but never a Tamil, or Kearaliite, or Gujrati....How in the world are (or were) we a part of the same civilization, if we don`t even have any commonalities after 5000 years?``}

Romair Bhai,
I am so glad, for Pakistan`s sake, that an understanding of anthropology and genetics are not necessary for military intelligence. :)

So, you are often mistaken for a Mexican? You have no luck whatsoever, if it ain`t the FBI, it`s the border guards after you. :)

Seriously, what one looks like and civilization/culture are very different. One generation of intermarriage can change the appearance of an Irani, an Afghan, a Paki, a Gujju, a Mexican, a Tamil, and yes even someone from Kerala. The fact that I may resemble a Frenchman, an Eskimo, a Spaniard, an Italian, a Greek, a Chinaman, a Jap, or a Bihari (as some Pakis enjoy calling me :) ) does not mean that I don`t share any culture with my Rajput, or Turk, or Irani relatives. Don`t let appearances fool you my friend. :)

Now, did anyone ever call you a wetback? :)