Talk:Punjabi Muslims/Archive 1

Vandal Warning

IP address: 122.164.190.132 (traced to India) has been identified as continuously vandalizing various pages relating to Muslims, and South Asian ethnic groups. In particular, he keeps removing pictures of or references to prominent South Asian Muslims and making uncited, unexplained changes. Follow his trail, his posts have been consistently reverted for unexplained deletion of content and biased behavior. Please keep an eye-out for that IP and revert his changes. Vdr11 (talk) 23:00, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving Uncited Population Figures

←== The non-existence of Punjabi Buddhists ==

@Abiel765: the source to support the claim dates back to 1872 which doesn’t adhere to Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Any evidence to support the existence of Punjabi Buddhists? Are there any historical figures? Doesn’t seem to be any.KashKarti (talk) 17:46, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@KashKarti: There are many stupas, remaints and sites still found in Punjab, particularly in the Pothohar region, so it's pretty obvious Buddhism was present in the region. Judging by your history, you are literally removing anything related to Buddhism with Pakistan or weirdly with "Punjabis" and also for an odd reason disassociating "Gandhara" with Pakistan when it's literally located in that country and associating it with Afghanistan which includes parts of it. By your same logic, there aren't any "Afghan buddhists" neither or many of stupas and sites or produced in Afghanistan like the Bamyan Buddhas were produced by foreign-origin Kushans and not by a regular Pashtun or Tajik of Afghanistan, but Buddhism was still present in the regions. What is the reason behind your constant edits, could you elaborate it.Abiel765 (talk) 18:28, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Abiel765: The stupas found in Punjab were built by foreign-origin rulers like the Indo-Greeks, Kushanas and Parthians. Is there any evidence that native Punjabis embraced Buddhism? And actually, we do have records of Buddhists born in the area that is now Afghanistan e.g. Prajñā (Buddhist monk) who was born in Kabul. Why are there no famous Buddhist historical figures born in Punjab? Please provide a reliable source for the existence of Buddhists in Punjab or it will have to be removed I’m afraid.KashKarti (talk) 18:34, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@KashKarti: The sentence is literally stating that Buddhism was present in the "Punjab region" and the sources are literally reiterating that, also apparently Kumāralāta hails from Gandhara, presumably from Taxila, and many others hail from Gandhara even though the main location is not known and Gandhara literally includes Pothohar and North Punjab. Abiel765 (talk) 18:50, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Abiel765: Present in Punjab only during the reign of Kushanas, Greeks and Parthians. Most regions of the world with a Buddhist presence can name hundreds of Buddhist monks and figures. Within the area that is now Punjab, why are there no Buddhist figures?KashKarti (talk) 19:02, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@KashKarti: So you proved the point, the sentence is stating that before the arrival of Islam, Buddhism was present in the region of Punjab, Kushan, Indo-greek, Mauryan empire were before the arrival of Islam with the Umayyad Caliphate and Ghaznavids. And Kumāralāta hails from Taxila which is located in what is now Punjab. Abiel765 (talk) 19:15, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Abiel765: Kumaralata was probably a Kushan/Yuezhi much like Lokaksema (Buddhist monk). But yes I concede that he was born in Taxila (not a part of core Punjab though). So far Punjab has produced ONE Buddhist figure it seems.KashKarti (talk) 19:50, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@KashKarti: Than others like Khema, an important figure in Buddhism was born during the time of Buddha, way before your definition of reign of Kushans, Indo Greeks and Parthians, and even before the Mauryan empire, and in Sialkot, which I guess it's also in Punjab. So you proved the point, the sentence is stating that before the arrival of Islam, Buddhism was obviously present and that's what the sources are reiterating. Abiel765 (talk) 11:41, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]