Did Thai steal from Khmer culture?

[wym]

British Royals? - surely the current crop are of german descent

And by the by great fans of Mussolini before that proved to be bad PR.

[willyumiii]

Ridiculous title to a ridiculous topic.

We are sharing this planet, exchanging ideas and ideals.

Look at any place on the planet and you will see the exchange.

Nobody is against exchange but one must always acknowledge the source of contribution/give credit to the giver.

Taking it from someone and calling it entirely as one's own is downright wrong.

like americans with pizza right?

Well....there is pizza and then there is Pizza!

Italian Pizza... Bazil, mozzarella and olive oil.

and this funny thing called Thai pizza comes even in tuna and hot dog flavors!

And then there is American pizza ( see attachment )

Two out of three ain't bad!

I'd like to order an American pizza, combination, with extra cheese...yes! real cheese!

[Asianbloke]

When I steal your mobile phone than I have it and you don't have it anymore.

But steal culture? I steal your culture so now I have it and you are without culture?

I guess you mean they copied some aspects of Khmer culture?

Well, theft of a mobile phone is a bit different since it is a physical possession.

But, what about intellectual property theft. What is the confidential information in the company's system is copied and used by the other company? It stays at the original location and yet it has been stolen.

I agree the word 'stealing' might be a bit harsh here and I don't state that Khmer can claim cultural exclusivity of their customs.

I am simply reiterating the point that some commenters are missing out on. The Khmer weren't given any credit for the 'inspiring' Thai culture, on the contrary, they were accused to be the ones who imitated Thai culture.

This is where it goes totally wrong.

This is so insulting for a nation and its people.

The Imitators pretending to be the owners/ gracious providers of creations to the very people who invented them in the first place.

I don't see any exchange in this kind of relationship.

[Asianbloke]

//Funny only thing I hear of Indian culture is when it's 5 guys on a bus with 1 woman. Or when I am having a beer on Sukhumvit and some guy have Rolexes on the street for such a low price. If you want to blow your horn about India fine just do it on Indian VISA dot com.//

I have already mentioned in one of my comments that this isn't about India. However, if some commenters make ignorant remarks about India at this post, I would be compelled to offer additional information/clarification.

It has nothing to do with the blowing my own trumpet.

However, I can say you have a lot of reading to do if this is all you have heard about India or any other nation for that matter.

[Donnie Brasco]

Actually Lokesh the Thai policy in the South is a British legacy.It's typical of a departing colonial entity to leave plenty of opportunity for wars like this.

The British at their best.

This is complete rubbish.

Nice thing about bombast of this caliber and depth is that there is absolutely no need to determine who has posted, what his origins are, what evidence he has or whether with his current capabilities he is allowed to post more than 140 characters.

Read this. Read it carefully. When you're done, read it again.

You'll learn that to describe the situation in Pattani as a "British legacy ... typical of a departing colonial entity" is complete rubbish.

http://www.ihrc.org.uk/publications/reports/6750-a-brief-introduction-to-the-malay-kingdom-of-patani-1-

You really do NOT get this do you, casualposter.

So I will attempt to help you.

The last custodians of this wasps' nest were the British. Upon cessation of the colonial occupation instead of straightening out this internecine mess by acceding territory according to the historical imperatives described in this article left a mess. They did this intentionally as they ALWAYS do.

The reasons for this are clear to anyone familiar with colonialism.

I am familiar with the history, ethnic imperatives, religious proclivities and the current broader issues in this area.

The British commercial and banking interests and the efficacy of a quick deal were far more easily achieved by leaving a mess.

You can limit your purview to the usual pedantic Wiki, or historical SNAPSHOT in order to better serve your personal loyalties and (I suspect) your nationalistic prejudices.

They left a mess. They always leave a mess.

The US is no better in the modern era.

Occupiers always leave chaos and discord upon departure.

What stays behind is always toxic, destructive and unstable.

Buy the way, my comment on your initial bombast and subsequent rudeness stands.

Spare me further orders and instructions to read a historical record that has been common knowledge for years but that is one that YOU fail to view in any serious geopolitical context.

Done with you.

"Sometimes, 'fuggedabowdit' just means fuggedabowdit. . . . "

Edited April 1, 2014 by Donnie Brasco

[paz]

@Donnie

Occupation not a good thing. But strategically necessary at times.

Colonialism not a good thing. But historically justified, and largely amended by now.

UK also colonized HK, Singapore and Belize, seems like they are doing well enough now.

To me, "mess" is when the most evil part of a population tries to take control of the rest (works better that the rest is starved enough to be not so good either). Independently from the events that came immediately before.

What you call common historical knowledge it's actually an matter of opinions.

Edited April 1, 2014 by paz

[paz]

I am simply reiterating the point that some commenters are missing out on. The Khmer weren't given any credit for the 'inspiring' Thai culture, on the contrary, they were accused to be the ones who imitated Thai culture.

This is where it goes totally wrong.

This is so insulting for a nation and its people.

The Imitators pretending to be the owners/ gracious providers of creations to the very people who invented them in the first place.

Be aware that in this context, "imitators" means people of a giving ethnicity that migrated, breed and flourished in a distant place. Or, in case of religion or written language, is about colonizers that brought these, to indigenous that did not had a relevant one before.

For Thais, tracing back their roots to the the people their first King ruled is enough. Many countries have a similar history, they date back just from the point when they gained indipendence, etc. It's understandable.

Anyway, I think that Khmer people of today deserves much more than just recognition for their glorious past. Like some more basic human rights withing and without Cambodia. But that's another story.

Edited April 1, 2014 by paz

[mikebike]

I am simply reiterating the point that some commenters are missing out on. The Khmer weren't given any credit for the 'inspiring' Thai culture...

So your whole point is really that modern THAIS are not acknowledging borrowing from Khmer culture. Certainly this has been acknowledged for centuries in acedemics and social sciences. Is the empirical evidence not enough for you?

If, for their own (debatably misguided) cultural reasons, Thais choose to ignore/deny these historic links I fail to see how this devalues any perceived "credit" to the immediately preceding culture OR the culture(s) preceding that since all cultures are built on the hubris of those which pre-date them.

[wym]

You really do NOT get this do you, casualposter.

So I will attempt to help you.

The last custodians of this wasps' nest were the British. Upon cessation of the colonial occupation instead of straightening out this internecine mess by acceding territory according to the historical imperatives described in this article left a mess. They did this intentionally as they ALWAYS do.

The reasons for this are clear to anyone familiar with colonialism.

I am familiar with the history, ethnic imperatives, religious proclivities and the current broader issues in this area.

The British commercial and banking interests and the efficacy of a quick deal were far more easily achieved by leaving a mess.

You can limit your purview to the usual pedantic Wiki, or historical SNAPSHOT in order to better serve your personal loyalties and (I suspect) your nationalistic prejudices.

They left a mess. They always leave a mess.

The US is no better in the modern era.

Occupiers always leave chaos and discord upon departure.

What stays behind is always toxic, destructive and unstable.

After the Japs were defeated, the US were actually in control of the region, Brits had no real say in anything. In fact they wanted to punish the Thais for their secret deal with the Japs to facilitate their intial moves on Malaya by taking back the Patani sultanate, which the Brits had ceded to Thailand in 1909.

The US had actually been operating their OSS-controlled Seri Thai operation pretty freely during the Japanese occupation so overruled the UK's wishes and let Thailand keep Patani.

The "Thai for Thai" fascist/nationalists reversed past Islam-tolerant self-rule policies, required Thai-language schooling, shoved Buddhism down their throats etc, many of which policies continue today.

So all in all the Brits really aren't at much fault for the current conflict, blame the Yanks for leaving Patani in Thai hands, and Phibun for being a jerk.

[kaldoverde]

Ridiculous title to a ridiculous topic.

We are sharing this planet, exchanging ideas and ideals.

Look at any place on the planet and you will see the exchange.

Nobody is against exchange but one must always acknowledge the source of contribution/give credit to the giver.

Taking it from someone and calling it entirely as one's own is downright wrong.

Did India steal from Portuguese culture? Portuguese taught Indians how to make vindaloo, yet all Indians will tell you vindaloo is an original Indian dish. Why don't Indians give credit to Portuguese then?

Because it was an exchange not a theft, so it is not anyone's to keep. It is also important to understand that most Thai people learn the history of their country through word of mouth which tends to emphasize their national pride.

Personally I met many Thais who were able to tell me the origins of certain Thai culture traits back to India, Persia, China and Europe. When it comes to ancient traditions like the songkran some Thais will swear it originated in Thailand but that is simply because that's what they've been taught since childhood.

I've never seen a Thai saying the Ohm and Ganesh were their own and you see plenty of those around. Actually most Thais have no problem admitting Buddhism has close connections with Hinduism.

To be honest for someone who is supposedly defending openness between cultures your use of the word 'steal' makes you sound outright racist.

Edited April 1, 2014 by kaldoverde

[thailiketoo]

You really do NOT get this do you, casualposter.

So I will attempt to help you.

The last custodians of this wasps' nest were the British. Upon cessation of the colonial occupation instead of straightening out this internecine mess by acceding territory according to the historical imperatives described in this article left a mess. They did this intentionally as they ALWAYS do.

The reasons for this are clear to anyone familiar with colonialism.

I am familiar with the history, ethnic imperatives, religious proclivities and the current broader issues in this area.

The British commercial and banking interests and the efficacy of a quick deal were far more easily achieved by leaving a mess.

You can limit your purview to the usual pedantic Wiki, or historical SNAPSHOT in order to better serve your personal loyalties and (I suspect) your nationalistic prejudices.

They left a mess. They always leave a mess.

The US is no better in the modern era.

Occupiers always leave chaos and discord upon departure.

What stays behind is always toxic, destructive and unstable.

After the Japs were defeated, the US were actually in control of the region, Brits had no real say in anything. In fact they wanted to punish the Thais for their secret deal with the Japs to facilitate their intial moves on Malaya by taking back the Patani sultanate, which the Brits had ceded to Thailand in 1909.

The US had actually been operating their OSS-controlled Seri Thai operation pretty freely during the Japanese occupation so overruled the UK's wishes and let Thailand keep Patani.

The "Thai for Thai" fascist/nationalists reversed past Islam-tolerant self-rule policies, required Thai-language schooling, shoved Buddhism down their throats etc, many of which policies continue today.

So all in all the Brits really aren't at much fault for the current conflict, blame the Yanks for leaving Patani in Thai hands, and Phibun for being a jerk.

1. Brits (Lord Mountbatten) occupied Bangkok not USA. 2. The sovereignty issues were decided in the Atlantic charter which Churchill signed. 3. The only Seri Thai operations were in re writing history after WWII was over. Feel free to correct by listing the Seri Thai operations during the war.

Edited April 1, 2014 by thailiketoo

[Asianbloke]

@ mikebike

You missed out on what I am saying. What about deliberate distortion of history whereby Thai went further and said that it was the Khmer who copied from them. How can such an act ever be justified?

[mikebike]

@ mikebike

You missed out on what I am saying. What about deliberate distortion of history whereby Thai went further and said that it was the Khmer who copied from them. How can such an act ever be justified?

Because it is nationalistic jingoism perpetuated by nationalistic goals and education, NOT academic fact - even to Thai historians. Very much the same in the USA and most other countries.

[Donnie Brasco]

@Donnie

Occupation not a good thing. But strategically necessary at times.

Colonialism not a good thing. But historically justified, and largely amended by now.

UK also colonized HK, Singapore and Belize, seems like they are doing well enough now.

To me, "mess" is when the most evil part of a population tries to take control of the rest (works better that the rest is starved enough to be not so good either). Independently from the events that came immediately before.

What you call common historical knowledge it's actually an matter of opinions.

Strategically necessary for whom ? Imperialist superpowers ?

Colonialism is justified ?? By what criteria ? The "white man's burden" "Because we are so . . . . . (cough) good

Because of or in spite of colonialism.

Your "mess" reference and your reference to "evil" are unsubstantiated opinion.

And historical fact, the complete report of historical events is fact.

Fact and opinion are NOT the same.

Unsupported substantiations are not fact.

You need to learn the difference between fact and opinion.

While you're at it you might want to examine the HUGE difference that exists between EVIDENCE and PROOF.

Clarity

"Sometimes, 'fuggedabowdit' just means fuggedabowdit. . . . "

[kaldoverde]

Actually, name one thing that Thai's have 'invented' that the world is using.

Not only did they not invent anything of worth or value...but their attempt to counterfiet and copy other items and procedures falls way short of the mark.

Red Bull! and errrm.........errrm.........ah okay well I did name 1

bum gun

Muay Thai is practiced all over the world on it's own and also as an influence to modern martial arts.

Thai massage (no, not the 'me love you long time' kind) which is popular in spas all over the world.

Either way it's not a race to see who invented the most things, the world is a bubble, we're in it together and learn from each other all the time. Fact.

[Asianbloke]

@ Kaldoverde

//Did India steal from Portuguese culture? Portuguese taught Indians how to make vindaloo, yet all Indians will tell you vindaloo is an original Indian dish. Why don't Indians give credit to Portuguese then?

Because it was an exchange not a theft, so it is not anyone's to keep. It is also important to understand that most Thai people learn the history of their country through word of mouth which tends to emphasize their national pride.

Personally I met many Thais who were able to tell me the origins of certain Thai culture traits back to India, Persia, China and Europe. When it comes to ancient traditions like the songkran some Thais will swear it originated in Thailand but that is simply because that's what they've been taught since childhood.

I've never seen a Thai saying the Ohm and Ganesh were their own and you see plenty of those around. Actually most Thais have no problem admitting Buddhism has close connections with Hinduism.

To be honest for someone who is supposedly defending openness between cultures your use of the word 'steal' makes you sound outright racist.//

I don't know where exactly are you getting your facts from but the dish 'Vindaloo' has been recognized all over India as an Indian dish of Portuguese origin. It is dish from the Indian state of Goa and most Indians are well aware of the Portuguese influence on Goan Indian cuisine when they came to India eyeing it as their colony.

Let's not even talk about their infamous brutal rule and missionary activity in India.

Thai have to recognize those Gods as Indian/Hindu because it would definitely be very hard for them to prove otherwise in this case.

Moreover, it's far easier for Thai to recognize the influence of the distant India at times rather than their close neighbour Cambodians/ Khmer because it would go against how they want to portray Khmer.

Edited April 1, 2014 by lokesh

[arminbkk]

They probably did copy from them.....a long time ago. Why "blame" the current Thais for it?

They only believe what they were taught in school.

For me it is just a side note, for them it is years of indoctrination.

I am sure wherever Songkhran came from originally, it was not celebrated back then the way it is done now.

(Although back then women went topless, so might have been more interesting )

Being the way Thais are, I don't see I would receive much appreciation from them should I tell or explain to them

that some Thai tradition or cultural expression is not something they came up with themselves.

The Thai psyche might perceive it as an insult.

[casualposter]

Read this. Read it carefully. When you're done, read it again.

You'll learn that to describe the situation in Pattani as a "British legacy ... typical of a departing colonial entity" is complete rubbish.

http://www.ihrc.org.uk/publications/reports/6750-a-brief-introduction-to-the-malay-kingdom-of-patani-1-

You really do NOT get this do you, casualposter.

So I will attempt to help you.

The last custodians of this wasps' nest were the British. Upon cessation of the colonial occupation instead of straightening out this internecine mess by acceding territory according to the historical imperatives described in this article left a mess. They did this intentionally as they ALWAYS do.

The reasons for this are clear to anyone familiar with colonialism.

I am familiar with the history, ethnic imperatives, religious proclivities and the current broader issues in this area.

The British commercial and banking interests and the efficacy of a quick deal were far more easily achieved by leaving a mess.

You can limit your purview to the usual pedantic Wiki, or historical SNAPSHOT in order to better serve your personal loyalties and (I suspect) your nationalistic prejudices.

They left a mess. They always leave a mess.

The US is no better in the modern era.

Occupiers always leave chaos and discord upon departure.

What stays behind is always toxic, destructive and unstable.

Buy the way, my comment on your initial bombast and subsequent rudeness stands.

Spare me further orders and instructions to read a historical record that has been common knowledge for years but that is one that YOU fail to view in any serious geopolitical context.

I'm sorry but I have to wonder if you have even a basic understanding of Thai history. I also have to wonder if you've been drinking.

Let me show you where you're going wrong.

The last custodians of this wasps' nest were the British. Upon cessation of the colonial occupation ...

This is rubbish. Pattani has never been colonized; the British were never its custodians.

Siam formally annexed Pattani in 1902; the annexation was then ratified in accordance with the Anglo-Siamese treaty of 1909.

Going back hundreds of years, Pattani has always been considered part of Siam. When it rebelled and rejected suzerainty (such as in the 1630s) it was promptly attacked and brought back "into the fold".

When it rebelled in 1767 (following the destruction of Ayuthaya) it was attacked again and, in 1785, destroyed.

The new town of Pattani grew up on the banks of the Pattani River in the 1830s. The town has always been part of Siam / Thailand.

To understand just how idiotic your assertion really is, take a look at Satun. The province was formerly part of Kedah. The people are ethnically and religiously similar to those in Pattani. Is there a conflict in Satun? There isn't. Do people in Satun wish to break away from Thailand? They don't.

Pattani is a complex problem, and it's clear to me that your limited (and indeed incorrect) understanding of both the historical and cultural issues renders your judgement worthless.

[casualposter]

After the Japs were defeated, the US were actually in control of the region, Brits had no real say in anything. In fact they wanted to punish the Thais for their secret deal with the Japs to facilitate their intial moves on Malaya by taking back the Patani sultanate, which the Brits had ceded to Thailand in 1909.

So all in all the Brits really aren't at much fault for the current conflict, blame the Yanks for leaving Patani in Thai hands, and Phibun for being a jerk.

Fair points, but your terminology is questionable (the Brits did not "cede" Pattani to Thailand, for example).

The key point is that the troubles in the deep south of Thailand have nothing whatsoever to do with Britain.

[Seastallion]

 

Try to tell even an educated Thai that chillies (chilli peppers) were brought to Asia by the Portugese only about 700 years ago and originated in South America, they will probably think you are misinformed.

They'd be perfectly correct in thinking you're misinformed.

The fact that the Portuguese didn't arrive here until just over 500 years ago might be significant.

Read up on what happened in 1511. Google is your friend.

I stand corrected.

Chillies were brought from South America 700 (odd) years ago to Europe. Gradually they were taken further afield.....and it was probably the Portugese that brought chillies to Asia, whereupon they spread out even further.

Makes my point even better to think that 550 odd years ago there were no chillies in Thailand.

[casualposter]

 

Try to tell even an educated Thai that chillies (chilli peppers) were brought to Asia by the Portugese only about 700 years ago and originated in South America, they will probably think you are misinformed.

They'd be perfectly correct in thinking you're misinformed.

The fact that the Portuguese didn't arrive here until just over 500 years ago might be significant.

Read up on what happened in 1511. Google is your friend.

I stand corrected.

Chillies were brought from South America 700 (odd) years ago to Europe. Gradually they were taken further afield.....and it was probably the Portugese that brought chillies to Asia, whereupon they spread out even further.

Makes my point even better to think that 550 odd years ago there were no chillies in Thailand.

Ha! I think you've still got this wrong.

Who do you think brought the chillies from South America to Europe 700 years ago?

It's true though that the Portuguese introduced a lot of goodies to Thailand.

The wife of Constance Phaulkon was part Portuguese. She introduced cakes:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Guyomar_de_Pinha

[wym]

This gives some good detail: http://books.google.co.th/books?id=S5q7qxi5LBgC&pg=PA79&lpg=PA79&q=Sir%20Frank%20Swettenham

[paz]

@donnie

I did not even mentioned facts beside perhaps mentioning few former colonies currently not messed up.

I see you come from the high moral grounds of being 'anti everything' if so I can say, and with the convincement that your opinions are facts, but tbe diverging one of others are only unsubstantiated annoyances.

I will not stand further in the path between your current launchpad of much uppercase and the next, that could be leading a local guerrilla inspired by Sendero Luminoso possibly.

Thank you for setting things straight!

[Asianbloke]

Wym said:

//At least well-educated Europeans are aware of the fact they were still living in mud huts and wearing animal skins while Islamic culture had well-developed science and higher maths, arts music, was going through its enlightenment hundreds of years before it started to penetrate into Europe, ending their "dark ages".//

@ Wym

Though I might be digressing from the topic for a while, I beg to differ with regard to Islamic culture being highly developed.

Islamic history & invasions are replete with incidents whereby native structures were erased, plundered, looted, ravaged, modified and rebuilt using the material/designs of the very buildings that were destroyed.

Recent examples have been the complete destruction of the towering Buddhist Statues of Bamiyan in Afghanistan in 2001 in a final attack (last amongst the series of Islamic attacks launched over centuries) and of numerous Hindu temples in Pakistan since 1947 & continues till date.

Closer home, in city of Delhi in India, which has been home to Hinduism for many millenia, there are hardly any Hindu monuments to speak of since centuries of Mughal Islamic rule (pre-British) ravaged and modified the existing structures so much so that they were wiped off of any Hindu remnants. All we have are 'Islamic' monuments dotting the city.

The Hagia Sophia in Turkey originally was a church but was later converted to a mosque under Ottoman rule.

The bells, altar, iconostasis & sacrificial vessels were removed and many of the mosaics were plastered over. Islamic features were added to it while in the possession of the Ottomans.

Have we ever wondered that why Islam wasn't able to produce any architectural wonder to speak of, in the very land (SAUDI ARABIA) it originated & flourished unabated for centuries but can boast of monumental grandeur in far-off lands which it migrated to under various conquests??

[wym]

Sorry, may not go back as far as India's but Muslim culture did have its extreme glories back in the day, Europe would never had its Renaissance nor the industrial revolution if the Moors hadn't conquered Spain.

None of which is relevant to Partition nor more recent conflicts.

Try to not be so partisan, we're all citizens of the world now, and only tolerant acceptance will help bring the peace we all crave.

[Jessi]

"Ridiculous title to a ridiculous topic.

We are sharing this planet, exchanging ideas and ideals.

Look at any place on the planet and you will see the exchange."

Not rediculous...Thailand is great at taking, and not giving.

Check your history...'Muay Thai' is really 'Muay Khmer'...case in point.

Fighting has been a constant part of Southeast Asia since ancient times and eventually led to organized combat systems. In the Angkor era, both armed and unarmed martial arts were practiced by the Khmers. Evidence shows that a style resembling pradal serey existed in the 9th century, which may be one of the reasons why the Khmer empire was such a dominant force in Southeast Asia. The kingdom of Angkor used an early form of pradal serey, named Yuthakun Khom, along with various weapons and war elephants to wage war against their main enemy, the Vietnam-based kingdom of Champa, and later, Siam.^[6][7] Re-enactments of elephant battles are still recreated at the Surin Elephant Round-up.

At this time, the kingdom of Angkor dominated and controlled most of what is now Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam and Laos.^[8] As a result, Cambodia has influenced much of Thai and Lao culture.^[9] This leads the Khmer to believe all Southeast Asian forms of kickboxing started with the early Mon-Khmer people; they maintain that Pradal serey also has influenced much of the basis Muay Thai.^[10] On top of oral stories from their ancestors, the basis of this argument are the bas-reliefs left behind by early Khmers in the ancient temples of the Bayon and other Angkor temples. Much of the writing on ancient Khmer art has either been destroyed or adopted by the invading Thai armies when the Siamese sacked and looted Angkor and took Khmer captives including members of the Khmer royal court back to Ayutthaya.^[11] The Khmer warrior-king Jayavarman VII and the founder of a unified Laos, Fa Ngum, were among the military leaders believed to have been trained in the old fighting styles of Cambodia.

You can read more here.....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pradal_Serey

[casualposter]

This gives some good detail: http://books.google.co.th/books?id=S5q7qxi5LBgC&pg=PA79&lpg=PA79&q=Sir%20Frank%20Swettenham

Good link. Try this:

http://newspapers.nl.sg/Digitised/Article/stweekly18891015.2.56.aspx

Click the "I agree" blurb and away you go.

The article is from The Straits Time, 1889. It's actually a re-print of an article that appeared in the Penang Gazette, which in turn was taken from a London newspaper called The Whitehall Review.

The article may take a few minutes to fully load.

The notion that Pattani was once a British colony or British protectorate is surprisingly widespread. The notion is incorrect.

But I've never before come across anyone claiming that the Pattani troubles can somehow be ascribed to the British. The idiocy of this claim is staggering.

[casualposter]

I beg to differ with regard to Islamic culture being highly developed.

Ever been to the Al Hambra?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alhambra

It's a perfect fusion of architecture and poetry.

[Asianbloke]

@ wyn

I am note being partisan at all, we have learned to keep our past behind us for India is a secular country with no state religion. Muslims constitute the largest minority group in our country and India is home to the second-largest Muslim population in the world after Indonesia.

Your viewpoint wrt to supposed supremacy of Islam over Europe might be true.

For example:

The Hindu numerals through Muslim Spain reached Europe, where it attained the name Arabic numerals.

Unaware of its Indian origin, the Europeans took it for Arabic invention and called it the Arabic numerals.

[Scottythai]

@ wyn

I am note being partisan at all, we have learned to keep our past behind us for India is a secular country with no state religion. Muslims constitute the largest minority group in our country and India is home to the second-largest Muslim population in the world after Indonesia.

Your viewpoint wrt to supposed supremacy of Islam over Europe might be true.

For example:

The Hindu numerals through Muslim Spain reached Europe, where it attained the name Arabic numerals.

Unaware of its Indian origin, the Europeans took it for Arabic invention and called it the Arabic numerals.

Seriously get over yourself. Numerals like 4 on a bus and 1 woman walks on? India also has one of the worlds worst caste systems. Yea I have been there. Last I looked this is a Thai forum so other than calling all Thai's Thief's what is this thread about? Talking up India? Like I said India VISA dot com