Blacks Climing Indus Valley Civilization

[Sugarcane]

As per your logic , Humans came from Africa , That is how Its valid .

Only If U consider Indians to have descended from MARS

If Africans , have a valid claim , then so does the whole Mankind as we all have descended from them .

That's still is more logical way to claim IVC than inventing stories.

 

[ArsalanKhan21]

Life evolved in the sea and then migrated to land. Human evolved in Africa. The people of Indus Valley created their civilization. The Humans migrated from Africa 120,000+ years and colonized the world. The people now living in Black Africa with no histprical monuments in their countries wants to claim Pakistan's Indus Valley Civilization. These turds want to hijak the accomplishments of other civilizations.

 

[Jaanbaz]

Black people have more claim on IVC then Indians.

 

[ArsalanKhan21]

Black people have more claim on IVC then Indians.

Can you elighten us on your brilliant logic !

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Can you elighten us on your brilliant logic !

What do you call people who claim as their property what is on you land? Indian's and now African's .....

Next it will be Eskimo's.

 

[Jaanbaz]

Can you elighten us on your brilliant logic !

I was kidding. Let me be serious, neither Indians or Africans has any claim on IVC.


How can some Indian sitting in Chennai claim to own IVC?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

i dont think its that clear cut.. dravidian are the original people of india and there is plenty of evidence to suggest they settled in indus valley prior to being driven south... google it

however thats neither here or there.... the topic is can this early civilisation be termed black..... personally it does not matter to me much... as i said human civilisation is human civilisation.... what shade ones skin is somewhat irrelevant

The term 'Dravidian' is typically used in two different contexts - linguistic and racial/ethnic. The theories that refer to the IVC (and the Baloch) being 'Dravidian' or 'linked to Dravidian' do so from a linguistic context, not racial/ethnic.

Then you should read about IVC.

BBC - Religions - Hinduism: History of Hinduism

Picture of Shiva found from IVC sites

Pashupati seal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

@DESERT FIGHTER I am not being religious here. The above god is Pashupati or Shiva...one of the main gods in Hinduism. The seals are from Mohenjo-daro.

That doesn't make the IVC a 'Hindu civilization', it merely suggests that Hinduism may have eventually evolved from the religio-cultural practices of various civilizations in South Asia.

 

[ito]

That doesn't make the IVC a 'Hindu civilization', it merely suggests that Hinduism may have eventually evolved from the religio-cultural practices of various civilizations in South Asia.

It makes Hindu civilization...Hinduism has no concept of proselytization. A person is Hindu if his ancestors are Hindus. There is no other way a person can be Hindu. So Hindus can trace their ancestry to IVC.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

It makes Hindu civilization...Hinduism has no concept of proselytization. A person is Hindu if his ancestors are Hindus. There is no other way a person can be Hindu. So Hindus can trace their ancestry to IVC.

Hindu is a modern term, compared to the IVC - so what that means is that Hinduism was born as a result of the religious and cultural evolution and changes from the rise and fall of various ancient civilizations, empires, invasions and human migration from West to East over millenia.

IN addition, Hindu is a belief - beliefs change, peoples origin does not. Hindus are who they are because of what they choose to believe.

Pakistanis are the descendants of the civilizations of Mehargarh, Harrapa, IVC etc not because of what they believe, but who they are.

You can't magically change the ancestry of modern Greeks by claiming that since they no longer practice the polytheistic faith of their ancient ancestors that they no longer have any claim on that history.

 

[Kashmiri Pandit]

It makes Hindu civilization...Hinduism has no concept of proselytization. A person is Hindu if his ancestors are Hindus. There is no other way a person can be Hindu. So Hindus can trace their ancestry to IVC.

Yup

When some one ( Western Person ) converts to Hinduism , he is not called Hindu .
He is called either a Shavite , Shakta , Hare Krishna , Vaishnava etc but not Hindu .

 

[ito]

Hindu is a modern term, compared to the IVC - so what that means is that Hinduism was born as a result of the religious and cultural evolution and changes from the rise and fall of various ancient civilizations, empires, invasions and human migration from West to East over millenia.

IN addition, Hindu is a belief - beliefs change, peoples origin does not. Hindus are who they are because of what they choose to believe.

Pakistanis are the descendants of the civilizations of Mehargarh, Harrapa, IVC etc not because of what they believe, but who they are.

You can't magically change the ancestry of modern Greeks by claiming that since they no longer practice the polytheistic faith of their ancient ancestors that they no longer have any claim on that history.

Hinduism has no founder. The customs and culture of IVC evolved into a full featured religion that is now know as Hinduism. I never said that Hindus of today strictly follow what was practiced in IVC. Like many religions, Hindusim too evolved. But there are many customs Hindus practice as was done in IVC days even today.

Yes, many from Pakistanis, especially from Punjab and Sindhi, are legacy to IVC too.

 

[ArsalanKhan21]

The theories that refer to the IVC (and the Baloch) being 'Dravidian' or 'linked to Dravidian' do so from a linguistic context, not racial/ethnic.

Balochs migrated from Iran and speak an Iranian language while the Brahui migrated from India and they speak Dravidian language. You meant Brahuis and not Balochs.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

How can we Pakistanis claim IVC, first off we are descended from low castes who maintained a lower position in society. Secondly we have been conquered and mixed with Arabs and Afghans etc. We have very little to do with IVC people who were high castes and high castes never lived in Pakistan.

History disagrees with you, migrations have taken place and the people who live in Pakistan are extremely different from IVC people. We are a mixture of low caste Dalits and tribals with Arabs and Afghans.

And how exactly have you established this particular genetic makeup of Pakistanis?

And aren't 'castes' in Hinduism reflective of social standing rather than race, and if so, how exactly did you establish the 'social standing' of Pakistan's ancestors from thousands of years ago in the IVC?

 

[ArsalanKhan21]

How can we Pakistanis claim IVC

Pakistanis descended from the people of Indus Valley Civilization. Some people may have foreign blood but after many centuries of intermarriage they are all native.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Hinduism has no founder.

You contradicted that statement with your next one.

The customs and culture of IVC evolved into a full featured religion that is now know as Hinduism.

Your own statement of 'XYZ evolving into a religion known as Hinduism' is a statement about the creation of a religion called Hinduism.