Connections between the Indus Valley (Harppan) & Mesopotamia

[LASER1]

True. And no amount of pretending to be disciples of Chanakya will change the fact that most of Ganga is just primitive aboriginal cultures with a thin overlay of civilization from our region. Indus like in history has always remained pristine and majestic. Ganga on the other hand evokes beastiality, primitivness etc.

Ganga is Ganga, Indus is Indus and both shall never meet. Both are synonyms for India and Pakistan. One a shudra and the other regal.

More than the place of origin, the people matters.
I'm no disciple of anyone. Our culture is not a primitive or aboriginal culture, this great culture has contributed a lot to different fields of science, philosophy, mathematics, medicine and so on. Sindhu is just a river, around which people have lived and passed. Ganga is another river.

Both are great rivers, nothing more nothing less. Now, one belongs to mlechas and the other is aryavarta. Hence I said, will the crow ever be an eagle if it sits in a higher place?

Shudra is the same chathurvarnya and part of aryavarta.

 

[Defenceanalyst91]

Good for you. Fantastic. I am glad you feel pride in your Ganga. Go and bath in the Ganga. Celebrate it. Now piss off and leave us with the "failed, invaded Indus". To us it is majestic.

Thank you.

Truth is bitter

Good for you. Fantastic. I am glad you feel pride in your Ganga. Go and bath in the Ganga. Celebrate it. Now piss off and leave us with the "failed, invaded Indus". To us it is majestic.

Thank you.

Truth is bitter

Good for you. Fantastic. I am glad you feel pride in your Ganga. Go and bath in the Ganga. Celebrate it. Now piss off and leave us with the "failed, invaded Indus". To us it is majestic.

Thank you.

Truth is bitter

 

[TMA]

Don't bait and start an unnecessary discussion. Just read and move on.

As Chanakya said prasada sikharasthoupi kakah kim garudayate Will the crow ever be an eagle if it sits in a higher place

Where was Chanakya from? Was he from co-terminous s Pakistan or co-terminous Bharat?

 

[LASER1]

Where was Chanakya from? Was he from co-termious Pakistan or co-termious Bharat?

He was from Aryavarta (Land of Aryas). A Vedic Brahmin, today's 'Pakistan' has nothing to do with Chanakya, the vedics are mostly non-existent there and so is aryavarta. But you can have the leftovers (whatever there is left) and land, movables and immovables. It doesn't matter to anyone since Bharat will always be associated with the land of great philosophy and inventions. There was no conterminous Pakistan anyway there was only Bharat.

 

[TMA]

More than the place of origin, the people matters.
I'm no disciple of anyone. Our culture is not a primitive or aboriginal culture, this great culture has contributed a lot to different fields of science, philosophy, mathematics, medicine and so on. Sindhu is just a river, around which people have lived and passed. Ganga is another river.

Both are great rivers, nothing more nothing less. Now, one belongs to mlechas and the other is aryavarta. Hence I said, will the crow ever be an eagle if it sits in a higher place?

Shudra is the same chathurvarnya and part of aryavarta.

But do you agree that India linguistically refers to the Indus River? And as such calling Bharat India today is a misnomer. Referring to Bharati culture as Indian culture is inaccurate?

He was from Aryavarta (Land of Aryas). A Vedic Brahmin, today's 'Pakistan' has nothing to do with Chanakya, the vedics are mostly non-existent there and so is aryavarta. But you can have the leftovers (whatever there is left) and land, movables and immovables. It doesn't matter to anyone since Bharat will always be associated with the land of great philosophy and inventions. There was no conterminous Pakistan anyway there was only Bharat.

And where on google map would one find the Land of Arya’s?

 

[LASER1]

But do you agree that India linguistically refers to the Indus River? And as such calling Bharat India today is a misnomer. Referring to Bharati culture as Indian culture is inaccurate?

India is relatively a new name. Indica too, it should've been Sindhya. As the name of Indus was Sindhu and arabean sea was Sindhu sagar.

But yes, it is originally Bharat.

 

[TMA]

India is relatively a new name. Indica too, it should've been Sindhya. As the name of Indus was Sindhu and arabean sea was Sindhu sagar.

But yes, it is originally Bharat.

And on today’s map you will find Indus/Sindhu/Sind in Pakistan. Not in today’s Bharat.

 

[LASER1]

And where on google map would one find the Land of Arya’s?

I don't think GPS was there during the time of Chanakya. Neither Chanakya had a Birth certificate or a facebook so, his location of origin is still unknown. Only assumptions are found.

And on today’s map you will find Indus/Sindhu/Sind in Pakistan. Not in today’s Bharat.

You will never find, the name Sindhu on a map.

 

[TMA]

I don't think GPS was there during the time of Chanakya. Neither Chanakya had a Birth certificate or a facebook so, his location of origin is still unknown. Only assumptions are found.

Really I heard that the internet was invented 6000 years ago in coterminous Bharat. If this is the case then GPS should have around at least four thousand years ago, right(?)


So somewhere in the Indian Subcontinent possibly even co terminous Pakistan?

I don't think GPS was there during the time of Chanakya. Neither Chanakya had a Birth certificate or a facebook so, his location of origin is still unknown. Only assumptions are found.


You will never find, the name Sindhu on a map.

The point is that these words whether you find them on a map or not refer to places which originate in coterminous Pakistan, they do not originate in coterminous Bharat.

 

[LASER1]

Really I heard that the internet was invented 6000 years ago in coterminous Bharat. If this is the case then GPS should have around at least four thousand years ago, right(?)


So somewhere in the Indian Subcontinent possibly even co terminous Pakistan?

What are you trying to say here? I'm not interested in some trolling or stuff, it's moronic. If you have no knowledge of anything that's being discussed, you can stop quoting me.

The point is that these words whether you find them on a map or not refer to places which originiate in coterminous Pakistan, they do not originate in coterminous Bharat.

Can you find me the name 'Pakistan' anywhere on any book written before 20th century? No, before the 7th century AD?

But I can give you the boundaries of Bharat based on books/epics written nearly some three thousand years back. (Probably won't, you're not worth replying given your lack of knowledge on the subject)
"Conterminous Pakistan"? Go look at the google map you mentioned.

 

[TMA]

What are you trying to say here? I'm not interested in some trolling or stuff, it's moronic. If you have no knowledge of anything that's being discussed, you can stop quoting me.


Can you find me the name 'Pakistan' anywhere on any book written before 20th century? No, before the 7th century AD?

But I can give you the boundaries of Bharat based on books/epics written nearly some three thousand years back. (Probably won't, you're not worth replying given your lack of knowledge on the subject)
"Conterminous Pakistan"? Go look at the google map you mentioned.

Hence my usage of the term coterminous Pakistan and not just Pakistan...

 

[LASER1]

Hence my usage of the term coterminous Pakistan and not just Pakistan...

It's still irrelevant in every sense. The name Pakistan has nothing to do with any of the historical figures I mentioned. Also, the boundaries of Bharat extended from what's today's Pakistan to the east (Bihar and so on) and up to what is today's central India. Pakistan is not part of Aryavarta/Bharat anymore.

 

[TMA]

It's still irrelevant in every sense. The name Pakistan has nothing to do with any of the historical figures I mentioned. Also, the boundaries of Bharat extended from what's today's Pakistan to the east (Bihar and so on) and up to what is today's central India. Pakistan is not part of Aryavarta/Bharat anymore.

Agree to disagree. Whilst the name Pakistan is new, the land and the peoples are not. Their history is their history.

Also Bharat as a nation state is only 71 years old. Before this what was Bharat?

 

[LASER1]

Agree to disagree. Whilst the name Pakistan is new, the land and the peoples are not. Their history is their history.

Also Bharat as a nation state is only 71 years old. Before this what was Bharat?

Nation has a unique culture to it. Your culture is as you have declared is Islamic. Then why claim those vedics? Your claim is based on geography which is a non-starter, my claim is based on people and their tradition (as mentioned in Vedas). Aryavarta is now concentrated in todays Bharat.
And no, Bharat as a nation-state existed before, today it's boundary has extended far south and have lost many lands towards west and east. But our civilization still survives.

 

[lastofthepatriots]

Bhartis living in their aryafarta delusions.