Ghaggar-Hakra believed to be mythical Rig Veda Sarasvati river proven false

[Fireurimagination]

20% of Pashtuns still make more then 3 times of Afghan pashtuns. We are not shamefull like you guys. Punjabis make 2% of Indians while 50% of Pakistan. You guys still have no shame claiming Harappa and Vedic civilizations.

But Bhai isn't Vedic culture Haram and anti-Islamic, damn you are gonna go to hell

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Because its our heritage. Meluhha the name given by Mesopotamians for the traders coming from Gujarat coast. Pashtuns never considered themselves people related with Punjabis.

Did i say they claimed to be punjabis Your heritage is being mulatto dravidian if you upper caste or dravidian if you are lower caste. Only punjabis can say they are original yindus. Come to Pakistan if you want to meet original pure Vedic, yes there are still few left in Punjab.

But Bhai isn't Vedic culture Haram and anti-Islamic, damn you are gonna go to hell

Another one bites the dust

 

[Roybot]

I explained to you how but you keep ignoring like typical Yindu 3 times more pashtuns live in Pakistan then in Afghans. And lets not even count how many punjabi-pathans there are. You see we are more culturally closer then Yindustan ever was.

Haha so are the Mogolians and Chinese, they are practically the same genetically. You will never see English referring to Napolean as their hero, and English and French are pretty close culturally and genetically. And lets not forget that Afghan Pashtuns don't see Pakistani Punjabis or Sindhis or Muhajirs are as their own.

This phenomena of making the people who invaded you your heroes is unique to Pakistanis.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Haha so are the Mogolians and Chinese, they are practically the same genetically. You will never see English referring to Napolean as their hero, and English and French are pretty close culturally and genetically.

But this phenomena of making the people who invaded you your heroes is unique to Pakistan.

See Mongolian will be close to Chinise then Yindu. Same way Pashtuns are closer to punjabis then dravidians mulatos.

 

[Nassr]

Mahabharata states that Sarasvati became invisible at a place called Vinasana due to her contempt of Sudras and Abhiras and thus the Rishis lost her at this place. This and subsequent narration clearly means that it were the Rishis who could not see the Sarasvati at this place and that Sarasvati was lost to them at Vinasana and not that the River had been completely lost in the desert as it is famously accepted. Mahabharat indicates that there were numerous other Trithas (pilgrimage site) on the banks of Sarasvati, ahead of Vinasana which were visited by mighty Baladeva.

The Mahabharata after narration of the Tirth at Vinasana, highlights that Baladeva next visited Subhumika located on the bank of Sarasvati where he came in contact with fair complexioned Apsaras. Next he visited the pilgrimage site of Gargasrota on the bank of same river. Next he visited Sankha on the bank of same river and then on to Dwaita lake. He then proceeded to the Tirtha called Nagadhanwana onbanks of Sarasvati. From this point Baladeva, face turned east, visited hundreds and thousands of famous tirthas that occurred at every step along his journey along the banks of river Sarasvati and reached the spot where Sarasvati turns in an eastward direction towards the forest of Nirmisha.

The most interesting and surprising aspect that has been highlighted in the Mahabharata itself and has not been much talked about (again very surprisingly) is the mention that Sarasvati changes course eastwards towards the forest of Naimisha, where the story of Mahabharata was narrated. The Forest of Naimisha is believed to be located in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, not far from Triveni Sangam where Ganga, Jamna and Sarasvati meet in a holy confluence.

When Mahabharata state this unequivocally and as clearly as the daylight, that Sarasvati did not completely die out at Vinasana and that it continued and followed an easterly course as compared with Ghagar-Hakra which followed a westerly course, why is it that history is being re-written and incorrectly presented by some Indians.

Could any of the Indian posters here please answer this question. Thanks.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Now get back to topic please, answer Nassr.

 

[Fireurimagination]

Another one bites the dust

That is the best you can come up with all your Vedic knowledge

 

[Nassr]

Mahabharata states that Sarasvati became invisible at a place called Vinasana due to her contempt of Sudras and Abhiras and thus the Rishis lost her at this place. This and subsequent narration clearly means that it were the Rishis who could not see the Sarasvati at this place and that Sarasvati was lost to them at Vinasana and not that the River had been completely lost in the desert as it is famously accepted. Mahabharat indicates that there were numerous other Trithas (pilgrimage site) on the banks of Sarasvati, ahead of Vinasana which were visited by mighty Baladeva.

The Mahabharata after narration of the Tirth at Vinasana, highlights that Baladeva next visited Subhumika located on the bank of Sarasvati where he came in contact with fair complexioned Apsaras. Next he visited the pilgrimage site of Gargasrota on the bank of same river. Next he visited Sankha on the bank of same river and then on to Dwaita lake. He then proceeded to the Tirtha called Nagadhanwana onbanks of Sarasvati. From this point Baladeva, face turned east, visited hundreds and thousands of famous tirthas that occurred at every step along his journey along the banks of river Sarasvati and reached the spot where Sarasvati turns in an eastward direction towards the forest of Nirmisha.

The most interesting and surprising aspect that has been highlighted in the Mahabharata itself and has not been much talked about (again very surprisingly) is the mention that Sarasvati changes course eastwards towards the forest of Naimisha, where the story of Mahabharata was narrated. The Forest of Naimisha is believed to be located in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, not far from Triveni Sangam where Ganga, Jamna and Sarasvati meet in a holy confluence.

When Mahabharata state this unequivocally and as clearly as the daylight, that Sarasvati did not completely die out at Vinasana and that it continued and followed an easterly course as compared with Ghagar-Hakra which followed a westerly course, why is it that history is being re-written and incorrectly presented by some Indians.

Could any of the Indian posters here please answer this question. Thanks.

No explanation to this query?

Can any of the Indian ladies and gentlemen here, clear this riddle please.

 

[Fireurimagination]

No explanation to this query?

Can any of the Indian ladies and gentlemen here, clear this riddle please.

What is the query..? Mahabharat happened around 3000 BC, after that probably 100s of rivers were lost and others came in to existence

 

[Menace2Society]

Indians, this is you guys back when the Indus Valley civilization put the sub continent on the map.

As you can see, living in the jungle all alone does not constitute a civilization.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Yup we nvr did u nvr were able to prove it even in this 21st century.

 

[bronxbull]

waste of a discussion.

 

[INDIC]

Yup we nvr did u nvr were able to prove it even in this 21st century.

Pakistan can never believe in the proofs.

 

[Nassr]

What is the query..? Mahabharat happened around 3000 BC, after that probably 100s of rivers were lost and others came in to existence

River Ghagar-Hakra’s flow was towards south west, whereas according to Mahabharata, River Sarasvati flowed in easterly direction towards Naimisha forest in UP. Which proves that according to Mahabharata River Ghagar-Hakra can not be River Sarasvati. And this has also been confirmed through recent scientific studies and scientifically acquired data.

This debunks the Indian claim that Ghagar-Hakra was the Rig Vedic River Sarasvati and also proves false the assertion that Indus Valley Civilization was Indus-Sarasvati or Sarasvati Civilization.

And, the oldest preserved parts of the Mahabharat text are thought to be not much older than around 400 BCE, though the origins of the epic probably fall between the 8th and 9th centuries BCE. The text probably reached its final form by the early Gupta period.

Mahabharata - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please reconcile.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

That is the best you can come up with all your Vedic knowledge

When Indians start using "muslim" it means they cant debate further.