Heir of IVC, India or Pakistan ?

[Spectre]

And @Spectre the link in civilizational continuity betwen IVC as modern Hindusim is so weak and tenous that you can make all sort of delusional connections. This is where the big fraud is manufactured by latching on to the minute traces in IVC as connections with Hinduism. It's like me saying I eat food through my mouth and release it through my rectum and lo and behold so did folk in IVC that means I am heir to them as they dispay similar characteristics as me.

IVC people ate meat, buried their dead. Quite contrary to Hinduism. And if you start flexing the connection well it gets tenous. So tenous that anybody can start seeing connections and making big deal about it.

Modern Egypt and Nile. Modern Pakistan and Indus. Period.

Though debatable this is a valid argument - How much of IVC roots still exist in modern India and can be pursued further.

Both your points about burial and meat eating are misplaced.

1. Hinduism did not have restrictions on eating meat this was a very recent development influenced by neo devotional period and re-imagining of Hinduism by later day reformers influenced by Buddhist and Jain practices. Animal sacrifices historically have been common in Hindusim. Still most of the Indians today partake meat, specially the warrior and lower castes. Brahmins of many areas also partake meat.

2. IVC had burial sites as well as cremation sites. Evidence was recovered of bodies that were either cremated, partially cremated or buried

.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

And here is Hindu India being Hindu. worshiping Holy Ganga. Par Excellance being Ganga-Landers.

Dip in River Ganges, India

Bathing in Ganges is rite for millions of Indians every year. Varanasi?

 

[halupridol]

Well India of course. Similar to how heir to the Roman Empire is Romania. We know the land east of Danube was Dacia and nation we call Romania.

Therefore Roman Empire equates to Romania. This is the same arguement Indian's peddle. Modern map of Europe. Do you see Romania? Thus Roman Empire equals Romania. It certainly can't be Italy!

So who is the heir to Roman Empire today - is it Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia or Romania?

At @flamer84

And now see where Indus Valley Civilization falls (map below)? 95% of Indus runs through Pakistan with minor in China and India. IVC itself spreads from Pakistan and spills over on the West into Iran, Afghanistan and on the East into minor part of India. The centre is Pakistan with the fulcrum the Indus River. You can see where Mehr Garh, Mohenjo Daro and Harrapa are.

These are the facts on the ground but you can of course distort this as much as you want.

And BTW 5,000 years ago there was no "India". The name did not even exist.

This Indin fascination for IVC is as lame as the Syrian's or Romanian's claming Roman Empire. The former because of their name "Romania" and the later because they have Roman ruins in Palmyra.

The Indian's really need to lay off the Indus which is to Pakistan like Nile is to Egypt. Indian's need to go back and worship the holy river - Ganges. For gawds sake take pride in being Gangalanders.

u r saying Pakistanis r heirs of IVC.lol
gudluck convincing Indologists all over the world
but wait, before tht,, u need superluck n supaeffort convincing Pakistanis
IVC was a pagan society,,without knowledge of the "truth">> jahilya.
accepting this pagan heritage basically means tht,Pakistanis have come to terms with the bitter fact tht after coming out of jahilya,,,heirs of IVC cudnt achieve anythng comparable>>>>,,the glory days were during jahilya n after enlightenment everything going downhill.yeh baat maan lene me,logo ko bohot mushkil hogi kaptan,,Pakistan ka matlab kya jaisi situation hai,,idher Kua udher khaee.

 

[flamer84]

So who is the heir to Roman Empire today - is it Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia or Romania?

At @flamer84

I get the gist of it all.

Though,in my opinion ,the heir of the Roman Empire is not Italy but Western civilisation.Romania has more Byzantium in it than Rome,nor did we ever claim to be the heirs of Rome.

 

[Peshwa]

And @Spectre the link in civilizational continuity betwen IVC as modern Hindusim is so weak and tenous that you can make all sort of delusional connections. This is where the big fraud is manufactured by latching on to the minute traces in IVC as connections with Hinduism. It's like me saying I eat food through my mouth and release it through my rectum and lo and behold so did folk in IVC that means I am heir to them as they dispay similar characteristics as me.

IVC people ate meat, buried their dead. Quite contrary to Hinduism. And if you start flexing the connection well it gets tenous. So tenous that anybody can start seeing connections and making big deal about it.

Modern Egypt and Nile. Modern Pakistan and Indus. Period.

Simple question...
An heir to any civilization will exhibit some similarities in culture, traditions, language, etc...this is the broad understanding of being an "heir"
What according to you are the parallels/similarities between the modern day inhabitants of Pakistan and the IVC?
The geographical overlap aside, it would be great to know how the "sole heirs" of the IVC in Pakistan are maintaining traditions to honor their forefathers..
Could you list some for us?
Clearly religion wasnt one...language maybe? Adoption of script?

 

[xyxmt]

If Indian are heir of Indus civilization then why start this discussion every month, why do you want confirmation from us.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

@Kaptaan

Indians and Hindus are AS much the Inheritors of IVC ; As
Pakistanis are of the Mughal Empire

Why Pakistanis feel proud after visiting Taj Mahal and Red Fort

Because you identify with it and can RELATE to it

Similarly IVC was the pre cursor to Hindu religion and Vedic civilisation

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

This is a stupid question; India trying to lay claim on the Indus is like South Sudan trying to claim the Nile Civilization.

Indians try to assert their claim by making baseless and false statements that IVC was linked to Hinduism - there is little to no evidence for that. IVC had their own religion which may have influenced Hinduism. They ate meat and buried their dead. Even after declined of Animism and Local religions the people around there never aligned themselves towards Hinduism - rather they became predominantly Buddhists.


Even today; we have distinct and unique blood; almost every ethnic group along the Indus are related to one another.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

@Kaptaan

By the way Pakistani text books teach that Pakistan came into being
when Mohammad Bin Qasim landed in Sindh

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

A Text Book of Pakistan Studies claims that Pakistan "came to be established for the first time when the Arabs under Mohammad bin Qasim occupied Sindh and Multan'; by the thirteenth century 'Pakistan had spread to include the whole ofNorthern India and Bengal' and then under the Khiljis, Pakistan moved further south-ward to include a greater part of Central India and the Deccan'. [...] The spirit of Pakistan asserted itself', and under Aurangzeb the 'Pakistan spirit gathered in strength'; his death 'weakened the Pakistan spirit'." Jalal points out that even an acclaimed scholar like Jameel Jalibi questions the validity of a national history that seeks to "claim Pakistan's pre-Islamic past" in an attempt to compete with India's historic antiquity. K. Ali's two volume history designed for BA students traces the pre-history of the 'Indo-Pakistan' subcontinent to the Paleolithic Age and consistently refers to the post-1947 frontiers of Pakistan while discussing the Dravidians and the Aryans.[4]

 

[Peshwa]

This is a stupid question; India trying to lay claim on the Indus is like South Sudan trying to claim the Nile Civilization.

Indians try to assert their claim by making baseless and false statements that IVC was linked to Hinduism - there is little to no evidence for that. IVC had their own religion which may have influenced Hinduism. They ate meat and buried their dead. Even after declined of Animism and Local religions the people around there never aligned themselves towards Hinduism - rather they became predominantly Buddhists.


Even today; we have distinct and unique blood; almost every ethnic group along the Indus are related to one another.

So what is the Pakistani connection to the IVC and its people?
Can you just explain this part? What are the similarities between the two people?

 

[Max]

The ecosystem therein is known as Gangetic plains or basin. Thirdly, you like all other Pakistanis exhibit little knowledge but a louder mouth in insinuating that I am talking about only rivers in the Gangetic Basin.

i know, but i chose to write ganga valley, 2nd, i know that India have many rivers but i though ganga is most holiest to you bhartis so you must name your country on that why chose a name of river which flows 95% in Pakistan, 2% in China and only 3% in India? something is fishy?? NO ??

There are many such major riverine basins across India, not just the Gangetic one. For your reference, when I say across India it means from Kashmir to Kanyakumari (the absolute tip of Peninsular India) and from Rajasthan to Arunachal Pradesh. Distances spanning many thousands of kilometers as the crow flies in which ever directional axis you choose.

I know you have many river, no need to type it again and again, what i meant was ganga is holiest among them for you and ur major population centers are in ganga basin/valley so its river then others? NO? also largest river of Bharat..

Whether or not Indus flows more in Pakistan is not the question. The question is simply whether does Indus flow in India as well, if it does, it will be called an Indian river by us.

What wrong have ganga done to you guys it flows 100% in ur country, supply more water to you, you worship her but dont want to name your country on you major river while Indus only flow 3% in India while 95% in Pakistan 2% in China.. yet you want to name your country on Indus? waise bhi no one become Alexander the great by naming himself Alexander.. same is your story.. you guys have inferiority complex hence you left bharat. gangaland and chose Indus... despite Pakistan own 95% of it...

IVC remains Indian. Regardless of Pakistani mental gymnastics.

India = Land of Indus.. not gangaland.. so yes IVC is very Indian..

Map of land of Indus

 

[Max]

Accordingly then, please take the K out of Pakistan...PAISTAN would be more appropriate since 100% of Kashmir valley has NEVER been a part of Pakistan.

we have 35% of Disputed territory, you want to compare 3% with 35%? even if Kashmir chose to remain independent we will change the acronym meaning to land of pure.. no one can lay claim on name Pakistan unlike Indus..

 

[Peshwa]

we have 35% of Disputed territory, you want to compare 3% with 35%?

Well the Indus is NOT disputed and based on the Indus water treaty, the Indus flows through India first..
See below for the quote:
Since Pakistan's rivers flow through India first, the treaty allowed India to use them for irrigation, transport and power generation, while laying down precise do's and don'ts for Indian building projects along the way. The treaty was a result of Pakistani fear that since the source rivers of the Indus basin were in India, it could potentially create droughts and famines in Pakistan, especially at times of war

Anymore problems with the name India?

On the other hand
Kashmir valley is 100% with India not 35%..please check your map again..
You can at best have a soft K..That too if you ask nicely...LOL

 

[Max]

Well the Indus is NOT disputed and based on the Indus water treaty, the Indus flows through India first..
See below for the quote:
Since Pakistan's rivers flow through India first, the treaty allowed India to use them for irrigation, transport and power generation, while laying down precise do's and don'ts for Indian building projects along the way. The treaty was a result of Pakistani fear that since the source rivers of the Indus basin were in India, it could potentially create droughts and famines in Pakistan, especially at times of war

Anymore problems with the name India?

On the other hand
Kashmir valley is 100% with India not 35%..please check your map again..
You can at best have a soft K..That too if you ask nicely...LOL

so by your logic china is more entitled to title indus then India bcoz it start from China? anyways does not change the fact that 95% indus flows in Pakistan..

 

[Max]

China can name themselves India if they want..OR at least they can try..we have no problem with that..

Also does not change the fact that the K in Pakistan is out of place..based on your own logic!

and they can also claim that they were ivc people not gangalander?