What's new

The delusion of identity

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rajput is an ethnicity.

No Rajput is caste comprising many ethnicity primarily includes Rajasthani, Sindhi, Punjabi, Gujarati and to a liitle extant in UP, Bihari and Haryanvi ethnic groups
 
.
IVC!! Not again
128fs4765852.gif
 
. .
Most Pakistanis here seem very proud of their roots and their connection to the "Cradle of Civilization" known as the IVC, which existed almost entirely within the borders of modern-day Pakistan.

What about the years in between the IVC and Muhammed Bin Qasim? should they be proud of that too or not?
 
.
If you are saying this ,you don't know BS what hindu is and what so called hinduism represents 8-)

Hindu is not a vedic word neither all practices like phallus worship and snake worship hindus do are vedic,it predates the vedas by at least 2000 years ,Read any scholar if you wish o_O

Book you mentioned is not visible in my area :mad:

Maybe, but you know jack shit about your own history. The Aryan invasion is still the most accepted theory about Indian Civilization. Why in hell do you even bother refuting this?

Here you go no need to thank me. Its an excerpt from the book from page 77 to 79.
The Indian Myth of the Aryans

There Has been lately a tendency to falsify history and scientific by creating Indian Myth on the origin of Aryans. These Revisionist of History have disputed the Aryan Invasion or of their Indo-European origin by suggesting that it never happened. The Myth that the Aryans were the original people of India is a lot of rubbish, since there is no archaeological or linguistic evidence for this fabricated story. The Aryans introduced Sanskrit & Horse to India. There is no convincing evidence of pre-Aryan existence of either Sanskrit or Horse in India. The written records of the language suggest that the invading Indo-Europeans brought Sanskrit with them to India, in addition to their language the Aryans brought their gods with them to India. These gods form the basis of Rig Veda and other sagas, which were first written down in Sanskrit. We can easily see that many words in Sanskrit are basically the same as in other Indo-European languages; for example, Horse in English is usp in Sanskrit, husp in Farsi; mother in English is mata in Sanskrit, maat in Russian, maader in Farsi and mutter in German. In addition, recent molecular & genetic evidence supports the arrival of the Indo-European genes into North India. Aryans also introduced the domesticated horse & to date no fossil remains of horse or its ancestral species have ever been found in India.

Th Aryans first settled along the Indus river in the same place, where the Harappan people had lived. During the early part of their arrival, and for a period, they mixed and inter-married with the local Indian people who were predominantly Dravidians. The Aryans continued to live there from about 1500 to 800 BCE. The Caste-system in India started during the same period. Around 800 BCE, the Aryans learned the use of Irons for making tools and weapons, probably from the people of West Asia, the Assyrians who had learned it from Indo-European Hittites. With the new iron weapons, the Aryan conquered and overran the territories up to the Ganges River Valley and established new settlements there. After their move into the Ganges Valley, the Aryans were very far from West Asia and had much less contact with the West Asian people. They began to mix more with the Indian people, and their gods also got mixed up with the native Indian gods. The Aryan conquest of the Ganges is narrated in the Mahabharata, dated around 800 BCE. However, the Aryans did not advance any further into India. At that time, South India was ruled by different Dravidian kings who were independent of the Aryans. Stories of fights between the Aryans & the Southern Dravidians are told in the Ramayana. Sati, the first wife of Shiva, is supposed to have immolated by burning, because her Dravidians relations ill-treated their Aryan son-in law.

We also know that before the Aryans invaded, an advanced Dravidians civilization had existed in India for many centuries. Many social, religious & marital customs & ritual of this civilization were completely different to those of the Aryans. Dravidians still dominate South India, although their culture and ethnicity have undergone major changes during the past 2000 years under the influence of the invading Aryans & later through Islamic invasions from the North & European Invasion through the sea.
 
.
Maybe, but you know jack shit about your own history. The Aryan invasion is still the most accepted theory about Indian Civilization. Why in hell do you even bother refuting this?

Here you go no need to thank me. Its an excerpt from the book from page 77 to 79.

I didn't saw anything in that post which shows "The Aryan invasion is still the most accepted theory about Indian Civilization":o:




Goto a good university & Ask any scholar and this is a FACT:

Rigvedic people had ABSOLUTELY no knowledge of towns ,they only saw ruins.


 
Last edited:
.
I didn't saw anything in that post which shows "The Aryan invasion is still the most accepted theory about Indian Civilization":o:




Goto a good university & Ask any scholar and this is a FACT:
Rigvedic people had ABSOLUTELY no knowledge of towns ,they only saw ruins.
Other than the fact that Aryan Invasion was real? It's not the only book around. The Aryan Invasion is still accepted as Truth, to deny them is to accept lie.

Really how many actual Historian actually believe in your Revisionist history? Many books & Scholars will agree with me more thankfully. Now stop bothering me ye of little intellect. If you can't even provide books or links to your supposed claims & come back when you have a degree in History.
 
.
Other than the fact that Aryan Invasion was real? It's not the only book around. The Aryan Invasion is still accepted as Truth, to deny them is to accept lie.

Really how many actual Historian actually believe in your Revisionist history? Many books & Scholars will agree with me more thankfully. Now stop bothering me ye of little intellect. If you can't even provide books or links to your supposed claims & come back when you have a degree in History.

What Revisionist history ?:mad: Its a FACT that people rigvedic people by language are connected to other Indo European/central asian people and hence their ancestors must have lived there !

The diffrence is :Aryan Migration Theory(AMT) has linguistic evidence ,AIT doesn't have any except mythological BS of early indologists.


Anyways 'Aryan' is a wrong word(invented by indologists) to use ,since RV people never called themselves by this name .



Last but not least,Neither you know what theories are there,nor you have much knowledge of any text and you have come here to copy paste GIBBERISH :blah:


Learn then Debate :-)
 
.
What about the years in between the IVC and Muhammed Bin Qasim? should they be proud of that too or not?

So if uneducated Pakistani don't know about 5000 years history doesn't mean everyone is delusional. And for educated Indians not accepting Brahmins being outsiders is also height of delusion.

You are right Pakistanis should be proud of everything, after all its legacy of their ancestors. Anyway between IVC and Bin Qasim here is little summary of history of Pakistan.

About 3500 years ago started Vedic Age, its when Aryans come or pooped out of Pakistan. They were confined to Pakistan and Indian punjab from 1500 BCE-500BCE, they come from NW. The only controversy is weather they are indigenous to Pakistan or not. Majority of historians believe and genetic tests proves that they most have come from outside Pakistan.

So in 500 BCE or about 2500 years ago Vedic Age ended and they started to expand east of Punjab, i doubt it was aryan invasion but migration to India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal.

But there is still around 12-13 centuries left when Qasim landed in Sindh. Between it there was Maurya and Alexander invasions. People in Pakistan started converting to Bhudism. Bhudists civilzation lasted 800 years. Then Gupta Empire invaded which converted people to modern Hinduism. So between 500 BCE and till Qasim Pakistani people were mixture of Bhudism and Hinduism.

So thats it i guess, but you are right the main focus is given to IVC and not Vedic Age which lasted 1000 years and mostly covered Pakistan. But another reason is Aryans were nomadic group who left Rig Veda book instead of monuments like Mohenje Daro. Thats another reason Vedic Era is mostly interested to hindus for religious reasons, after all Rig Veda is oldest hindu book.

What Revisionist history ?:mad: Its a FACT that people rigvedic people by language are connected to other Indo European/central asian people and hence their ancestors must have lived there !

The diffrence is :Aryan Migration Theory(AMT) has linguistic evidence ,AIT doesn't have any except mythological BS of early indologists.


Anyways 'Aryan' is a wrong word(invented by indologists) to use ,since RV people never called themselves by this name .



Last but not least,Neither you know what theories are there,nor you have much knowledge of any text and you have come here to copy paste GIBBERISH :blah:


Learn then Debate :-)

Yes Aryans were migrants, unless someone can prove that empire existed in in those times which Aryans defeated. Though aryans not being indigenous to South Asia is not disputed.

Other than the fact that Aryan Invasion was real? It's not the only book around. The Aryan Invasion is still accepted as Truth, to deny them is to accept lie.

Really how many actual Historian actually believe in your Revisionist history? Many books & Scholars will agree with me more thankfully. Now stop bothering me ye of little intellect. If you can't even provide books or links to your supposed claims & come back when you have a degree in History.

Aryan invasion is never accepted as truth, which empire did they defeat? Forget about 3500 years ago but what about 2500 years ago when they started to expand all over South Asia? They were migrants not invaders.
 
Last edited:
.
Indians will forever be butt hurt. I have seen Indians fighting Pakistanis who claim to be Rajputs saying they are lying while also fighting Pakistanis who claim foreign roots. Damned if you do and don't with these clowns.

Rajput isn't tribe or ethinicity, there is no connection between Rajasthan rajputs and punjab rajputs. Rajput is title given to tribes like for exemple Janjua who were supposed to defend and failed miserably to islamic invaders. Jatt, Gujjars etc are tribes. Rajput mean son of king, the meaning is pretty clear. What does Janjua mean if you separate rajput from it?
 
.
What Revisionist history ?:mad: Its a FACT that people rigvedic people by language are connected to other Indo European/central asian people and hence their ancestors must have lived there !

The diffrence is :Aryan Migration Theory(AMT) has linguistic evidence ,AIT doesn't have any except mythological BS of early indologists.


Anyways 'Aryan' is a wrong word(invented by indologists) to use ,since RV people never called themselves by this name .



Last but not least,Neither you know what theories are there,nor you have much knowledge of any text and you have come here to copy paste GIBBERISH :blah:


Learn then Debate :-)

8d70fd89-6157-43d5-a222-aedb5c771bef.jpg


The Aryans first settled along the Indus river in the same place, where the Harappan people had lived. During the early part of their arrival, and for a period, they mixed and inter-married with the local Indian people who were predominantly Dravidians. The Aryans continued to live there from about 1500 to 800 BCE. The Caste-system in India started during the same period. Around 800 BCE, the Aryans learned the use of Irons for making tools and weapons, probably from the people of West Asia, the Assyrians who had learned it from Indo-European Hittites. With the new iron weapons, the Aryan conquered (Invade) and overran the territories up to the Ganges River Valley and established new settlements there. After their move into the Ganges Valley, the Aryans were very far from West Asia and had much less contact with the West Asian people. They began to mix more with the Indian people, and their gods also got mixed up with the native Indian gods. The Aryan conquest of the Ganges is narrated in the Mahabharata, dated around 800 BCE. However, the Aryans did not advance any further into India. At that time, South India was ruled by different Dravidian kings who were independent of the Aryans. Stories of fights between the Aryans & the Southern Dravidians are told in the Ramayana. Sati, the first wife of Shiva, is supposed to have immolated by burning, because her Dravidians relations ill-treated their Aryan son-in law.
 
.
Other than the fact that Aryan Invasion was real? It's not the only book around. The Aryan Invasion is still accepted as Truth, to deny them is to accept lie.

Really how many actual Historian actually believe in your Revisionist history? Many books & Scholars will agree with me more thankfully. Now stop bothering me ye of little intellect. If you can't even provide books or links to your supposed claims & come back when you have a degree in History.

You were talking about some proof from some book, that there was some invasion from North. So, tell me what really happened.
acigar.gif


Rajput isn't tribe or ethinicity, there is no connection between Rajasthan rajputs and punjab rajputs. Rajput is title given to tribes like for exemple Janjua who were supposed to defend and failed miserably to islamic invaders. Jatt, Gujjars etc are tribes. Rajput mean son of king, the meaning is pretty clear. What does Janjua mean if you separate rajput from it?

You really meant Jatt is a tribe and Rajput is an ethnicity? @KingMamba
25r30wi.gif


Other than the fact that Aryan Invasion was real? It's not the only book around. The Aryan Invasion is still accepted as Truth, to deny them is to accept lie.

Really how many actual Historian actually believe in your Revisionist history? Many books & Scholars will agree with me more thankfully. Now stop bothering me ye of little intellect. If you can't even provide books or links to your supposed claims & come back when you have a degree in History.

So, if anyone don't believe in the pack of crap theories coming with Aryan invasion theory, you will paint him as revisionist. :girl_wacko:
 
Last edited:
.
You really meant Jatt is a tribe and Rajput is an ethnicity? @KingMamba
25r30wi.gif

Why are you lol? o_O Janjua is tribe, janjuas are known as rajputs. Jats is tribe. Rajput is title, they were supposed to defend motherland from invaders. Many jatts clans also claim royal rajput ancestry. Rajput mean son of king, not everyone can become son of king right?

There is difference being rajput and janjua, jatt, gujjar, arain etc Rajputs are bunch of tribes who brahmins though were good enough to defend motherland.
 
.
Why are you lol? o_O Janjua is tribe, janjuas are known as rajputs. Jats is tribe. Rajput is title, they were supposed to defend motherland from invaders. Many jatts clans also claim royal rajput ancestry. Rajput mean son of king, not everyone can become son of king right?

There is difference being rajput and janjua, jatt, gujjar, arain etc

Janjua is a clan name. clan is called gotra in Hinduism. Calling Jatts as tribe sounds extremely bizarre. :laugh:
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom