# Blacks Climing Indus Valley Civilization



## Asiatic Lion

The Indus Valley Civilization | Sag-gig-ga (The Black-headed People)
5 Ancient Black Civilizations That Were Not in Africa - Page 2 of 5 - Atlanta Blackstar

Black Buddha
Ancient Black Buddha - Religion - Nigeria

your Views ??


----------



## mb444

If one Accepts that human life started in Africa then really we are all African.

Not sure about the claims, I am not an anthropologist but South Indian and Australian aboriginals are the same.... Both can be classified as black..... India is a bit of Australia that broke off and hit Asia...

This is only an issue if you consider melanin to some kind of important factor. Human civilisation is human civilisation what skin colour got anything to do with it

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Maira La

mb444 said:


> Not sure about the claims, I am not an anthropologist but *South Indian and Australian aboriginals are the same*.... Both can be classified as black..... India is a bit of Australia that broke off and hit Asia...
> 
> This is only an issue if you consider melanin to some kind of important factor. Human civilisation is human civilisation what skin colour got anything to do with it



IVC people were not Dravidians and had nothing to do with South Indians.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mb444

Maira La said:


> IVC people were not Dravidians and had nothing to do with South Indians.




I do not know what IVC is. however genetic evidence suggests aborigines and south indians have common ancestry which is further backed up by linguistic characteristics 

Aboriginal genetic study suggests Indian migration - Australian Geographic

Genomes link aboriginal Australians to Indians : Nature News & Comment

Dravidian Tamils: Tamil in Australian Aboriginal Languages

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Maira La

mb444 said:


> I do not know what IVC is. however genetic evidence suggests aborigines and south indians have common ancestry which is further backed up by linguistic characteristics
> 
> Aboriginal genetic study suggests Indian migration - Australian Geographic
> 
> Genomes link aboriginal Australians to Indians : Nature News & Comment
> 
> Dravidian Tamils: Tamil in Australian Aboriginal Languages



Well they are indeed connected. Look up "Great Coastal Migration" - it's the first of the two early human exodus out of Africa.


----------



## mb444

Maira La said:


> Well they are indeed connected. Look up "Great Coastal Migration" - it's the first of the two early human exodus out of Africa.




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


----------



## Maira La

mb444 said:


> 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



Every blogger pretty much cooks up their own "truth".. the wonders of internet!

Artefacts recovered from IVC sites point to a phenotype similar to West Asians/Baloch/Pashtuns:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mb444

well the indus valley script is yet to be deciphered.... but this guys argument seems convincing.

‘Indus script early form of Dravidian’ - The Hindu

but coming back to topic..... the statue above can easily be said to be that of a black dude with corn rows.... maybe the OP has something


----------



## ito

mb444 said:


> well the indus valley script is yet to be deciphered.... but this guys argument seems convincing.
> 
> ‘Indus script early form of Dravidian’ - The Hindu
> 
> but coming back to topic..... the statue above can easily be said to be that of a black dude with corn rows.... maybe the OP has something



Indus Valley civilization is Dravidian or not is still controversial. But I would go by the religion. Hinduism as a religion grew out of Indus Valley Civilization. Hence all Hindus and Muslims who have converted from Hinduism are rightful claimants of Indus Valley Civilization.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Maira La said:


> Every blogger pretty much cooks up their own "truth".. the wonders of internet!
> 
> Artefacts recovered from IVC sites point to a phenotype similar to West Asians/Baloch/Pashtuns:


IVC covers entire Pak ...

The pic you posted is the statue of the "Priest King" -- found in Mohenjodaro,Sindh.



ito said:


> Indus Valley civilization is Dravidian or not is still controversial. But I would go by the religion. Hinduism as a religion grew out of Indus Valley Civilization. Hence all Hindus and Muslims who have converted from Hinduism are rightful claimants of Indus Valley Civilization.



IVCs religions has still not been discovered ! 

And you can't claim it as your own --- even if we "supposedly" believe that it was Hindu ! The claimants are yhe people whose ancestors created the civilisation ... Not some dudes living a thousand mile away from it!

IT would be like me claiming Arab heritage coz I'm Muslim ... Hence utterly retarded!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ito

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> IVC covers entire Pak ...
> 
> The pic you posted is the statue of the "Priest King" -- found in Mohenjodaro,Sindh.
> 
> 
> 
> IVCs religions has still not been discovered !
> 
> And you can't claim it as your own --- even if we "supposedly" believe that it was Hindu ! The claimants are yhe people whose ancestors created the civilisation ... Not some dudes living a thousand mile away from it!
> 
> IT would be like me claiming Arab heritage coz I'm Muslim ... Hence utterly retarded!



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.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Maira La

ito said:


> Indus Valley civilization is Dravidian or not is still controversial. But I would go by the religion. Hinduism as a religion grew out of Indus Valley Civilization. Hence all Hindus and Muslims who have converted from Hinduism are rightful claimants of Indus Valley Civilization.



Prove those gods are the gods you worship. A couple of pictures prove nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mughal arslan shah mirza

mb444 said:


> well the indus valley script is yet to be deciphered.... but this guys argument seems convincing.
> 
> ‘Indus script early form of Dravidian’ - The Hindu
> 
> but coming back to topic..... the statue above can easily be said to be that of a black dude with corn rows.... maybe the OP has something



Scripts or language families in general don't mean much in terms of genes etc. (well most of the time at least).
If I (Pakistani) keep speaking English and my great-great grandkid speaks English (and completely forgets his native language), would the great-great-grandkind suddenly be considered an English person.
That's what precisely happened in Pakistan and North India where people started speaking Indo-European languages AFTER the Indus valley era ended (most likely).
Language shift doesn't imply that those 'original' people suddenly all left for South India crossing Indo-european speaking Maharashtra and those 4 communites in South India are the only inheritors of IVC. That's absurd and faulty logic but this simple thing is not clear precisely because there's political propaganda around it.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ito

Maira La said:


> Prove those gods are the gods you worship. A couple of pictures prove nothing.



Man..you are hilarious. It is like asking who Allah is to you

Anyway...why me, ask anyone who is a Hindu on this forum or any Hindu anywhere. Pashupati is one of the main gods of Hinduism. There is very famous Hindu temple in Kathmandu dedicate to Pashupati. 

Pashupatinath Temple - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

ito said:


> Then you should read about IVC.
> 
> BBC - Religions - Hinduism: History of Hinduism
> *Religion in the Indus Valley *



*Maybe you should read what you post ? In this case a hypothesis... *


*"*
*We know little of the religion, social structure or politics of this early civilisation and we do not know the language, but seals have been found with what looks like a script inscribed on them. This has not been deciphered successfully and some scholars now question whether it is in fact a script, although this is contentious.

"

*


> 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.


Maybe you should read what you post

So every seal or drawing in the world somehow means it's Shiva etc?


As I said before .. Let's (for the sake I the argument) believe that Hinduism was born out of IVCs continuation .. How does that make you claimants or inheritors of IVC ?

The only people who inherit it are the ones from the land ...

As I said ... Just coz i follow Islam doesn't mean my ancestors were Arab or I'm Arab!

So stop being stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Maira La

ito said:


> Man..you are hilarious. It is like asking who Allah is to you
> 
> Anyway...why me, ask anyone who is a Hindu on this forum or any Hindu anywhere. Pashupati is one of the main gods of Hinduism. There is very famous Hindu temple in Kathmandu dedicate to Pashupati.
> 
> Pashupatinath Temple - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Post a picture of the Pashupati you worship. Let's see if its' the same God or just a crafty attempt to connect to the IVC!
Generally anything not backed by academic papers are just figments of fanboy imagination.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mughal arslan shah mirza

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> *Maybe you should read what you post ? In this case a hypothesis... *
> 
> 
> *"*
> *We know little of the religion, social structure or politics of this early civilisation and we do not know the language, but seals have been found with what looks like a script inscribed on them. This has not been deciphered successfully and some scholars now question whether it is in fact a script, although this is contentious.
> 
> "
> 
> *
> Maybe you should read what you post
> 
> So every seal or drawing in the world somehow means it's Shiva etc?
> 
> 
> As I said before .. Let's (for the sake I the argument) believe that Hinduism was born out of IVCs continuation .. How does that make you claimants or inheritors of IVC ?
> 
> The only people who inherit it are the ones from the land ...
> 
> As I said ... Just coz i follow Islam doesn't meant my ancestors were Arab or I'm Arab!
> 
> So stop being stupid.



True . Hinduism is practiced in Bali. Are people of Bali the main inheritors of IVC just because they practice Hinduism.
Even if it's proved that IVC people were Hindus, it doesn't mean anything.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Maira La said:


> Prove those gods are the gods you worship. A couple of pictures prove nothing.



Similiar rock paintings can also be found on othe continents .. I believe everybody was Hindu..hence Indian can claim the history of Peru or other nations Coz they were Hindus!



mb444 said:


> well the indus valley script is yet to be deciphered.... but this guys argument seems convincing.
> 
> ‘Indus script early form of Dravidian’ - The Hindu
> 
> but coming back to topic..... the statue above can easily be said to be that of a black dude with corn rows.... maybe the OP has something



Thes guys also believe Taj Mahal was a Rajput temple .. Among other hilarious nonsense ..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ito

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> *Maybe you should read what you post ? In this case a hypothesis... *
> 
> 
> *"*
> *We know little of the religion, social structure or politics of this early civilisation and we do not know the language, but seals have been found with what looks like a script inscribed on them. This has not been deciphered successfully and some scholars now question whether it is in fact a script, although this is contentious.
> 
> "
> 
> *
> Maybe you should read what you post
> 
> So every seal or drawing in the world somehow means it's Shiva etc?
> 
> 
> As I said before .. Let's (for the sake I the argument) believe that Hinduism was born out of IVCs continuation .. How does that make you claimants or inheritors of IVC ?
> 
> The only people who inherit it are the ones from the land ...
> 
> As I said ... Just coz i follow Islam doesn't meant my ancestors were Arab or I'm Arab!
> 
> So stop being stupid.



There is a difference between Hinduism and Islam. Hinduism doesn't believe in religious conversion or religious propagation. The only way one is a Hindu if their ancestors are Hindus.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zibago

ito said:


> There is a difference between Hinduism and Islam. Hinduism doesn't believe in religious conversion or religious propagation. The only way one is a Hindu if their ancestors are Hindus.


Then explain ghar wapsi?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ito

Maira La said:


> Post a picture of the Pashupati you worship. Let's see if its' the same God or just a crafty attempt to connect to the IVC!
> Generally anything not backed by academic papers are just figments of fanboy imagination.



You are stupid...that all I can say. It is like saying show me your Allah that you worship then only I will believe Allah exist.



fakhre mirpur said:


> Then explain ghar wapsi?



What ghar wapsi means revert back to your ancestor's religion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Maira La

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> *Similiar rock paintings* can also be found on othe continents .. I believe everybody was Hindu..hence Indian can claim the history of Peru or other nations Coz they were Hindus!



Exactly, there are so many rock paintings across different continents that look similar - after all many of these depict a combination of men, women and animals doing some random ritual - and it can only be a coincidence that two different rock paintings have a similar looking hairy man posing alongside a similar animal, lol!
The "link" between the two is only in the observer's mind, unless it has been academically proven through a peer reviewed reputable journal.



ito said:


> You are *stupid*...*that all I can say*. It is like saying show me your Allah that you worship then only I will believe Allah exist.



Sorry I mistook you for one of those rare Indians with normal IQ.
All I asked for is a picture of your god in question. I rest my case!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## nForce

mughal arslan shah mirza said:


> True . Hinduism is practiced in Bali. Are people of Bali the main inheritors of IVC just because they practice Hinduism.
> Even if it's proved that IVC people were Hindus, it doesn't mean anything.


Yeah.. all of them are. Hindu way of life does not have any center. It's omnipresent


----------



## mughal arslan shah mirza

Maira La said:


> Exactly, there are so many rock paintings across different continents that look similar - after all many of these depict a combination of men, women and animals doing some random ritual - and it can only be a coincidence that two different rock paintings have a similar looking hairy man posing alongside a similar animal, lol!
> The "link" between the two is only in the observer's mind, unless it has been academically proven through a peer reviewed reputable journal.



True. Well, even if the link's proven, then what? Do modern Balinese claim IVC just based on their Hindu religion?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## nForce

Maira La said:


> Exactly, there are so many rock paintings across different continents that look similar - after all many of these depict a combination of men, women and animals doing some random ritual - and it can only be a coincidence that two different rock paintings have a similar looking hairy man posing alongside a similar animal, lol!
> The "link" between the two is only in the observer's mind, unless it has been academically proven through a peer reviewed reputable journal.



Dada.. what does it matter.. hehe..

I would have done a rock painting myself, for you, only if I knew how to paint

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zibago

ito said:


> You are stupid...that all I can say. It is like saying show me your Allah that you worship then only I will believe Allah exist.
> 
> 
> 
> What ghar wapsi means revert back to your ancestor's religion.


How do you know what religion their ancestors followed they could be animists,zorastrians or buddhists?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ito

Maira La said:


> Sorry I mistook you for one of those rare Indians with normal IQ.
> I rest my case!



I don't need an certificate from you on what I am and what I am capable of. As I said, spend some time on learning about IVC and Hindiusm. There are hundreds of research papers on this topic from some of the best research institute. Use Google.


----------



## nForce

fakhre mirpur said:


> How do you know what religion their ancestors followed they could be animists,zorastrians or buddhists?



Actually, that can be said in a pretty much broad sense, from statistical point of view. The history is quite well documented for the region on that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Maira La

nForce said:


> Dada.. what does it matter.. hehe..
> 
> I would have done a rock painting myself, for you, only if I knew how to paint



It doesn't matter, just needed a "casus belli" to pick a fight on PDF - part of my daily schedule.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

ito said:


> There is a difference between Hinduism and Islam. Hinduism doesn't believe in religious conversion or religious propagation. The only way one is a Hindu if their ancestors are Hindus.


So basically a madrassi South Indian,a Balinese (Indonesian) Hindu,a Vietnamese (champa empire - champa converted to Hinduism) had the same ancestors from modern day Pakistan? Who somehow were Hindus Coz of a few seals that somehow "look" like Hindu gods .. Which we Dnt know about?

Damn IVC guys were "international playas"! 


BC even among Jews (the bani Israeli - the children of Ibraham) .. You are only Jewish if *atleast* your mother was Jewish - that's DNA link! Proven stuff.

P.S; Do you want me to post sources about "Hindu converts" from other religions Aswell as nationalities?

Who the fuk are you kidding man.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ito

fakhre mirpur said:


> How do you know what religion their ancestors followed they could be animists,zorastrians or buddhists?



Man...why ask stupid questions. Use google and educate yourself. Anyway discussing religion is banned on this forum.


----------



## Zibago

This is from where the IVC started
Mehrgarh - Dost Pakistan



DESERT FIGHTER said:


> So basically a madrassi South Indian,a Balinese (Indonesian) Hindu,a Vietnamese (champa empire - champa converted to Hinduism) had the same ancestors from modern day Pakistan? Who somehow were Hindus Coz of a few seals that somehow "look" like Hindu gods .. Which we Dnt know about?
> 
> Damn IVC guys were "international playas"!
> 
> 
> BC even among Jews (the bani Israeli - the children of Ibraham) .. You are only Jewish if your mother was Jewish - that's DNA link!
> 
> P.S; Do you want me to post sources about "Hindu converts" from other religions Aswell as nationalities?
> 
> Who the fuk are you kidding man.


Yep ivc folks the baddest playas since 5000 BC

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ito

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> So basically a madrassi South Indian,a Balinese (Indonesian) Hindu,a Vietnamese (champa empire - converts) had the same ancestors from modern day Pakistan?
> 
> Damn IVC guys were "international playas"!
> 
> 
> BC even among Jews (the bani Israeli - the children of Ibraham) .. You are only Jewish if your mother was Jewish - that's DNA link!
> 
> P.S; Do you want me to post sources about "Hindu converts" from other religions Aswell as nationalities?
> 
> Who the fuk are you kidding man.



Yes...South Indian,a Balinese Hindu,a Vietnamese had the same ancestors. If the world doesn't have any reservation on accepting an African as the ancestor for all humans...why do you that problem. Facial feature morph and morph according to climate, weather, occupation and time


----------



## deepak.chauhan2312

Maira La said:


> IVC people were not Dravidians and had nothing to do with South Indians.




North west India ,Pakistan ,Sindhi and Baluchistan are generation evolved from IVC.Dravidians were different but with years they mixed up genetically.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

ito said:


> Yes...South Indian,a Balinese Hindu,a Vietnamese had the same ancestors. If the world doesn't have any reservation on accepting an African as the ancestor for all humans...why do you that problem. Facial feature morph and morph according to climate, weather, occupation and time



And that makes IVC the cradle of humanity and the evolution I humankind into different groups barely 5000 years old or so .. Meaning Mespotamia and other civilisations of times were fake ..

Also meaning that the ancestors Indonesians,Vietnamese,Indians etc were from modern day Pakistan ..

Fuk logic .. 

You are a fukin genius!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## deepak.chauhan2312

Maira La said:


> Prove those gods are the gods you worship. A couple of pictures prove nothing.




you claimed that IVC was west Asian by just one statue right.Why would he prove to you who are you.Whoever God he was they worshiped God you are unaware of Hinduism concept and you are behaving like all guru. Hinduism is the culture and tradition which was started from Indus valley civilization.Hinduism was not even a word we the people of south Asia were called because of our location and our culture.
Hindus are still very much attached to those ancient rituals so they are Hindus. You will need to have better understanding ability to understand Hinduism.There are no fixed rules you follow them and you are good.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## srshkmr

ito said:


> Man..you are hilarious. It is like asking who Allah is to you
> 
> Anyway...why me, ask anyone who is a Hindu on this forum or any Hindu anywhere. Pashupati is one of the main gods of Hinduism. There is very famous Hindu temple in Kathmandu dedicate to Pashupati.
> 
> Pashupatinath Temple - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Pashupati(shiva) is the god who was worshiped with no statue . and later during the mauriyan period the statues were sculptured



Maira La said:


> Post a picture of the Pashupati you worship. Let's see if its' the same God or just a crafty attempt to connect to the IVC!
> Generally anything not backed by academic papers are just figments of fanboy imagination.



pashupati was the god shiva with no statue or sculpture used to worship .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Maira La

deepak.chauhan2312 said:


> you claimed that IVC was west Asian by just one statue right.



I will only reply to the first sentence. Please read carefully and don't make assumptions. I didn't claim IVC is West Asian. I said the phenotype looks similar.

If you disagree, I can't do much to prove it and that's my weakness.

The onus is on me to back up my claims with reputable sources. The statue of the Priest king is the only clue I'm aware of.


----------



## TMA

mb444 said:


> If one Accepts that human life started in Africa then really we are all African.
> 
> Not sure about the claims, I am not an anthropologist but South Indian and Australian aboriginals are the same.... Both can be classified as black..... India is a bit of Australia that broke off and hit Asia...
> 
> This is only an issue if you consider melanin to some kind of important factor. Human civilisation is human civilisation what skin colour got anything to do with it



Well skin color per se may have little to do with civilization however race may have a lot!!


----------



## Asiatic Lion

idiots !


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

fakhre mirpur said:


> This is from where the IVC started
> Mehrgarh - Dost Pakistan
> 
> 
> Yep ivc folks the baddest playas since 5000 BC



Bhirrana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rakhigarhi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistani E

Yah kiya hogaya bhai? These Indians claiming IVC as their own based on religion is as absurd as Pakistanis claiming Spain as their own just because their co-religionists ruled there. Both are idiots, but Indians who usually claim moral superiority over us converted folks have proven themselves to be as idiotic as people on this side of the border.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## denel

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> So basically a madrassi South Indian,a Balinese (Indonesian) Hindu,a Vietnamese (champa empire - champa converted to Hinduism) had the same ancestors from modern day Pakistan? Who somehow were Hindus Coz of a few seals that somehow "look" like Hindu gods .. Which we Dnt know about?
> 
> Damn IVC guys were "international playas"!
> 
> 
> BC even among Jews (the bani Israeli - the children of Ibraham) .. You are only Jewish if *atleast* your mother was Jewish - that's DNA link! Proven stuff.
> 
> P.S; Do you want me to post sources about "Hindu converts" from other religions Aswell as nationalities?
> 
> Who the fuk are you kidding man.


To clarify.... in judaism mother's lineage is important as the day of judgement she is the only person who know's her born children. I believe this is also inherited in islam as well.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

denel said:


> To clarify.... in judaism mother's lineage is important as the day of judgement she is the only person who know's her born children. I believe this is also inherited in islam as well.



Yes on the judgement day .. All men will be called/identified by the name of their mothers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shoaib Aziz

Asiatic Lion said:


> Black Buddha
> 
> 
> your Views ??



When every Bhopali, Marathi, Dravidian, Assamese can jump up and down up and down on mentioning of Indus Valley, why can't Africans do?


----------



## haviZsultan

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> IVC covers entire Pak ...
> 
> The pic you posted is the statue of the "Priest King" -- found in Mohenjodaro,Sindh.
> 
> 
> 
> IVCs religions has still not been discovered !
> 
> And you can't claim it as your own --- even if we "supposedly" believe that it was Hindu ! The claimants are yhe people whose ancestors created the civilisation ... Not some dudes living a thousand mile away from it!
> 
> IT would be like me claiming Arab heritage coz I'm Muslim ... Hence utterly retarded!


IVC worshipped idols and were a type of pagan-but not Hindu I believe.


----------



## Levina

haviZsultan said:


> IVC worshipped idols and were a type of pagan-but not Hindu I believe.


Hinduism back then was called Sanatana dharma.
Btw they used Shiv-Ling like Hindus do.
Ofcourse there are other similarities too, like the style of worshipping, use of fire altars etc.



Maira La said:


> IVC people were not Dravidians and had nothing to do with South Indians.


And how would you explain the use of Brahui language in Pakistan???

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## takeiteasy

Aminroop said:


> Hinduism back then was called Santana dharma.


It is Sanatana Dharma, I believe. Santana Dharma is a type of Dharma where couples create Santanas each year for 12 consecutive years to attain Nirvana.


----------



## Levina

takeiteasy said:


> It is Sanatana Dharma, I believe. Santana Dharma is a type of Dharma where couples create Santanas each year for 12 consecutive years to attain Nirvana.


Were you serious???
Scientifically, it's not possible.
Btw Sanatana dharma refers to the eternal, natural way, the never beginning and never ending flow of the whole of being.
It was not a religion, but a scientific way of living.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## takeiteasy

Aminroop said:


> Were you serious???


 I was talking about Santana(progeny) Dharma; not Sanatana Dharma. Mazzaaq ko Samajhne ki koshish toh karo ma'am.


----------



## Levina

takeiteasy said:


> I was talking about Santana(progeny) Dharma; not Sanatana Dharma. Mazzaaq ko Samajhne ki koshish toh karo ma'am.


Santana sun kar hi pucha tha "are you serious??". 
Ab Tumhe hamari baat samajh Nahi aayi, toh Mera Kya dosh?


----------



## haviZsultan

Aminroop said:


> Hinduism back then was called Sanatana dharma.
> Btw they used Shiv-Ling like Hindus do.
> Ofcourse there are other similarities too, like the style of worshipping, use of fire altars etc.
> 
> 
> And how would you explain the use of Brahui language in Pakistan???


How old is the Hindi language? Urdu was born partly from it and persian so would be interesting to know.


----------



## Levina

haviZsultan said:


> How old is the Hindi language? Urdu was born partly from it and persian so would be interesting to know.


I'm really not sure about its origin but I do know that Hindi is a dialect of Hindustani, which is based on Khariboli.
It is believed that Khariboli developed in the 900–1200 CE, and it has strong influences of Awadhi and brij languages.
@It.is.all.mudi's.fault @SarthakGanguly @Bitter Melon 
correct me if i'm wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Maira La

Aminroop said:


> Hinduism back then was called Sanatana dharma.
> Btw they used Shiv-Ling like Hindus do.
> Ofcourse there are other similarities too, like the style of worshipping, use of fire altars etc.
> 
> 
> And how would you explain the use of Brahui language in Pakistan???



Brahui are migrants from Central India, not a relict of the IVC population; here:



Wikipedia said:


> ...theory is that they migrated to Baluchistan from inner India during the early Muslim period of the 13th or 14th centuries.[4]
> 
> Another theory says the Brahui migrated to Balochistan from Central India after 1000 AD. *The absence of any older Iranian (Avestan) influence in Brahui supports this last hypothesis.* The main Iranian contributor to Brahui vocabulary is a northwestern Iranian language, Baluchi, Sindhiand southeastern Iranian language, Pashto.[5]



No Dravidian language is native to Pakistan.
@Atanz

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

haviZsultan said:


> How old is the Hindi language? Urdu was born partly from it and persian so would be interesting to know.



IVC was the land of Proto Indo Europeans . From which Sanskrit , Latin , Greek and Avestan came 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/IndoEuropeanTreeDielli1.svg


----------



## Levina

Maira La said:


> Brahui are migrants from Central India, not a relict of the IVC population;


I am not saying inhabitants of IVC were South Indians, but there was definitely an influence.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja.Pakistani

haviZsultan said:


> IVC worshipped idols and were a type of pagan-but not Hindu I believe.


Arabs worshipped idols and were pagan too . Were they inheritor of IVS? Earliest that we know of Hindu religion comes from the Vedas, of which rigveda is the oldest.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## haviZsultan

Raja.Pakistani said:


> Arabs worshipped idols and were pagan too . Were they inheritor of IVS? Earliest that we know of Hindu religion comes from the Vedas, of which rigveda is the oldest.


No offense buddy. I was just trying to learn about the various pagan cultures and did not allege that they were linked to Hinduism. For example rumuva, slavic and norse religion had nothing to do with Hindus but are old pagan religions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja.Pakistani

haviZsultan said:


> No offense buddy. I was just trying to learn about the various pagan cultures and did not allege that they were linked to Hinduism. For example rumuva, slavic and norse religion had nothing to do with Hindus but are old pagan religions.


It was not intended for you mate but for those who were linking Hinduism with IVC because they assume some similarities in few things


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

I had exchange comments with on of the Afro-centric YouTuber who claimed that Indus Valley Civilisation was Black. Then changed his channel and the video to No Comments and deleted comments of people that challenges him. These people know that Black African have no history and monuments so they want to hijack the Egyptian, Sumerian, Greek and Indus Valley Civilisation as their own.


----------



## Shoaib Aziz

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> I had exchange comments with on of the Afro-centric YouTuber who claimed that Indus Valley Civilisation was Black. Then changed his channel and the video to No Comments and deleted comments of people that challenges him. These people know that Black African have no history and monuments so they want to hijack the Egyptian, Sumerian, Greek and Indus Valley Civilisation as their own.



How is their claim any different from every Marathi, Bhopali, Assamese laying a claim on IVC?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## haviZsultan

Raja.Pakistani said:


> It was not intended for you mate but for those who were linking Hinduism with IVC because they assume some similarities in few things


Its human nature mixed with a bit of insecurity. Even my Lucknowi cousins are surprised at Indians claiming and linking themselves to Islamic practices, ideology and people. I believe it is human nature to claim all that is Hindu as superior for them as is the case with us for all that is Muslim. But in India there is a type of insecurity-they feel their religion is disappearing hence they are worried about conversion, love jihad and claiming Muslim history-for example the claim Muhammed SAW was a Hindu God. 

I don't really blame them. Pagan religions have always been susceptible to conversion which was the exact reason for the fall of Norse and Romuva religions and this conversion is occurring both to Christianity and Islam. They feel insecure and want to preserve their religion-hence linking it to everything muslim to gain legitimacy.



ArsalanKhan21 said:


> I had exchange comments with on of the Afro-centric YouTuber who claimed that Indus Valley Civilisation was Black. Then changed his channel and the video to No Comments and deleted comments of people that challenges him. These people know that Black African have no history and monuments so they want to hijack the Egyptian, Sumerian, Greek and Indus Valley Civilisation as their own.


Blacks are most proud of North African history-they lay claim and properly so of the Al Mohad and almoravid dynasties. The blacks in America have religions like the Moorish science temple-talk about weird.

I don't think though that the blacks have no history-before being ruled by the British French and others they had a long and beautiful history. The Bantus nubians among many.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

IVC was created by Proto Indo Europeans .

Since then Humans of different races , Languages , Religions have hijacked South Asia .
Modern South Asia is a fusion of the above mentioned things .

So there is no rightful inheritor of IVC .

I am living in Jammu . I permanently moved to US . Now some dogra from the same region or Bengali from Bengal comes and lives in my house on rent . It doesn't make him the inheritor of the house .


----------



## Shoaib Aziz

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> IVC was created by Proto Indo Europeans .
> 
> Since then Humans of different races , Languages , Religions have hijacked South Asia .
> Modern South Asia is a fusion of the above mentioned things .
> 
> So there is no rightful inheritor of IVC .
> 
> I am living in Jammu . I permanently moved to US . Now some dogra from the same region or Bengali from Bengal comes and lives in my house on rent . It doesn't make him the inheritor of the house .



Go read about Cemetery-H culture implying continuity of culture based on biological affinities among the people of Punjab and IVC. Kashmir, yes was a part of IVC along with eastern Punjab and Gujarat, but other bhartis are just being utterly desperate. Poor souls, not having seen Indus or any of its rivers in their lives and not familiar with any of its language are jumping with pride at its mentioning.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Shoaib Aziz said:


> Go read about Cemetery-H culture implying continuity of culture based on biological affinities among the people of Punjab and IVC. Kashmir, yes was a part of IVC along with eastern Punjab and Gujarat, but other bhartis are just being utterly desperate. Poor souls, not having seen Indus or any of its rivers in their lives and not familiar with any of its language are jumping with pride at its mentioning.





Difference between Magnanimous and Meanie 

Magnanimous : IVC was built by Humans hence belongs to Humans 

Meanie : IVC was built by Pakistani , IVC was built by Vedic People  Just to satisfy False EGO

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shoaib Aziz

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Difference between Magnanimous and Meanie
> 
> Magnanimous : IVC was built by Humans hence belongs to Humans
> 
> Meanie : IVC was built by Pakistani , IVC was built by Vedic People  Just to satisfy False EGO



Of course its a false pride. Unfortunately study of history itself has been turned into a source of false pride and hatred where every nation claims to have been always great and enemy always evil. Well you know Pakistanis only recently started talking too much about IVC and that was actually in response to people claiming it on false religious basis. Similar claims of some land belonging to a religion already gave the world the Palestinian dispute. The claim of Israelis on Palestine and Indians on Indus land is, "It belonged to us 2000 years ago". No matter how absurd the claim is, given the situation of Palestinians, Pakistanis can't afford to be weak.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Shoaib Aziz said:


> Of course its a false pride. Unfortunately study of history itself has been turned into a source of false pride and hatred where every nation claims to have been always great and enemy always evil. Well you know Pakistanis only recently started talking too much about IVC and that was actually in response to people claiming it on false religious basis. Similar claims of some land belonging to a religion already gave the world the Palestinian dispute. The claim of Israelis on Palestine and Indians on Indus land is, "It belonged to us 2000 years ago". No matter how absurd the claim is, given the situation of Palestinians, Pakistanis can't afford to be weak.



Yup ,

History Taught these days is a distorted history and there is no way to correct as farther back we go in time , The lesser evidences we have . Changing history now will create a mess which will take another century to settle down .


----------



## MadDog

ito said:


> Indus Valley civilization is Dravidian or not is still controversial. But I would go by the religion. Hinduism as a religion grew out of Indus Valley Civilization. Hence all Hindus and Muslims who have converted from Hinduism are rightful claimants of Indus Valley Civilization.



Punjabis, Pushtuns, Baloch, Sindhis, Kashmiris..all ethnicities of Pakistan (land of five regions, the name is an acronym itself) are the ones who can claim any civilization on the banks of River Indus as they are the ones living on its banks since thousands of years. Whether its Mehrghar, Gandhara, Harrapa or Mohen jo Daro….Only Punjabis of India are related to it…rest are way of River Indus. Its not about religion, its about ethnicity and its about location.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ito

MadDog said:


> Punjabis, Pushtuns, Baloch, Sindhis, Kashmiris..all ethnicities of Pakistan (land of five regions, the name is an acronym itself) are the ones who can claim any civilization on the banks of River Indus as they are the ones living on its banks since thousands of years. Whether its Mehrghar, Gandhara, Harrapa or Mohen jo Daro….Only Punjabis of India are related to it…rest are way of River Indus. Its not about religion, its about ethnicity and its about location.



I guess the question is settled on who hold the legacy of IVC. You can check with research papers of top research institutes and University.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Final Conclusion of thread :

Pakistanis inherited the Land , While Indians inherited the Values/Culture 
Pakistanis received Sharingan , While Indians inherited the Chakra


----------



## Sugarcane

Asiatic Lion said:


> The Indus Valley Civilization | Sag-gig-ga (The Black-headed People)
> 5 Ancient Black Civilizations That Were Not in Africa - Page 2 of 5 - Atlanta Blackstar
> 
> Black Buddha
> Ancient Black Buddha - Religion - Nigeria
> 
> your Views ??



When every tom, d!ck and harry Indian can claim the IVC than what's problem with Blacks? As per theory that life originated in Africa, So they still have more right to claim IVC than Indians.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

LoveIcon said:


> When every tom, d!ck and harry Indian can claim the IVC than what's problem with Blacks? As per theory that life originated in Africa, So they still have more right to claim IVC than Indians.



By that logic we all are Africans So our Claim is valid like yours


----------



## Sugarcane

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> By that logic we all are Africans So our Claim is valid like yours



How your claim is valid like mine?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

LoveIcon said:


> How your claim is valid like mine?



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 .


----------



## Sugarcane

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> 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.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 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.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jaanbaz

Black people have more claim on IVC then Indians.


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

Jaanbaz said:


> Black people have more claim on IVC then Indians.



Can you elighten us on your brilliant logic !


----------



## Indus Pakistan

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> 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.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jaanbaz

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> 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?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

mb444 said:


> 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.



ito said:


> 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.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ito

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> 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.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

ito said:


> 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.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

ito said:


> 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

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> 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.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> 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.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Clawz said:


> 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

Clawz said:


> 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

ito said:


> 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.


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

Clawz said:


> Brother Pakistan is an artificial nation, Baloch and Pashtuns should join Afghanistan while the Punjabis and Sindhis who are low caste converts should revert to Hinduism and be accept reservation for low castes in India.



Another Hindutva Bhakturd idiot displaying their deception with false flags !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SarthakGanguly

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> 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.


Nobody disputes that. When someone claims SOLE ownership of it, it becomes laughable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SarthakGanguly

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> 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.


No. Hindus (Sanatanis/Dharmics) can draw their lineage from all civilizations in this Holy Land. From Sindhu to Kanyakumari and beyond.



Kashmiri Pandit said:


> 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 .


Now rules have changed. A convert to any of the above is a Hindu.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Clawz said:


> Because civilisations have always been established by the upper strata of society. Only low castes in South Asia converted to Islam, mainly to escape persecution from higher castes. Our ancestors were mainly toilet cleaning chamars.


By 'ours' you're obviously referring to 'yours' (Indian), and you can choose to call them whatever you wish.

And again, what genetic and anthropological analysis are you basing your claims about the social and racial makeup of ancestors of Pakistan on? On what basis are you arguing that those responsible for the establishment of the IVC were not subsumed into whatever wave of human migration entered that area, rather than packing their bags up and taking the next train into South India or whatever arbitrary location you concocted?


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

SarthakGanguly said:


> Nobody disputes that. When someone claims SOLE ownership of it, it becomes laughable.



Alexander the Great was born in Macedonia and was culturally Greek. The Greece has blocked Macedonia entering UN and EU with Macedonian flag with Alexander's shield. Both countries constantly fight over Alexander. Greece do claim SOLE ownership of Alexander and his accomplishments !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> Alexander the Great was born in Macedonia and was culturally Greek. The Greece has blocked Macedonia entering UN and EU with Macedonian flag with Alxander's shield. Both countries constantly fight over Alexander. Greece do claim SOLE ownership of Alexander and his accomplishments !


Old People satisfying their false ego


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

SarthakGanguly said:


> No. Hindus (Sanatanis/Dharmics) can draw their lineage from all civilizations in this Holy Land. From Sindhu to Kanyakumari and beyond.


Hinduism is a belief system, so your reference to 'lineage' is only applicable in the context of 'religio-cultural' beliefs, and since the non-Deobandi/Wahabbi practice of Islam in Pakistan is itself a result of the amalgamation of Islam into the existing religio-cultural beliefs of the lands constituting Pakistan, the same argument (in fact stronger, given the geographical location of Pakistan on the heartland of the IVC) applies to Pakistan.

The argument that any contemporary belief system 'draws from the social, cultural and religious practices of those that came before it' is a self-evident one.


----------



## Paksanity

Dear Indian members,

Why can't you be proud of your own civilization? The civilization of Ganges valley. Why abandon your roots in shame? Please consider that your holy river is Ganges not Indus. You take dips in Ganges. You float Ashes of your dead in Ganges not Indus. All ancient Hindu temples are all along Ganges and its littoral regions. There is no ancient temple to be found in Pakistan let alone along Indus. Katas Raj temple, the oldest in Pakistan is on a plateau far from Indus and it isn't built on IVC architecture. There are no IVC style Hindu temples in India (or Pakistan). You have your own history, civilization and everything that comes with it. Why try steal ours?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## SarthakGanguly

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> Hinduism is a belief system, so your reference to 'lineage' is only applicable in the context of 'religio-cultural' beliefs, and since the non-Deobandi/Wahabbi practice of Islam in Pakistan is itself a result of the amalgamation of Islam into the existing religio-cultural beliefs of the lands constituting Pakistan, the same argument (in fact stronger, given the geographical location of Pakistan on the heartland of the IVC) applies to Pakistan.
> 
> The argument that any contemporary belief system 'draws from the social, cultural and religious practices of those that came before it' is a self-evident one.


You are confusing my tone to be exclusive. 

The world does not have a problem if you claim to belong to IVC.
The world has a problem if you claim SOLE ownership of IVC.



Paksanity said:


> Dear Indian members,
> 
> Why can't you be proud of your own civilization? The civilization of Ganges valley. Why abandon your roots in shame? Please consider that your holy river is Ganges not Indus. You take dips in Ganges. You float Ashes of your dead in Ganges not Indus. All ancient Hindu temples are all along Ganges and its littoral regions. There is no ancient temple to be found in Pakistan let alone along Indus. Katas Raj temple, the oldest in Pakistan is on a plateau far from Indus and it isn't built on IVC architecture. There are no IVC style Hindu temples in India (or Pakistan). You have your own history, civilization and everything that comes with it. Why try steal ours?


Rig Veda disagrees with you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Paksanity said:


> Dear Indian members,
> 
> Why can't you be proud of your own civilization? The civilization of Ganges valley. Why abandon your roots in shame? Please consider that your holy river is Ganges not Indus. You take dips in Ganges. You float Ashes of your dead in Ganges not Indus. All ancient Hindu temples are all along Ganges and its littoral regions. There is no ancient temple to be found in Pakistan let alone along Indus. Katas Raj temple, the oldest in Pakistan is on a plateau far from Indus and it isn't built on IVC architecture. There are no IVC style Hindu temples in India (or Pakistan). You have your own history, civilization and everything that comes with it. Why try steal ours?



Rig Veda talks about sapt Sindhu


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Clawz said:


> Brother these are historical facts. Come to any neutral forum and there is consensus. Unfortunately since this is a Pakistani forum so neutral discussion is impossible. I wish we Pakistanis were capable of reasoned debate.


You mean come to any racist Indian forum and there is consensus - no one is stopping you from providing credible links to genetic and anthropological studies that establish, beyond doubt, that the founders and residents of the IVC just packed up their bags and moved away.



Clawz said:


> We are mainly Dalit converts with Arab blood, IVC people were high caste so how can we be the descendants?


Since when did Indians start claiming they had Arab blood? But hey, if you think you do, all power to you.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Paksanity

Please have a look at what present day India looked like at the time of Indus Valley Civilization


----------



## SarthakGanguly

Paksanity said:


> Please have a look at what present day India looked like at the time of Indus Valley Civilization
> 
> 
> View attachment 273993


Ah. Ancient Aryavarta. Thank you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Paksanity said:


> Dear Indian members,
> 
> Why can't you be proud of your own civilization? The civilization of Ganges valley. Why abandon your roots in shame? Please consider that your holy river is Ganges not Indus. You take dips in Ganges. You float Ashes of your dead in Ganges not Indus. All ancient Hindu temples are all along Ganges and its littoral regions. There is no ancient temple to be found in Pakistan let alone along Indus. Katas Raj temple, the oldest in Pakistan is on a plateau far from Indus and it isn't built on IVC architecture. There are no IVC style Hindu temples in India (or Pakistan). You have your own history, civilization and everything that comes with it. Why try steal ours?



Rig Veda talks about sapt Sindhu 


Paksanity said:


> Please have a look at what present day India looked like at the time of Indus Valley Civilization
> 
> 
> View attachment 273993



During Bronze age , Most of the India was Forest . With the coming of Iron age , forests were cleared and some People of IVC migrated to Ganges plains and not Ganges Valley


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

SarthakGanguly said:


> You are confusing my tone to be exclusive.
> 
> The world does not have a problem if you claim to belong to IVC.
> The world has a problem if you claim SOLE ownership of IVC.


Can Pakistani's claim Arab, Persian and Afghan history (outside of Arab and Persian invasions and migration into the lands that constitute Pakistan) merely because we follow a faith established in Arabia? No.

Following religious beliefs that might be similar or may have evolved from another land and peoples is not the same thing as being descendants of those ancient people.



Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Rig Veda talks about sapt Sindhu


The Quran talks about lands in Arabia - that doesn't mean non-Arab Muslims can now claim Arab history from those lands.


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> Can Pakistani's claim Arab, Persian and Afghan history (outside of Arab and Persian invasions and migration into the lands that constitute Pakistan) merely because we follow a faith established in Arabia? No.
> 
> Following religious beliefs that might be similar or may have evolved from another land and peoples is not the same thing as being descendants of those ancient people.
> 
> 
> The Quran talks about lands in Arabia - that doesn't mean non-Arab Muslims can now claim Arab history from those lands.



There was a time when Persia ruled over Indian territories of Gandhara and those close to Indus . Its documented by Persians and Greeks .


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Clawz said:


> The world doesn't revolve around South Asia, history based forums like Historum are rife with discussions on this topic. Expand your mind and intellect.
> I am Pakistani not Indian. We are Dalit converts, only lower castes converted to Islam. Please do some research.


You are making these outlandish claims (and I'm assuming you've done your research about Indians having Arab blood) so please, post these credible expert studies supporting your arguments.


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> Can Pakistani's claim Arab, Persian and Afghan history (outside of Arab and Persian invasions and migration into the lands that constitute Pakistan) merely because we follow a faith established in Arabia? No.
> 
> Following religious beliefs that might be similar or may have evolved from another land and peoples is not the same thing as being descendants of those ancient people.
> 
> 
> The Quran talks about lands in Arabia - that doesn't mean non-Arab Muslims can now claim Arab history from those lands.



Yup ! Quran is about Arab world . Hindu , Jain and Buddhist books talk about South Asia .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> There was a time when Persia ruled over Indian territories of Gandhara and those close to Indus . Its documented by Persians and Greeks .


I agree, and that would be the kind of Persian, Greek or Afghan influence Pakistanis would talk about - we can't claim all Greek mythology and history or all Arab mythology and history merely because, in the former, our ancestors were invaded by Alexander's armies and, in the latter, that modern day Pakistanis follow a faith created by Arabs in Arabia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SarthakGanguly

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> Can Pakistani's claim Arab, Persian and Afghan history (outside of Arab and Persian invasions and migration into the lands that constitute Pakistan) merely because we follow a faith established in Arabia? No.
> 
> Following religious beliefs that might be similar or may have evolved from another land and peoples is not the same thing as being descendants of those ancient people.


1. The only claim Pakistan has is on the Western part of the ISVC.
2. Bharatvarsh will remain the main inheritor of the ISVC.

Why?

Because we follow a similar way of life. 
Because most of the sites are here. Because we value it. All of us. How many new sites have you tried to find out since 47?

Just because the people of the land converted and separated does not mean they take away the culture and the history along with them. 

Barcelona may get independence from Spain. Does not mean that Spain will lose claim to El Cid.  The suggestion is beyond stupid to be honest. 

So if you wish to claim IVSC entirely, PLEASE continue to do so. It will remain under 'Indian History' for eternity. 

@Paksanity - Ganga valley civilization never existed. Because Ganga is not a valley. It is a plains.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Yup ! Quran is about Arab world . Hindu , Jain and Buddhist books talk about South Asia .


No - we can't (and your position on this issue would explain why rabidly Hindutva Indians take such a ridiculous position on the IVC).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> No - we can't (and your position on this issue would explain why rabidly Hindutva Indians take such a ridiculous position on the IVC).



Kashmiris , Punjabis , Gujaratis and Some Rajasthanis have every right on IVC .
Tamils might have a separate civilization .
IVC was a heterogeneous Society .


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

The homeland of Aryans is in Eurasia.
























SarthakGanguly said:


> Ah. Ancient Aryavarta


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

SarthakGanguly said:


> 1. The only claim Pakistan has is on the Western part of the ISVC.



The IVC extended into Afghanistan, with new discoveries being made in NWFP of late. That would make modern India the Eastern fringe of the IVC, with Afghanistan being the Western fringe, and the Indus Valley (modern day Pakistan) the center of the civlization and the main inheritor.

Following a particular religious belief means nothing - religious beliefs are a matter of choice, ancestry is not. Practicing Islam is a choice, it does not make us Arabs. Practicing modern day Hinduism (at best a bastardized/evolved form of whatever was practiced in the IVC thousands of years ago) does not make all Indian Hindus descendants of the IVC, it merely means you made a choice to follow a particular faith.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> The homeland of Aryans is in Ukraine.


 No archeological evidence . Only linguistics believe that .
Plus genetics show , Migration has happened before 12,500 years from present .


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Kashmiris , Punjabis , Gujaratis and Some Rajasthanis have every right on IVC .
> Tamils might have a separate civilization .
> IVC was a heterogeneous Society .


I might have misunderstood your earlier post - were you agreeing or disagreeing with my argument that a persons choice to follow Islam does not make them Arab or allow them to claim Arab history?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Eminent Mainstream Media

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> You are making these outlandish claims (and I'm assuming you've done your research about* Indians* having Arab blood) so please, post these credible expert studies supporting your arguments.





AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> No - we can't (and your position on this issue would explain why rabidly Hindutva Indians take such a ridiculous position on the IVC).



Either you are confused or you are confusing everybody here-

1- Do you consider present day Pakistan as India before 1947 ?

Or

2- Are you claiming Pakistan to be Pakistan before India and since the beginning of human history in India ?


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> The IVC extended into Afghanistan, with new discoveries being made in NWFP of late. That would make modern India the Eastern fringe of the IVC, with Afghanistan being the Western fringe, and the Indus Valley (modern day Pakistan) the center of the civlization and the main inheritor.
> 
> Following a particular religious belief means nothing - religious beliefs are a matter of choice, ancestry is not. Practicing Islam is a choice, it does not make us Arabs. Practicing modern day Hinduism (at best a bastardized/evolved form of whatever was practiced in the IVC thousands of years ago) does not make all Indian Hindus descendants of the IVC, it merely means you made a choice to follow a particular faith.



Modern Indians didn't came from Mars . They are they hard work of our ancestors from 5000 years ago


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Kashmiris , Punjabis , Gujaratis and Some Rajasthanis have every right on IVC .
> Tamils might have a separate civilization .
> IVC was a heterogeneous Society .



Abd combined they make what 7% of Indian population? Or is it 10%,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> I might have misunderstood your earlier post - were you agreeing or disagreeing with my argument that a persons choice to follow Islam does not make them Arab or allow them to claim Arab history?



Yup ! , Following Islam doesn't mean U have arab ancestory .
If U really believe U are a real Sindhi or Punjabi and not some one from the line of central Asian Invaders , then U have first right to IVC .


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> They are they hard work of our ancestors from 5000 years ago



Only 5000 years ! I have read Indians claiming 100,000 year old Vedic civilization with nuclear and space age !


----------



## SarthakGanguly

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> The IVC extended into Afghanistan, with new discoveries being made in NWFP of late. That would make modern India the Eastern fringe of the IVC, with Afghanistan being the Western fringe, and the Indus Valley (modern day Pakistan) the center of the civlization and the main inheritor.


Not true. The biggest sites are closer to the sea (not surprisingly). 

AND, I am least bothered about the present political boundaries of Pakistan.

Tomorrow when Pakistan implodes, what will happen to this claim? Will KP/Punjab/Sindh have the primary claims? I mean this delineation based on present political lines is hilarious.


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> Abd combined they make what 7% of Indian population? Or is it 10%,



In present Indian population , Tribals have no IVC ancestory . Rest of the population around 80 % is linked with IVC and Ganges Plains .


----------



## Zibago

SarthakGanguly said:


> 1. The only claim Pakistan has is on the Western part of the ISVC.
> 2. Bharatvarsh will remain the main inheritor of the ISVC.
> 
> Why?
> 
> Because we follow a similar way of life.
> Because most of the sites are here. Because we value it. All of us. How many new sites have you tried to find out since 47?
> 
> Just because the people of the land converted and separated does not mean they take away the culture and the history along with them.
> 
> Barcelona may get independence from Spain. Does not mean that Spain will lose claim to El Cid.  The suggestion is beyond stupid to be honest.
> 
> So if you wish to claim IVSC entirely, PLEASE continue to do so. It will remain under 'Indian History' for eternity.
> 
> @Paksanity - Ganga valley civilization never existed. Because Ganga is not a valley. It is a plains.


What makes you think we dont value it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SarthakGanguly

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> The homeland of Aryans is in Eurasia.


Genius.

Aryavarta = Land of the Arya.

Not Aryans.

Arya = noble people.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Modern Indians didn't came from Mars . They are they hard work of our ancestors from 5000 years ago


I'm not saying they did - just as the argument that all of the IVC just packed up and left, making sure they crossed the yet to be defined borers of contemporary Pakistan and India, into India, is absurd, so is the argument that human and cultural migration did not continue.

Without an accurate genetic analysis of people of the IVC, compared to the genetic makeup of modern day Pakistanis and Indians, we can't validate either claim, but what we do know is that the IVC was centered on what is today Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SarthakGanguly

Zibago said:


>


Yes, and the political rallies are cool too. Even parties love them.


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> Only 5000 years ! I have read Indians claiming 100,000 year old Vedic civilization with nuclear and space age !


----------



## SarthakGanguly

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> just as the argument that all of the IVC just packed up and left


No. They stayed. A part of them left only during the Partition. The ones before had and have links all over South Asia.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Eminent Mainstream Media said:


> Either you are confused or you are confusing everybody here-
> 
> 1- Do you consider present day Pakistan as India before 1947 ?


No - my use of the terms 'India' and 'Indian' are only made in reference to the country established in 1947. The individual I was responding to is an Indian troll (irrespective of the flags he's displaying) and therefore when he states 'ours' I can only assume he is making claims about 'descendants of dalits and Arab blood' on behalf of modern day Indians.


----------



## Zibago

SarthakGanguly said:


> Yes, and the political rallies are cool too. Even parties love them.


And how is it related to my comment?


----------



## SarthakGanguly

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> In present Indian population , Tribals have no IVC ancestory . Rest of the population around 80 % is linked with IVC and Ganges Plains .


Genetics state that all Indians TODAY have pretty much the same ancestry.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zibago

@SarthakGanguly 
Do you know about the predecessor of ivc?
Mherghar: A 10,000 years old civilization in Pakistan - By Sohail Taj


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> Without an accurate genetic analysis of people of the IVC, compared to the genetic makeup of modern day Pakistanis and Indians, we can't validate either claim, but what we do know is that the IVC was centered on what is today Pakistan.



There are skeletons found to do DNA analysis. The Indians usually burned their dead so hard to find many burials to do proper DNA analysis of all communities. If 5000 years in future a civilization did DNA analysis of the skeletons found in India then the sample will be skewed as 95% of burials are Muslims and 5% Christians.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

SarthakGanguly said:


> Tomorrow when Pakistan implodes, what will happen to this claim? Will KP/Punjab/Sindh have the primary claims? I mean this delineation based on present political lines is hilarious.


If India and Pakistan implode into multiple independent States, then the States with boundaries that encompass critical parts of the IVC will have claims on that history based on the extent of the presence of critical parts of the IVC within their political boundaries.

The Pakistani argument here is consistent, and doesn't become invalid in the case of a balkanization of India and Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> I'm not saying they did - just as the argument that all of the IVC just packed up and left, making sure they crossed the yet to be defined borers of contemporary Pakistan and India, into India, is absurd, so is the argument that human and cultural migration did not continue.
> 
> Without an accurate genetic analysis of people of the IVC, compared to the genetic makeup of modern day Pakistanis and Indians, we can't validate either claim, but what we do know is that the IVC was centered on what is today Pakistan.



As per the recorded history only two things existed around the Indus region .
Indo Iranians ( West of Indus ) and Indo Aryans ( East of Indus ) .
They both descended from Proto Indo Europeans , The real owners of IVC .
When Islam and Central and Middle east Asians entered South Asia , only then the first real changes began to appear around Indus .


----------



## SarthakGanguly

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> If India and Pakistan implode into multiple independent States, then the States with boundaries that encompass critical parts of the IVC will have claims on that history based on the extent of the presence of critical parts of the IVC within their political boundaries.
> 
> The Pakistani argument here is consistent, and doesn't become invalid in the case of a balkanization of India and Pakistan.


And rest of the states will lose their claims?

If you answer yes, please stop responding to my posts.


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Zibago said:


> @SarthakGanguly
> Do you know about the predecessor of ivc?
> Mherghar: A 10,000 years old civilization in Pakistan - By Sohail Taj



Yup ! Mherghar gave birth to societies around West of Indus .
*Bhirrana *gave birth to societies in the east of Indus .
Bhirrana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

During Bronze age both societies combined and gave birth to IVC .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SarthakGanguly

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> As per the recorded history only two things existed around the Indus region .
> Indo Iranians ( West of Indus ) and Indo Aryans ( East of Indus ) .
> They both descended from Proto Indo Europeans , The real owners of IVC .
> When Islam and Central and Middle east Asians entered South Asia , only then the first real changes began to appear around Indus .


Sorry. No Aryans. No Dravidians.
Reconstructing Indian population history : Abstract : Nature
PLOS Genetics: Inference of Population Splits and Mixtures from Genome-Wide Allele Frequency Data
Ancient Admixture in Human History

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Eminent Mainstream Media

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> No - my use of the terms 'India' and 'Indian' are only made in reference to the country established in 1947. The individual I was responding to is an Indian troll (irrespective of the flags he's displaying) and therefore when he states 'ours' I can only assume he is making claims about 'descendants of dalits and Arab blood' on behalf of modern day Indians.



Thanks for clarifying-


----------



## SarthakGanguly

Zibago said:


> @SarthakGanguly
> Do you know about the predecessor of ivc?
> Mherghar: A 10,000 years old civilization in Pakistan - By Sohail Taj


It is called the early Harrapa period. Not pre ISVC.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

SarthakGanguly said:


> Sorry. No Aryans. No Dravidians.
> Reconstructing Indian population history : Abstract : Nature
> PLOS Genetics: Inference of Population Splits and Mixtures from Genome-Wide Allele Frequency Data
> Ancient Admixture in Human History


I am saying that as per Linguistics


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> When Islam and Central and Middle east Asians entered South Asia , only then the first real changes began to appear around Indus .



It was mostly Muslim armies, elite and missionaries that came to the South Asia. It was not like Aryan migration that changed the ethnic make up of the Indus Valley.



Kashmiri Pandit said:


> I am saying that as per Linguistics



You cannot just prove by linguistic evidence. The North Africa is mostly ethnically Berber but linguistically Arab.


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> It was mostly Muslim armies, elite and missionaries that came to the South Asia. It was not like Aryan migration that changed the ethnic make up of the Indus Valley.



Yup ! But I didn't meant that .
Religion of people changed and first real differences appeared .

In all this we forget the period from 600 BCE to 600 CE , during which IVC people were ruled mostly by central Asians , Greeks , Scythans while Mainland India or Modern India was still under the rule of native kings .

Buddhists , Jains and Hindus have differences but Just like Judaism , Christianity and Islam , there are many similarities .



ArsalanKhan21 said:


> It was mostly Muslim armies, elite and missionaries that came to the South Asia. It was not like Aryan migration that changed the ethnic make up of the Indus Valley.
> 
> 
> 
> You cannot just prove by linguistic evidence. The North Africa is mostly ethnically Berber but linguistically Arab.



Linguistics , genetics and Archeology must go hand in hand .

Archeology rejects Aryan inavsion .
Genetics support Aryan migration but 12,500 years ago .
Linguistics support Aryan invasion/Migration around 1900 to 1500 BCE .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Eminent Mainstream Media

AgNoStiC MuSliM said:


> If India and Pakistan implode into multiple independent States, then the States with boundaries that encompass critical parts of the IVC will have claims on that history based on the extent of the presence of critical parts of the IVC within their political boundaries.
> 
> The Pakistani argument here is consistent, and doesn't become invalid in the case of a balkanization of India and Pakistan.



If we go by your argument- IVC will be claimed by Haryanvis, Rajasthanis, Gujratis, Punjabis and Sindhis separately- Which one is to be taken as legitimate-

List of Indus Valley Civilization sites - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zibago

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Yup ! Mherghar gave birth to societies around West of Indus .
> *Bhirrana *gave birth to societies in the east of Indus .
> Bhirrana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> During Bronze age both societies combined and gave birth to IVC .


What destroyed them remains a mystery it was either war,famine or disease

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Zibago said:


> What destroyed them remains a mystery it was either war,famine or disease


Diseases and Climate change are on top of my list .
War may be a reason . Persians were powerful rulers during that time .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## B+ Dracula

SarthakGanguly said:


> Not true. The biggest sites are closer to the sea (not surprisingly).
> 
> AND, I am least bothered about the present political boundaries of Pakistan.
> 
> Tomorrow when Pakistan implodes, what will happen to this claim? Will KP/Punjab/Sindh have the primary claims? I mean this delineation based on present political lines is hilarious.


Whether your paper *Dinosaurs *make sense or not....its none of my business.
.
.
I urge every *Indian *to visit our land with Loaded pockets and go back empty 
.
Same i demand from *Chinese *_Buddhist _Junta to visit TAXILA...once in a lifetime

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zibago

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Diseases and Climate change are on top of my list .
> War may be a reason . Persians were powerful rulers during that time .


Or aryans from central asia


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Magnitude 5.9 earthquake rocks Pakistan, Afghanistan and north India


----------



## SarthakGanguly

B+ Dracula said:


> Whether your paper *Dinosaurs *make sense or not....its none of my business.
> .
> .
> I urge every *Indian *to visit our land with Loaded pockets and go back empty
> .
> Same i demand from *Chinese *_Buddhist _Junta to visit TAXILA...once in a lifetime


You are just a baniya in disguise.  Or a Pushtoon baniya.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Zibago said:


> Or aryans from central asia



No real evidence to prove Aryan Invasion . 
Aryan Migration though is supported by some Linguistics .


----------



## SarthakGanguly

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Magnitude 5.9 earthquake rocks Pakistan, Afghanistan and north India


Hope Bhagwan sabko theek rakhe.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zibago

B+ Dracula said:


> Whether your paper *Dinosaurs *make sense or not....its none of my business.
> .
> .
> I urge every *Indian *to visit our land with Loaded pockets and go back empty
> .
> Same i demand from *Chinese *_Buddhist _Junta to visit TAXILA...once in a lifetime


Sure why not i will request ch nisar to allow him entrance into sharda 



SarthakGanguly said:


> Hope Bhagwan sabko theek rakhe.


Actually it was 6.2 and thankyou



SarthakGanguly said:


> You are just a baniya in disguise.  Or a Pushtoon baniya.


Sheikh sahab hoosla

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sugarcane

The energies which Indians spent to somehow attach themselves with IVC (while only minority have genuine linkage), Had they spent 1/2 of energy in digging south they would have found their forefathers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

LoveIcon said:


> The energies which Indians spent to somehow attach themselves with IVC (while only minority have genuine linkage), Had they spent 1/2 of energy in digging south they would have found their forefathers.



They don't want to do archaelogical excavation in Central and Southern India since they are fearful that they will find their real archaelogical roots in those regions. They are consequently fixated on Pakistan's archaelogical roots.


----------



## Paksanity

First of all we are talking of period 2500 B.C. to 1500 B.C. here. At that time there are only three civilizations in the world at that time. Sumerian, Egyptian and Indus Valley. Not all human settlements qualify for the status civilization. Please read on primary and secondary attributes of a civilization in historical/ archaeological context. Please limit your discussion to the period we are referring to. As to Hindu scriptures of which Rigveda is the oldest, none of them are dated as far as IVC. Rigveda appeared in around 500 B.C. Some 1000 years after decline of IVC. There is neither an old surviving script of Rigveda nor it is a scientific reference. Rigveda is composed of narratives of Rishis (persons who heard and forwarded the narrative) as is believed by followers of Hindu faith. As a scripture of faith to some, it is fine to believe in it. Each individual is free to believe and practice its religion. However presenting a scripture as a scientific evidence can not be accepted. For that you need hard science like archeology, genetics, geographical history and linguistic science. Please keep in mind that River Indus has never been in history a sacred river nor the area which is Indus basin remained with area east of it as one unit. In the last 5000 years, it has been only 300 years when area which now is Pakistan remained United with what now is India under an indigenous ruling dynasty. That is Maurian empire. Parts of India and Pakistan have been for some duration but neither for long and nor for entirety.

It is pertinent to note that Hindu faith had never claimed it's roots in Indus basin till 1920s when first IVC site was discovered by British. There is good strong evidence of that. No ancient temples in Pakistan. No sacred rituals associated with this area and no evidence of ancient Hindu history here. It was, until 1920s believed that Ganges basin and area south of its western half was birthplace of Hindu faith. Himalayas in the north mostly associated with meditation practices of Hindu mythology. It was also believed that Hindu faith is the oldest in the region and everyone was happy with this fact. No mention of Indus or this area. British were happy too as they found European (aryan) connection. Shock came after Railway engineers found Harrappa ruins and immediately the effort to somehow connect it to Hindu faith started. Just by any means possible. Some people just could not swallow that there existed a great civilization before Hindu faith. So please, I request you to take the history as it is and do not feel ashamed of what you have or where your roots are.



SarthakGanguly said:


> Rig Veda disagrees with you.



Rigveda is not a scientific evidence.



Clawz said:


> We are mainly Dalit converts with Arab blood, IVC people were high caste so how can we be the descendants



Please base your arguments on scientific basis. Here is genetic map of this area. As you can see people of Pakistan are genetically distinct from Indian diaspora. Such diversity can not come within 60 years. And we are no way genetically close to Dalits. Closest anyone come to us is Kashmiris Pundits, UP brahmins and Gujaratais to an extent. As a matter of fact Indian genetics are no where close to each other as a nation. If India is one nation in genetics term, we, the Pakistanis are part of Europeans in terms of genetics! Look for yourself









Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Rig Veda talks about sapt Sindhu



A river is a geographical feature. Rigveda can talk about it because it will be known to them. It doesn't make Indus central to Hindu mythology. And Rigveda talks about Indus river but it doesn't talk about the magnificent cities built around it? By any stretch of imagination, Harrappa and Mohen-jo-Daro would be a site to behold for any human of that time yet Rigveda has no mention of them or their civilization? Could it be that people writing it had no idea about Indus Civilization?



Clawz said:


> Ancient Indians ruling the Dalits of Pakistan from Pataliputra:
> View attachment 273994



@Atanz

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sugarcane

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> They don't want to do archaelogical excavation in Central and Southern India since they are fearful that they will find their real archaelogical roots in those regions. They are consequently fixated on Pakistan's archaelogical roots.



What if there was far older and greater civilization than IVC existed there and influenced IVC? And instead of claiming every random drawing found as one of god they actually find the origins of those gods in south?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

Paksanity said:


> First of all we are talking of period 2500 B.C. to 1500 B.C. here. At that time there are only three civilizations in the world at that time. Sumerian, Egyptian and Indus Valley.



Not true. The Chinese civilization of Xia was also comparable.

Xia dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



LoveIcon said:


> What if there was far older and greater civilization than IVC existed there and influenced IVC? And instead of claiming every random drawing found as one of god they actually find the origins of those gods in south?



The Aryan centric North Indians and Hindutva will not start excavations only South Indians can do that on their own.


----------



## Ind4Ever

Maira La said:


> Every blogger pretty much cooks up their own "truth".. the wonders of internet!
> 
> Artefacts recovered from IVC sites point to a phenotype similar to West Asians/Baloch/Pashtuns:



Looks like Our PM Modi of Ancient Times 

On topic India is the worlds largest and most importantly oldest civilization. 

Lol blacks claiming Indus is like funniest thing ever



ArsalanKhan21 said:


> Seems to be true love when you see your beloved lover's face everywhere ?


LOL dude check out the similarities man. And we belive in incarnation. Why not 

Not good sign for some reason for someone 



ArsalanKhan21 said:


> Seems to be true love when you see your beloved's face everywhere. You both seem to be single and same sex marriage is allowed in India !


 Are u a hater of same sex marriage ... You support human rights to eat beef in India but not Right to marriage anyone we like

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

Ind4Ever said:


> Looks like Our PM Modi of Ancient Times



Seems to be true love when you see your beloved's face everywhere. You both seem to be single and same sex marriage is allowed in India !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

Ind4Ever said:


> Are u a hater of same sex marriage .. You support human rights to eat beef in India but not Right to marriage anyone we like



May be your love will change your wife Modi for good.


----------



## Ind4Ever

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> May be your love will change your wife Modi for good.




Mean while even ancient Modi Gi is looking the direction of present day Pakistan and not towards Bangladesh or Sri Lanka

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Paksanity

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> During Bronze age , Most of the India was Forest . With the coming of Iron age , forests were cleared and some People of IVC migrated to Ganges plains and not Ganges Valley



IVC existed in bronze age. You underestimate bronze age. Just to give you an idea, Egyptian pyramids were constructed in bronze age with bronze tools. If they could cut stones with bronze tools, they could cut trees as well. However Indus basin was not as thickly forested as India because it received less monsoon thus making of civilization possible. Due to thick forests present day India was mostly inhabited with jungle hunters, cattle herders, foragers and jungle food gatherers at that time. Some in early bronze age and some still in stoneware.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

Ind4Ever said:


> Mean while even ancient Modi Gi is looking the direction of present day Pakistan and not towards Bangladesh or Sri Lanka



People usually look at beautiful things longer than the ugly ones.

(No disrespect intended)



Clawz said:


> spread their legs for them



You seem to be doing that for your gay lovers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Paksanity

Clawz said:


> Map is based on limited samples, it is also very outdated. The reason you drift closer to Arabs is because low castes were more open to mixing with foreigners. Your ancestors spread their legs for them



Search any map you will find the same result. Genetically Pakistanis are more closer to central Asia than middle east. Arabs did not settle in this area and most invasions came from central Asia. Remove those biased glasses for a while. There is Turkish, central Asian, Greek and Bactrian genes mixed with indigenous Indus population rather than Persian and Arabic.


----------



## Ind4Ever

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> People usually look at beautiful things longer than the ugly ones.
> 
> (No disrespect intended)
> 
> 
> 
> You seem to be doing that for you gay lover.


LOL  beautiful things

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Paksanity

SarthakGanguly said:


> - Ganga valley civilization never existed. Because Ganga is not a valley. It is a plains.



Valley is in the context of basin of Ganges but you are right. Initial stages of Hindu history does not meet all attributes of civilization and does not qualify to be called a civilization till about Mauryan time.



ArsalanKhan21 said:


> Not true. The Chinese civilization of Xia was also comparable.



Chinese civilization (yellow river civilization) appeared later but was contemporary to IVC from 2000 B.C. onwards. First civilization was Sumerian Iraq (3500 B.C.) second Egypt (3000-2500 B.C.) Third Indus (2500 B.C.). Indus Valley Civilization was in contact with Sumerian and Egyptian civilizations as it traded with them through ships. IVC people are mentioned in Sumerian records and are called 'Meluhas' (some historians think it as 'Mallahs' or ship sailors). Sumerian records tell them of people who bring exotic goods to Sumerian (Iraq). Indus valley people traded with Middle East and their trading posts have been discovered in Oman, Bahrain and Indus artifacts and seals have been found in Iraq.



Ind4Ever said:


> On topic India is the worlds largest and most importantly oldest civilization.



Sumerian civilization is the oldest and is called cradle of human civilization. It thrived between Euphrates and Tigris rivers. Second oldest is Egyptian and then is Indus valley basin (not India by any stretch of imagination).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Paksanity

Clawz said:


> Map is based on limited samples, it is also very outdated. The reason you drift closer to Arabs is because low castes were more open to mixing with foreigners.



Genetic mapping of world population is available on Internet. Feel free to share your evidence. My map is neither outdated nor based on limited samples. Truth is out there for everyone to see. Looking however at the diversity of Indian populace, it is abundantly clearly that many races are mixed therein. Do you ever wonder why Pakistanis genetically bunch together and Indians do not?!


----------



## Paksanity

@waz @Irfan Baloch @Horus @WebMaster @mods

Can you please check location of @Clawz 
Apparently a false flagging troll.


----------



## Raja.Pakistani

Clawz said:


> We are mainly Dalit converts with Arab blood
> 
> 
> 
> You are definitely Indian dalits and I am happy that you are embracing this truth again and again in every thread. Its 21 century so please accept your identity and stop using Pakistani flags. We will not consider you untouchable if you do this
Click to expand...




Paksanity said:


> @waz @Irfan Baloch @Horus @WebMaster @mods
> 
> Can you please check location of @Clawz
> Apparently a false flagging troll.


location dont matter because he might be living in UK but he is definitely self proclaimed dalit


----------



## Indus Pakistan

LoveIcon said:


> attach themselves



What you and me need to do is find out how they can "attach" to Indus when almost all of them are hundreds if not thousand miles. this like Pakistani's try to "attach" to Mesopotamia in Iraq. If you can find this thing they use to "attach" then we can make superglue out of it trust me it will have best bonding abilities than any other glue.

You know seriously I must admit I have to scratch my head at this delusion. Here is Bengali's, Maratas, Tamils, Orrisans and the rest who have no idea of what the Indus region looks like, have never now or in the past ever gone near it somehow have dreamed up they have some connection with our land. Before Urdu/Hindi was standarized in recent times and spread non of these people could have talked with our people. They look differant, they eat differant, they dress differant but somehow they want to make us disappear and claim our history.

This is absurd. They have no sense of shame. They are efectively seeing that they are spawns of our ancestors. I mean you realize this means they are disowning their own forefathers. Despite this like dogs that won't let go of a bone, you can kick, you do what you want but they will come back for the bone - the Indus. 

The bizzare thing is they entirely overlook their own lands and their own ancestors. Look they worship the Ganga. So how come these Indians who are from the Ganga basin do not build a identity and history based on the Ganga Basin? There are probably over 500 million Indian's living on the Ganga Basin so why not take pride in their land. Be proud Ganga Indians. 

Then there is the Dravid Indian's. These guys are even more remote from us. They live entirely in a differant environment which mostly is tropical unlike the semi desert or mountains of Pakistan. These Dravid Indians in South India should be taking ownership of their land and the history of their forefathers. Instead they look far way north to our lands on the Indus and sniff on it and get high. crazy.

And Ganguly I coould ask you what would happen if India imploded. Don't compare with that lump of land separated 1,300 miles from us called Bangladesh. It was not a contigous part of the Indus basin. The provinces that make Pakistan are the custodians of Indus basin as whole. Have a look at the map. In fact why not find out where Indus River is and you will find it is to Pakistan what Nile is to Egypt.

Yes there might be overspill of Indus civilizations to neighbouring regions in Iran, Afghanistan and India near Durand line but no civilization is found in nice little boxes. That way Ancient Egypt had overspill into Nubia in Sudan with some sites even in Ethopia. However the fulcrum was in Egypt. Ditto Indus/Pakistan. Just to refresh your geography have a look at the "I" of IVC or Indus River. You can see how it defines and dominates Pakistan. Not only that it unites all provinces.







And just in case you have illusions look at the Ganges basin and Indus basin. Both are distinct never mind South India. Ganga basin all shit flows east to Gulf of Bengal. Whereas Indus basin flows in differant direction. Sort of south, south west to Arabian Sea.






And here is what is Ganga Basin is. It covers most of North India and home probably to majority of Indians. Eastern Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, North East Rajasthan, Madya Pradesh, Jharkand, Bihar, Bengal, Chattisgarh peoples are all proud Ganga dwellers and should learn to take pride in their own land instead looking far west to feel good about themselves. They need to own their own ancestors on the Ganga.

Below: The Ganga India - New Delhi is in the basin.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nForce

Atanz said:


> What you and me need to do is find out how they can "attach" to Indus when almost all of them are hundreds if not thousand miles. this like Pakistani's try to "attach" to Mesopotamia in Iraq. If you can find this thing they use to "attach" then we can make superglue out of it trust me it will have best bonding abilities than any other glue.
> 
> You know seriously I must admit I have to scratch my head at this delusion. Here is Bengali's, Maratas, Tamils, Orrisans and the rest who have no idea of what the Indus region looks like, have never now or in the past ever gone near it somehow have dreamed up they have some connection with our land. Before Urdu/Hindi was standarized in recent times and spread non of these people could have talked with our people. They look differant, they eat differant, they dress differant but somehow they want to make us disappear and claim our history.
> 
> This is absurd. They have no sense of shame. They are efectively seeing that they are spawns of our ancestors. I mean you realize this means they are disowning their own forefathers. Despite this like dogs that won't let go of a bone, you can kick, you do what you want but they will come back for the bone - the Indus.
> 
> The bizzare thing is they entirely overlook their own lands and their own ancestors. Look they worship the Ganga. So how come these Indians who are from the Ganga basin do not build a identity and history based on the Ganga Basin? There are probably over 500 million Indian's living on the Ganga Basin so why not take pride in their land. Be proud Ganga Indians.
> 
> Then there is the Dravid Indian's. These guys are even more remote from us. They live entirely in a differant environment which mostly is tropical unlike the semi desert or mountains of Pakistan. These Dravid Indians in South India should be taking ownership of their land and the history of their forefathers. Instead they look far way north to our lands on the Indus and sniff on it and get high. crazy.
> 
> And Ganguly I coould ask you what would happen if India imploded. Don't compare with that lump of land separated 1,300 miles from us called Bangladesh. It was not a contigous part of the Indus basin. The provinces that make Pakistan are the custodians of Indus basin as whole. Have a look at the map. In fact why not find out where Indus River is and you will find it is to Pakistan what Nile is to Egypt.
> 
> Yes there might be overspill of Indus civilizations to neighbouring regions in Iran, Afghanistan and India near Durand line but no civilization is found in nice little boxes. That way Ancient Egypt had overspill into Nubia in Sudan with some sites even in Ethopia. However the fulcrum was in Egypt. Ditto Indus/Pakistan. Just to refresh your geography have a look at the "I" of IVC or Indus River. You can see how it defines and dominates Pakistan. Not only that it unites all provinces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And just in case you have illusions look at the Ganges basin and Indus basin. Both are distinct never mind South India. Ganga basin all shit flows east to Gulf of Bengal. Whereas Indus basin flows in differant direction. Sort of south, south west to Arabian Sea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And here is what is Ganga Basin is. It covers most of North India and home probably to majority of Indians. Eastern Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, North East Rajasthan, Madya Pradesh, Jharkand, Bihar, Bengal, Chattisgarh peoples are all proud Ganga dwellers and should learn to take pride in their own land instead looking far west to feel good about themselves. They need to own their own ancestors on the Ganga.
> 
> Below: The Ganga India - New Delhi is in the basin.



You are in UK. You still identify yourself as a Pakistani, right ? It's same thing. 

Indians are the heirs of Indus Valley civilization. Pakistanis are those who wanted to be Arabs, but Arabs did not want them. So they got stuck in the no man's land.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Pakistan

nForce said:


> It's same thing.



No. I actually come from there. I was born there. My grandparents live there. I own land there - my share of my fathers estate. I am therefore British - Pakistani. Now if any Indian citizen ( I know there are some like your former PM Singh ) tell me he is from Khyber Pakhtunkwa or Punjab etc trust me I would open my arms and treat them as my brothers despite what religion they are and would not even dare challange their right to the history of this land. Those Indian migrants who left in 1947 and are now Indian citizens are equivalent to me or any other person from the provinces of Pakistan. I think it was a tragedy that we lost them in 1947. If it came to a vote I would say yes to them coming back.

However a Bengali, a Marata, a Tamil, a Orrisan, a Telagu, a Assamese have absolutely no right as they have no connect to this land now or in the past unless of course they happen to be migrants from here which might be applicable to atiny number. I recently met a chap from Hyderabad in India and he told me his father was from Lahore and in 1947 he never went back because he had a good job. However you know these are exceptions. 100 of millions or the vast number of Indians are intrinsic to Ganges India or South India and have had no knowledge of or connection to Indus other than recent historical revisionism.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nForce

Atanz said:


> No. I actually come from their. I was born there. My grandparents live there. I own land there - my share of my fathers estate. I am therefore British - Pakistani. Now if any Indian citizen ( I know there are ) tell me he is from Khyber Pakhtunkwa or Punjab etc trust me I would open my arms and treat them as my brothers despite what religion they are and would not even dare challange their right to the history of this land. Those Indian migrants who left in 1947 and are now Indian citizens are equivalent to me.
> 
> However a Bengali, a Marata, a Tamil, a Orrisan, a Telagu, a Assamese have absolutely no right as they have no connect to this land now or in the past unless of course they happen to be migrants from here which might be applicable to atiny number. I recently met a chap from Hyderabad in India and he told me his father was from Lahore and in 1947 he never went back because he had a good job. However you know these are exceptions. 100 of millions or the vat number are intrinsic to Ganges India or South India and have had no knowledge of or connection to Indus other than recent historical revisionism.



That was an example, which one can relate to within a life time. If not you, then probably someone else ? I'm sure a first generation migrant Pakistani in UK will identify himself as a Pakistani to be his origin.

In case of IVC, the same is true, only span over thousands of years. The civilization it gave rise to has span over places, across India.
Pakistan is the custodian of the artefacts of parts of that civilization. It is so, because, it shunned that identity ( and I'm not merely indicating at religion here) and went for creating a new identity which was based on a civilization that grew and prospered elsewhere, in the middle east.

So, either you are this one, or that one. You cannot be both at same point of time.


----------



## Indus Pakistan

nForce said:


> wanted to be Arabs,



This applies to maybe 1% of Pakistan. I hear this so often from Indian's. Is this some self prescribed medicine to knock out 94% of native Pakistani's from their own ancestors thus making it easier for you guy to make move. You are badly misinformed my friend if you believe that. Muslim yes but Arab no. There is very strong identification in Pakistan with their tribe, clan, bradheri which always are significant formulation of their identity. In fact these precede the "Pakistan" tag. A Sadozai,a Khattak, a Jat, a Gakkar, a Arrain, a Baloch will take extreme pride in that ancestry. Islam also plays a role but it just one thread in a complex.

And if any of them even do dream of Arab ( possibly Syeds who actually are invariably converts as the Arab impact on Pakistan was nominal as it was restricted to just Sindh ) that certainly does not create a vacancy for some Bengali, Tamil or Telagu to jump in.

That is like a Viking going awol on his ancestry and you decide fill his vancancy !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## my2cents

Atanz said:


> This applies to maybe 1% of Pakistan. I hear this so often from Indian's. Is this some self prescribed medicine to knock out 94% of native Pakistani's from their own ancestors thus making it easier for you guy to make move. You are badly misinformed my friend if you believe that. Muslim yes but Arab no. There is very strong identification in Pakistan with their tribe, clan, bradheri which always are significant formulation of their identity. In fact these precede the "Pakistan" tag. A Sadozai,a Khattak, a Jat, a Gakkar, a Arrain, a Baloch will take extreme pride in that ancestry. Islam also plays a role but it just one thread in a complex.
> 
> And if any of them even do dream of Arab ( possibly Syeds who actually are invariably converts as the Arab impact on Pakistan was nominal as it was restricted to just Sindh ) that certainly does not create a vacancy for some Bengali, Tamil or Telagu to jump in.
> 
> That is like a Viking going awol on his ancestry and you decide fill his vancancy !!!



If you want to own up to IVC more power to you. Until now we were of the impression that you disowned your ancestors and followed Arabs. Now why is it very little is know about IVC and their inhabitants?? Can you quantify your connection you have with IVC? Why was this world lost and forgotten until its discovery in 1940's by British and Indian archeologists??
Why it was not mentioned in any of your folklore or scriptures?? There are more questions than answers for why it was lost to the outside world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nForce

@Atanz This is interesting. But, I have to leave now. I will share my thoughts as soon as possible.


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Paksanity said:


> A river is a geographical feature. Rigveda can talk about it because it will be known to them. It doesn't make Indus central to Hindu mythology. And Rigveda talks about Indus river but it doesn't talk about the magnificent cities built around it? By any stretch of imagination, Harrappa and Mohen-jo-Daro would be a site to behold for any human of that time yet Rigveda has no mention of them or their civilization? Could it be that people writing it had no idea about Indus Civilization?
> 
> 
> 
> @Atanz



Which can also mean , Rig veda precedes IVC . It can also mean Rig Veda was written on the east of Indus , near saraswati .
It talks about Saraswati river , and its clear through geology and scientific research that , the river got extinct by 1900 BCE .

Rig Veda and Avestan of Iranians have similarities . Its already clear that Iranians were ruling Indus areas for a long time .

Battle of the Ten Kings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rig Veda talks about battle of 10 kings . If there are kings with big armies then there must be big enough empires to support them . Only 2 possible areas can have these empires : Persia ( Including all parts of IVC ) and Egypt .
And only logical answer could be the 1st one .



Paksanity said:


> IVC existed in bronze age. You underestimate bronze age. Just to give you an idea, Egyptian pyramids were constructed in bronze age with bronze tools. If they could cut stones with bronze tools, they could cut trees as well. However Indus basin was not as thickly forested as India because it received less monsoon thus making of civilization possible. Due to thick forests present day India was mostly inhabited with jungle hunters, cattle herders, foragers and jungle food gatherers at that time. Some in early bronze age and some still in stoneware.



But its widely accepted that advent of Iron age resulted in clearance of Forests .
Many Egyptians concepts and Gods have similarities with Hindu Gods , lets not go there 

There are lots of conspiracy theories floating around Egypt , SO no need to go there too

At best we can say Egyptians were well ahead of Time . If not then there must be ALIENS

Modern India and Pakistan are a mixture a races , Cultures , Languages and Religions .
We are so mixed up that , It will be foolish of both of us to have claim on IVC .

None of us hold pure genes of IVC people


----------



## farhan_9909

nForce said:


> You are in UK. You still identify yourself as a Pakistani, right ? It's same thing.
> 
> Indians are the heirs of Indus Valley civilization. Pakistanis are those who wanted to be Arabs, but Arabs did not want them. So they got stuck in the no man's land.



Who are you dear?who the hell are you to claim that we don't own IVC?We may claim to be from peru or chile but it doesn't change the fact that where Pakistanis are from.

This stupid double standard of india doesn't work anymore as many agencies around the world are now claiming IVC part of Pakistan and Ganges part of India.

Persian history belong to persian despite the fact that they are muslim today
Egyptian history belong to Egyptian despite the fact that they are muslim today
IVC history exclusively belong to pakistanis despite the fact that Pakistanis are Muslim today.

I agree you can claim the IVC only if your ancestors migrated from the land of Pakistan during partition or even earlier though if your family has married for at least 2 generation within India,than again your not related to the Ancient IVC People or we Pakistanis.But again if you want to become part of the IVC/Pakistan family please contact me,thanks

NOTE: This is really stupid,I am from Pakistan but even i can't claim to be part of IVC as i am not from the region linked to IVC.But an indian who doesn't even live in Pakistan or Indian occupied Punjab but still claim IVC just because he's a hindu.

Dear,it it was just upto religion,we would had claim over all the ancient ME civilizations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## B+ Dracula

Few days back i was watching *Professor Rafiq Akhter* religious thoughts on that subject.....According to him...Allah has bestowed his blessings to everyone in this Universe. Each Society have concept of single God to be worship,this creed get distorted with passage of time and that resulted in their ultimate destruction....So according to him its not worth to take pride in a ruins where Allah has shown his rage of destruction.....then later on he explains why we always find Statue of Gods while digging?? it gives us the wrong conclusion that each society in primitive world worship Stone crafted GODS???....as a muslim that's wrong belief in itself bcoz we believe in series of Prophets send to each society in different part of the world....Point is man is prone to make same mistake over & over again which forces Divine forces to set example to rest of the world....Sumarian/Egyptian/IVC are those that are now open to the world buried in deep soil with full evidences...one thing that is common among them are that they're all IDOL WORSHIPERS
.
Pakistan "A Glance on Future" Part-1 - Video Dailymotion
.
*watch after 9:00 or 11:00.*...its interesting where he describe "WhyBuddha devise strategy of *NIRVANA *in the society of BURAHMANS"?...who already worship millions of demi-gods
.
Prof Rafiq Akhtar Personal website.
Prof.Ahmad Rafique Akhtar Official Website


Paksanity said:


> First of all we are talking of period 2500 B.C. to 1500 B.C. here. At that time there are only three civilizations in the world at that time. Sumerian, Egyptian and Indus Valley. Not all human settlements qualify for the status civilization. Please read on primary and secondary attributes of a civilization in historical/ archaeological context. Please limit your discussion to the period we are referring to. As to Hindu scriptures of which Rigveda is the oldest, none of them are dated as far as IVC. Rigveda appeared in around 500 B.C. Some 1000 years after decline of IVC. There is neither an old surviving script of Rigveda nor it is a scientific reference. Rigveda is composed of narratives of Rishis (persons who heard and forwarded the narrative) as is believed by followers of Hindu faith. As a scripture of faith to some, it is fine to believe in it. Each individual is free to believe and practice its religion. However presenting a scripture as a scientific evidence can not be accepted. For that you need hard science like archeology, genetics, geographical history and linguistic science. Please keep in mind that River Indus has never been in history a sacred river nor the area which is Indus basin remained with area east of it as one unit. In the last 5000 years, it has been only 300 years when area which now is Pakistan remained United with what now is India under an indigenous ruling dynasty. That is Maurian empire. Parts of India and Pakistan have been for some duration but neither for long and nor for entirety.
> 
> *It is pertinent to note that Hindu faith had never claimed it's roots in Indus basin till 1920s when first IVC site was discovered by British*. There is good strong evidence of that. No ancient temples in Pakistan. No sacred rituals associated with this area and no evidence of ancient Hindu history here. It was, until 1920s believed that Ganges basin and area south of its western half was birthplace of Hindu faith. Himalayas in the north mostly associated with meditation practices of Hindu mythology. It was also believed that Hindu faith is the oldest in the region and everyone was happy with this fact. No mention of Indus or this area. British were happy too as they found European (aryan) connection. Shock came after Railway engineers found Harrappa ruins and immediately the effort to somehow connect it to Hindu faith started. Just by any means possible. Some people just could not swallow that there existed a great civilization before Hindu faith. So please, I request you to take the history as it is and do not feel ashamed of what you have or where your roots are.


I really enjoyed your Observation...thanks



LoveIcon said:


> The energies which Indians spent to somehow attach themselves with IVC (while only minority have genuine linkage), Had they spent 1/2 of energy in digging south they would have found their forefathers.


hahaha....you're right but i want Indians to hinge around us all the time...consider 1.2 Billion people who just blindly following mantra of IVC association in itself appear radiculous......so if are eager to fall in our lap (Tourism perspective) then let them feed their misguided thoughts indirectly....If Gov ask me to devise a tourism policy....I first make them beleive "We hold the Magic-Wand" ...then .."I instruct them dance according to our tunes"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ind4Ever

Paksanity said:


> Valley is in the context of basin of Ganges but you are right. Initial stages of Hindu history does not meet all attributes of civilization and does not qualify to be called a civilization till about Mauryan time.
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese civilization (yellow river civilization) appeared later but was contemporary to IVC from 2000 B.C. onwards. First civilization was Sumerian Iraq (3500 B.C.) second Egypt (3000-2500 B.C.) Third Indus (2500 B.C.). Indus Valley Civilization was in contact with Sumerian and Egyptian civilizations as it traded with them through ships. IVC people are mentioned in Sumerian records and are called 'Meluhas' (some historians think it as 'Mallahs' or ship sailors). Sumerian records tell them of people who bring exotic goods to Sumerian (Iraq). Indus valley people traded with Middle East and their trading posts have been discovered in Oman, Bahrain and Indus artifacts and seals have been found in Iraq.
> 
> 
> 
> Sumerian civilization is the oldest and is called cradle of human civilization. It thrived between Euphrates and Tigris rivers. Second oldest is Egyptian and then is Indus valley basin (not India by any stretch of imagination).



On sumerian : Bhai do u even know Underwater city found in cost of Gujarat’s "Dwaraka - city of Lord krishna" it's elf 12000-24000 BC year old? 

Do you know South indian cities and our civilization cities are far more older than Indus Valley civilization? 

Think about it there was a time when almost all western continents and Eastern continents were covered with ice and Indian subcontinent long with sunken landmass of Indian subcontinent flourished with tropical climate!!! 
It's matter of fact the human origin began from India. Whether you like India or not. It's the fact. Even indian street dogs been traced to Egypt and Australia. Lots of studies recently proved it. 

You can hide or twist the history you can narrat. But is really sad that you or anyone can't change it!!! Truth will come out. We human being are very curious about everything.


----------



## Gen Padmanabhan

Asiatic Lion said:


> The Indus Valley Civilization | Sag-gig-ga (The Black-headed People)
> 5 Ancient Black Civilizations That Were Not in Africa - Page 2 of 5 - Atlanta Blackstar
> 
> Black Buddha
> Ancient Black Buddha - Religion - Nigeria
> 
> your Views ??


There is any problem if Buddha was black?


----------



## MadDog

ito said:


> I guess the question is settled on who hold the legacy of IVC. You can check with research papers of top research institutes and University.



One doesn't need research, only common sense is required. Pushtuns, Baloch, Most of the Sindhis and Punjabis exist in Pakistan and Indus River and the ancient sites are located in Pakistan. Facts on the ground matter !!!


----------



## Paksanity

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Which can also mean , Rig veda precedes IVC . It can also mean Rig Veda was written on the east of Indus , near saraswati .
> It talks about Saraswati river , and its clear through geology and scientific research that , the river got extinct by 1900 BCE



Rigveda is not a scientific evidence and is widely believed to have been dated 500 BC. For simple reason that Indian script did not exist before that, it can not predate IVC which has an older script.

Dating of sand grains from dry bed of Saraswati was carried out in 2014 and compared to Yamuna river. Results indicate that Yamuna river stopped feeding it some 10,000 years ago this making it a seasonal river before IVC. Saraswati does not originate from high glacial mountains hence can not maintain year round flow. Only way to maintain year round flow is being fed from Yamuna river which changed course some 10,000 years ago making Saraswati seasonal during monsoon only. IVC settlements are found along Saraswati but no major city as big as Harrappa or Mohen Jo Daro. Big cities need year round flow to sustain.



Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Rig Veda and Avestan of Iranians have similarities . Its already clear that Iranians were ruling Indus areas for a long time



Persian civilization had not appeared at the time of IVC. Persian civilization is contemporary to Greek civilization much later.



Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Rig Veda talks about battle of 10 kings . If there are kings with big armies then there must be big enough empires to support them . Only 2 possible areas can have these empires : Persia ( Including all parts of IVC ) and Egypt .
> And only logical answer could be the 1st one .



Without disrespecting a religious scripture, I have to say that ancient stories (which may well be untrue) get exaggerated over time especially when you attach religion to them. One can believe them in religious sense but they hold no weight in scientific context unless proven with hard evidence. There is no evidence of great armies at the time of IVC which was as the evidence suggests very peaceful civilization. They were more into trade, economy and welfare of citizens than warfare and religion. Very few weapons have been found at IVC sites and illustrations on IVC artifacts do not show any scenes of war or conflict. There is no violence, weaponry or religious rituals on IVC artifacts in sharp contrast to Hindu religious artifacts of early era.



Kashmiri Pandit said:


> But its widely accepted that advent of Iron age resulted in clearance of Forests .
> Many Egyptians concepts and Gods have similarities with Hindu Gods , lets not go there



Again science asks for proof. If anyone was in iron age then iron tools would be found dated to that period. Just like iron told were found at Mehr Garh site belonging to late Mehr Garh period but at the same site early periods only give you bronze tools. Evidence not our nationalism or religious bias is the way to deal with subject.



Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Modern India and Pakistan are a mixture a races , Cultures , Languages and Religions .
> We are so mixed up that , It will be foolish of both of us to have claim on IVC .
> 
> None of us hold pure genes of IVC people



Obviously humans mix up. Evidence suggests that purest of IVC genes maybe with people of interior Sindh and central Punjab all along river Indus and its feeding rivers. Just three days back IVC site has been discovered at Dera Ismael Khan in KPK.



Ind4Ever said:


> You can hide or twist the history you can narrat. But is really sad that you or anyone can't change it!!! Truth will come out. We human being are very curious about everything.



For truth please refer to works of universities and not biased websites and newspapers. History is just as is. And at the moment it tells us that human race spread out from Africa. It also tells us that when IVC was at its peak, India as it stands today was thickly forested and did not even had a script. None of the Vedas were there (how could they as written script was yet to be developed).

As far your claim of 20,000 years old cities under water cities, Indians the oldest civilization and origin of human race, I really can not answer to such claims. Nobody can. It is likely religious beliefs. Science has no space in it. By the way there is no such scientific evidence as you claimed. Coastline extended not receded and hence cities would not go under sea they would rather move away from coastline. IVC coastal towns and trading posts in Balochistan are much further away inland now. Please do not make outrageous claims.

Please learn to differentiate between a settlement, a town, a city state and a civilization. People who erected stone henge in England do not qualify as civilization. Earliest human city found outside Africa is Mehr Garh, Pakistan. For anything of this skill and complexity anywhere else, you need experts to let work there and use scientific techniques to ascertain anything. A masala news is for those who aren't open to truth.


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Paksanity said:


> Rigveda is not a scientific evidence and is widely believed to have been dated 500 BC. For simple reason that Indian script did not exist before that, it can not predate IVC which has an older script.
> 
> Dating of sand grains from dry bed of Saraswati was carried out in 2014 and compared to Yamuna river. Results indicate that Yamuna river stopped feeding it some 10,000 years ago this making it a seasonal river before IVC. Saraswati does not originate from high glacial mountains hence can not maintain year round flow. Only way to maintain year round flow is being fed from Yamuna river which changed course some 10,000 years ago making Saraswati seasonal during monsoon only. IVC settlements are found along Saraswati but no major city as big as Harrappa or Mohen Jo Daro. Big cities need year round flow to sustain.
> 
> 
> 
> Persian civilization had not appeared at the time of IVC. Persian civilization is contemporary to Greek civilization much later.
> 
> 
> 
> Without disrespecting a religious scripture, I have to say that ancient stories (which may well be untrue) get exaggerated over time especially when you attach religion to them. One can believe them in religious sense but they hold no weight in scientific context unless proven with hard evidence. There is no evidence of great armies at the time of IVC which was as the evidence suggests very peaceful civilization. They were more into trade, economy and welfare of citizens than warfare and religion. Very few weapons have been found at IVC sites and illustrations on IVC artifacts do not show any scenes of war or conflict. There is no violence, weaponry or religious rituals on IVC artifacts in sharp contrast to Hindu religious artifacts of early era.
> 
> 
> 
> Again science asks for proof. If anyone was in iron age then iron tools would be found dated to that period. Just like iron told were found at Mehr Garh site belonging to late Mehr Garh period but at the same site early periods only give you bronze tools. Evidence not our nationalism or religious bias is the way to deal with subject.
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously humans mix up. Evidence suggests that purest of IVC genes maybe with people of interior Sindh and central Punjab all along river Indus and its feeding rivers. Just three days back IVC site has been discovered at Dera Ismael Khan in KPK.
> 
> 
> 
> For truth please refer to works of universities and not biased websites and newspapers. History is just as is. And at the moment it tells us that human race spread out from Africa. It also tells us that when IVC was at its peak, India as it stands today was thickly forested and did not even had a script. None of the Vedas were there (how could they as written script was yet to be developed).
> 
> As far your claim of 20,000 years old cities under water cities, Indians the oldest civilization and origin of human race, I really can not answer to such claims. Nobody can. It is likely religious beliefs. Science has no space in it. By the way there is no such scientific evidence as you claimed. Coastline extended not receded and hence cities would not go under sea they would rather move away from coastline. IVC coastal towns and trading posts in Balochistan are much further away inland now. Please do not make outrageous claims.
> 
> Please learn to differentiate between a settlement, a town, a city state and a civilization. People who erected stone henge in England do not qualify as civilization. Earliest human city found outside Africa is Mehr Garh, Pakistan. For anything of this skill and complexity anywhere else, you need experts to let work there and use scientific techniques to ascertain anything. A masala news is for those who aren't open to truth.





Widely accepted Dates of Rig Veda are 1700 to 1500 BCE and not 500 BCE
Nup ! Persian Civilization or in other words Old Persia but with a different name was present at that time
History of Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Greater Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Modern Iran and Modern India are smaller in size compared to the Ancient Iran and Ancient India .
Indo-Iranians - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Akkadian Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sintashta culture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Andronovo culture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Iron age in south Asia was slated at 1200 BCE
But new evidence shows use of Iron much before

Discovery of Ancient Indian Daggers may push back Start of Iron Age by Hundreds of Years | Ancient Origins

Vedas were oral tradition . When script appeared for the first time in South Asia . It got written down in Vedic sanskrit which is similar to Avestan . In other words Vedas or Vedic hymns existed before they were composed by Ved Vyasa . Hymns in Veda are hymns by several Sages .

It is too early to speculate about IVC .

Language is yet to be deciphered . Many sites are yet to be studied . Based on rudimentary evidence we are only fooling ourselves . If Aryan Invasion is true then , The original people of IVC moved eastward into India . If Aryan invasion or migration is proved wrong , then Rig Veda belongs to the people of IVC a.k.a Modern Indians and Pakistanis


----------



## Royal Kathiyawadi

Aminroop said:


> Hinduism back then was called Sanatana dharma.
> Btw they used Shiv-Ling like Hindus do.
> Ofcourse there are other similarities too, like the style of worshipping, use of fire altars etc.
> 
> 
> And how would you explain the use of Brahui language in Pakistan???


they used Dravidian languages tlbut they were not Dravidians.

they were only culturally and linguistically Dravidians but they were mixture of different races



ArsalanKhan21 said:


> Alexander the Great was born in Macedonia and was culturally Greek. The Greece has blocked Macedonia entering UN and EU with Macedonian flag with Alexander's shield. Both countries constantly fight over Alexander. Greece do claim SOLE ownership of Alexander and his accomplishments !


that one is a Slavic nation.
macedonia greek - Google Search

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SarthakGanguly

Atanz said:


> However a Bengali, a Marata, a Tamil, a Orrisan, a Telagu, a Assamese have absolutely no right as they have no connect to this land now or in the past unless of course they happen to be migrants from here which might be applicable to atiny number. I recently met a chap from Hyderabad in India and he told me his father was from Lahore and in 1947 he never went back because he had a good job. However you know these are exceptions. 100 of millions or the vast number of Indians are intrinsic to Ganges India or South India and have had no knowledge of or connection to Indus other than recent historical revisionism.


Here - 
Ancient Indus Valley Civilization Book List

They study the ISVC. They are called Indologists. There is only one Pakistani. He is also an Indologist. 

Manas: History and Politics, Indus Valley

Indus Valley civilization - Oxford Reference

I can give you link after link.

Indian history. Unanimous. Pure and simple. 

So. How does it feel to be stripped of all cultural heritage and made an orphan of history?



Paksanity said:


> There is no violence, weaponry or religious rituals on IVC artifacts in sharp contrast to Hindu religious artifacts of early era.


Oh really! Cite some Pakistani papers in this area of research please. Recent ones. We have hundreds in India.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Paksanity

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Widely accepted Dates of Rig Veda are 1700 to 1500 BCE and not 500 BCE
> Nup ! Persian Civilization or in other words Old Persia but with a different name was present at that time
> History of Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Greater Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Modern Iran and Modern India are smaller in size compared to the Ancient Iran and Ancient India .
> Indo-Iranians - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Akkadian Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Sintashta culture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Andronovo culture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> Iron age in south Asia was slated at 1200 BCE
> But new evidence shows use of Iron much before
> 
> Discovery of Ancient Indian Daggers may push back Start of Iron Age by Hundreds of Years | Ancient Origins
> 
> Vedas were oral tradition . When script appeared for the first time in South Asia . It got written down in Vedic sanskrit which is similar to Avestan . In other words Vedas or Vedic hymns existed before they were composed by Ved Vyasa . Hymns in Veda are hymns by several Sages .
> 
> It is too early to speculate about IVC .
> 
> Language is yet to be deciphered . Many sites are yet to be studied . Based on rudimentary evidence we are only fooling ourselves . If Aryan Invasion is true then , The original people of IVC moved eastward into India . If Aryan invasion or migration is proved wrong , then Rig Veda belongs to the people of IVC a.k.a Modern Indians and Pakistanis



You are mixing religion with history. It is a very bad mixture. Rigveda has no scientific or historical significance. Religious stories can not be the basis of science.



SarthakGanguly said:


> So. How does it feel to be stripped of all cultural heritage and made an orphan of history?



Lol.... With archeological sites all over Pakistan, someone else is at risk of being an orphan. Stop divorcing Ganges and embrace your history. Why is it shameful for you people? I really don't get it.


----------



## SarthakGanguly

Paksanity said:


> Lol.... With archeological sites all over Pakistan, someone else is at risk of being an orphan. Stop divorcing Ganges and embrace your history. Why is it shameful for you people? I really don't get it.


Step out of Pakistan and look for Pakistani ISVC section in the Libraries.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Paksanity said:


> You are mixing religion with history. It is a very bad mixture. Rigveda has no scientific or historical significance. Religious stories can not be the basis of science.



Yup !

Only in the case of Misinterpretation .
Rig Veda has a historical significance . Separate the cultural practices of Egypt from its civilization , U will get only hollow artifacts .

Historical Vedic religion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Paksanity

Kashmiri Pandit said:


> Yup !
> 
> Only in the case of Misinterpretation .
> Rig Veda has a historical significance . Separate the cultural practices of Egypt from its civilization , U will get only hollow artifacts .
> 
> Historical Vedic religion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



To establish existence of Rigveda one has to produce written script of Rigveda carbon dated to 1500 BC. As I understand earliest surviving copy of it dates back no further than 14 or 15th century (recalling from memory). There is no established identity of Rishis (the narrators) nor any archeological evidence of events mentioned therein. I am walking a fine line here and do not want to hurt your religious beliefs. Let me point you to a simple fact. British institutionalised ancient history of India in 1870s with almost all native scholars scholars Hindus. Numerous work was written and recorded. How on earth there is no mention of IVC till 1920s when Harrappa was excavated? And thereafter references to IVC are suddenly found everywhere in Vedas?! What does it tell you? What is going on here?



SarthakGanguly said:


> Step out of Pakistan and look for Pakistani ISVC section in the Libraries.



In that case Greek civilization is definitely Pakistani. We have books on them in our libraries and evidence to prove that Greeks were here!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

Paksanity said:


> To establish existence of Rigveda one has to produce written script of Rigveda carbon dated to 1500 BC. As I understand earliest surviving copy of it dates back no further than 14 or 15th century (recalling from memory). There is no established identity of Rishis (the narrators) nor any archeological evidence of events mentioned therein. I am walking a fine line here and do not want to hurt your religious beliefs. Let me point you to a simple fact. British institutionalised ancient history of India in 1870s with almost all native scholars scholars Hindus. Numerous work was written and recorded. How on earth there is no mention of IVC till 1920s when Harrappa was excavated? And thereafter references to IVC are suddenly found everywhere in Vedas?! What does it tell you? What is going on here?


 The dates of Rig Veda are arbitrary . It was based on Christian views that World came to existence in 4004 BCand Deluge happened around 2000 BC  So they can't put Rig Veda dates before deluge .
This happened before IVC got discovered .

British believed , No humans lived prior to 3 BC in Indian Subcontinent .
But they were bulldozed , when Ashoka , Alexander , Mahajanpadas and others were found .
Mahajanapada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Then we had Germans who believed , they were Aryans and they were the ones who gave Vedic literature to Indians 

Do U want to listen more about these stupid Europeans who are immersed in a superiority complex of its own Kind .


----------



## SarthakGanguly

Paksanity said:


> In that case Greek civilization is definitely Pakistani. We have books on them in our libraries and evidence to prove that Greeks were here!


No wonder no one takes you seriously.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xyxmt

Why all of sudden Indian's stomach aching for the claim of Indus civilization. This civilization belongs to people of Indus and that definitely not current day India. In Pakistan should have a claim on the name India not Bharatis


----------



## Kashmiri Pandit

xyxmt said:


> Why all of sudden Indian's stomach aching for the claim of Indus civilization. This civilization belongs to people of Indus and that definitely not current day India. In Pakistan should have a claim on the name India not Bharatis



World respect India for its Cultures , religions , Ideologies , philosophies , Empires , Science etc .
All these represent modern day India .


----------



## Ind4Ever

Paksanity said:


> Rigveda is not a scientific evidence and is widely believed to have been dated 500 BC. For simple reason that Indian script did not exist before that, it can not predate IVC which has an older script.
> 
> Dating of sand grains from dry bed of Saraswati was carried out in 2014 and compared to Yamuna river. Results indicate that Yamuna river stopped feeding it some 10,000 years ago this making it a seasonal river before IVC. Saraswati does not originate from high glacial mountains hence can not maintain year round flow. Only way to maintain year round flow is being fed from Yamuna river which changed course some 10,000 years ago making Saraswati seasonal during monsoon only. IVC settlements are found along Saraswati but no major city as big as Harrappa or Mohen Jo Daro. Big cities need year round flow to sustain.
> 
> 
> 
> Persian civilization had not appeared at the time of IVC. Persian civilization is contemporary to Greek civilization much later.
> 
> 
> 
> Without disrespecting a religious scripture, I have to say that ancient stories (which may well be untrue) get exaggerated over time especially when you attach religion to them. One can believe them in religious sense but they hold no weight in scientific context unless proven with hard evidence. There is no evidence of great armies at the time of IVC which was as the evidence suggests very peaceful civilization. They were more into trade, economy and welfare of citizens than warfare and religion. Very few weapons have been found at IVC sites and illustrations on IVC artifacts do not show any scenes of war or conflict. There is no violence, weaponry or religious rituals on IVC artifacts in sharp contrast to Hindu religious artifacts of early era.
> 
> 
> 
> Again science asks for proof. If anyone was in iron age then iron tools would be found dated to that period. Just like iron told were found at Mehr Garh site belonging to late Mehr Garh period but at the same site early periods only give you bronze tools. Evidence not our nationalism or religious bias is the way to deal with subject.
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously humans mix up. Evidence suggests that purest of IVC genes maybe with people of interior Sindh and central Punjab all along river Indus and its feeding rivers. Just three days back IVC site has been discovered at Dera Ismael Khan in KPK.
> 
> 
> 
> For truth please refer to works of universities and not biased websites and newspapers. History is just as is. And at the moment it tells us that human race spread out from Africa. It also tells us that when IVC was at its peak, India as it stands today was thickly forested and did not even had a script. None of the Vedas were there (how could they as written script was yet to be developed).
> 
> As far your claim of 20,000 years old cities under water cities, Indians the oldest civilization and origin of human race, I really can not answer to such claims. Nobody can. It is likely religious beliefs. Science has no space in it. By the way there is no such scientific evidence as you claimed. Coastline extended not receded and hence cities would not go under sea they would rather move away from coastline. IVC coastal towns and trading posts in Balochistan are much further away inland now. Please do not make outrageous claims.
> 
> Please learn to differentiate between a settlement, a town, a city state and a civilization. People who erected stone henge in England do not qualify as civilization. Earliest human city found outside Africa is Mehr Garh, Pakistan. For anything of this skill and complexity anywhere else, you need experts to let work there and use scientific techniques to ascertain anything. A masala news is for those who aren't open to truth.



Bhai jaan if you don't know something try to know it not keep humming the same retard info. Rig Veda has very long and very high details about Saraswati river banks which only proved recently with high quality satellite imaging. And it's proved with scientific facts that Saraswati river dried up during end of the ice age. 12000- 10000 bce. How can some know about dried up river banks after 10000 years? 

See if you want to belive that world started in 1 AD or there was no Hindu civilization before that or before Abraham then so be it. But I must say try to explore with open mind. History and knowledge on our own civilization is more than just rhetoric if some moron publish some nonsense with I'll intent then it won't the truth. He might be wrong. All West tried to. Do is to change religion but who succeeded in changing the history? Non. Arabs and West did a good job but incomplete and can't be completed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Paksanity

Ind4Ever said:


> Bhai jaan if you don't know something try to know it not keep humming the same retard info. Rig Veda has very long and very high details about Saraswati river banks which only proved recently with high quality satellite imaging. And it's proved with scientific facts that Saraswati river dried up during end of the ice age. 12000- 10000 bce. How can some know about dried up river banks after 10000 years?
> 
> See if you want to belive that world started in 1 AD or there was no Hindu civilization before that or before Abraham then so be it. But I must say try to explore with open mind. History and knowledge on our own civilization is more than just rhetoric if some moron publish some nonsense with I'll intent then it won't the truth. He might be wrong. All West tried to. Do is to change religion but who succeeded in changing the history? Non. Arabs and West did a good job but incomplete and can't be completed.



1. Rigveda is not a scientific proof and has no value in scientific context

2. Saraswati did not dry up 10000 years back. It became seasonal around that time. 

3. Saraswati may dry up but its river bed remains till today. No big deal to tell there was a river here. 

4. Nobody said world started in 1 A.D. Neither westerns nor Arabs. We are not talking historians here. We are talking Science and Archeology. 

5. There is no evidence of civilization in this region prior to Indus valley civilization. Hindu religion evolved well after IVC declined.

6. History of Pakistan region is older than India (save for IVC spill in adjacent Indian areas) and you are not coming to terms with the facts.


----------



## libertycall

Asiatic Lion said:


> The Indus Valley Civilization | Sag-gig-ga (The Black-headed People)
> 5 Ancient Black Civilizations That Were Not in Africa - Page 2 of 5 - Atlanta Blackstar
> 
> Black Buddha
> Ancient Black Buddha - Religion - Nigeria
> 
> your Views ??



Nonsense. Likewise their idea that 'Sag-gig-ga' means 'black-headed', the term used by the Surmerians to describe themselves.

This is based on the incorrect idea that the sign 'gig' means the same as the Akkadian 'samu' which one translator they've used thought meant 'black', but it can also be read as 'red' and also as 'sky'. 

We know that the Akkadians called the Sumerians, 'Sumeru' and not ''Sag-gig-ga'. So what does 'Sumeru' mean in Akkadian?

Su - red (same as Pashto soar and Farsi surkh)
Meru - land

So why would the Akkadians call them 'sumeru' if the correct translation of 'samu' is black? Even worse for our black african supremacist friends is the fact that the sumerians in their artwork depicted themselves as having *blue* eyes. Red hair and blue eyes...ever heard of the Tokharians?  because we know the Tokharians were known in the region


----------



## Maravan

This world is a mysterious place. First, whether IVC really originated in the indian subcontinent? My doubt is, The scripts found in IVC site at mohenjadaro matches with the scripts found in easter island(located in pacific ocean) which is 12000km far from Mohenjadaro. Does the land mass was really united as a single piece at one point of time?


----------



## Bharat Muslim

Kaptaan said:


> You can see how it defines and dominates Pakistan. Not only that it unites all provinces.


I think it (river Indus) misses Balochistan. How would you explain that?


----------



## Indus Pakistan

Bharat Muslim said:


> How would you explain that?


Geography.Although Zhob River, Gomal River on Balochistan drain into Indus River.







And here is map of the Indus Basin. It almost covers *most* of *Pakistan*, sliver of Afghanistan, China and India.
Of course India is wrapped in the warm embrace of Holy Mother Ganges with your neighbour Bangladesh also getting some attention.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------

