What's new

A Brief History of The Warrior Rajputs

That may be true but i dont see you saying the same thing when Pakistanis say the same thing to Indians.Secondly this is just a list of history of Modern India,nothing to do with who ruled whom.


yes I agree with that
 
Well the list does say history of India and not Pakistan. We share some history with them but they are desperate when they say we share all.

This guy claim that India ruled Pakistan for thousands upon thousands of years. Can anyone tell me how did IVC, Vedic civilization in Pakistan mean ''India'' ruled it? They were not even empires, these expanded to India later on.
 
Already posted.Shan is saying that Indians have no claim on Vedic civilization or Indus valley civilization.Plese counter his claim??
I am in a hospital now and only using phone. But soon counter all his bs once I get to my laptop.
 
This guy claim that India ruled Pakistan for thousands upon thousands of years. Can anyone tell me how did IVC, Vedic civilization in Pakistan mean ''India'' ruled it? They were not even empires, these expanded to India later on.
Dude that was a troll reply to another Pakistani.Leave it now.What you people have to say about Mahabharata,Did it really occured @Multani @KingMamba
 
Why would any Indian will say that we share all the history??

I just looked at that history again it bunches together Gandhara with Indian history when it had nothing to do with you guys. I will show you your real history LOL.
 
I am in a hospital now and only using phone. But soon counter all his bs once I get to my laptop.

First explain your bs list and how India ruled Pakistan for thousands of years. When history says only Maurya and Gupta empires from India ruled Pakistan. Anyway get well soon lol
 
This guy claim that India ruled Pakistan for thousands upon thousands of years. Can anyone tell me how did IVC, Vedic civilization in Pakistan mean ''India'' ruled it? They were not even empires, these expanded to India later on.

Well IVC could not be called empire in the sense we know it but they do say there was city planning and Harrapa was like the capital this shows some sort of structure. Vedic civ we do not know how it spread although the fact that the locals called it Aryavarta again shows some sort of cohesive structure. Both of which began in modern day Pakistan so if anything ancient Pakistanis ruled Bharat in those time frames.
 
Up until 1947 they say we did
Pakistanis and Indians both were Hindus in ancient times so one can say that we shared history in a broad sense.Its your choice with whom who you want to associate yourself.
 
Dude that was a troll reply to another Pakistani.Leave it now.What you people have to say about Mahabharata,Did it really occured @Multani @KingMamba

well, the evidence of Mahabharata in terms of physical locations is found in their respective places.

so, there must have been some battle that did take place

janjua rajputs are descendent of the 5 pandva characters from the Mahabharata Epic
 
Dude that was a troll reply to another Pakistani.Leave it now.What you people have to say about Mahabharata,Did it really occured @Multani @KingMamba

Maybe some of the wars really happened but then over time the mystical stuff was added into the legends idk for sure I am 50/50.
 
Pakistanis and Indians both were Hindus in ancient times so one can say that we shared history in a broad sense.Its your choice with whom who you want to associate yourself.

well, not necessarily all hindus

Pakistanis were Zoroastrians, budhists, native religions

I don't think Hinduism was the unanimous religion of the Sub Continent
 
Lol nothing but the truth, what part you have a problem with? :pop:
That's because it isn't. They're merely your subjective perceptions of the issue. Firstly you've come to the false conclusion that Brahmins are somehow hurt over whatever issue that you've raked up there. All based on the reactions of one poster. Secondly, how many Brahmin-convert Muslim groups do you know of in India who've been treated badly post conversion? :angry:
 
Pakistanis and Indians both were Hindus in ancient times so one can say that we shared history in a broad sense.Its your choice with whom who you want to associate yourself.

Common religion does not mean common history, do Filipinos who are majority Christian have same history as Brits LOL?

That's because it isn't. They're merely your subjective perceptions of the issue. Firstly you've come to the false conclusion that Brahmins are somehow hurt over whatever issue that you've raked up there. All based on the reactions of one poster. Secondly, how many Brahmin-convert Muslim groups do you know of in India who've been treated badly post conversion? :angry:

You must have read it wrong, I said Brahmins were lower in social standing in Muslim rule most historians agree that Muslim rule kicked Pundits to the bottom of the food chain so to speak. Converts to Islam were treated differently depending on the leader but most Brahmins who converted to Islam took on Muslim surnames that is what I was referring to whereas you can find ksatriya or merchant class still retain some Hindu surnames. Also lowest caste chose Muslim surnames largely depending on the saint who converted them. Being a brahmin in Muslim India was of low standing, truth.
 
Back
Top Bottom