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.
Rig Veda disagrees with you.
Rigveda is not a scientific evidence.
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
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?
Ancient Indians ruling the Dalits of Pakistan from Pataliputra:
View attachment 273994
@Atanz
