Ghaggar-Hakra believed to be mythical Rig Veda Sarasvati river proven false

[pk_baloch]

@pk_baloch - Hello Sister !

Aur kiya haaal haiii janaaab kaa ?

thek hun MASHALLAH ...ALLAH KA SHUKAR HE ..........

AAP KESE HEIN ?MEIN JAB BHI QUAID-E-AZAM KI TASWEER DAKHTY HUN MUJHE AB TUM HE LAGTE HO

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Why is Punjabi called Indo-Aryan language and why are Punjabi people referred as indic people. Pakistan is not just Punjab, you are forgetting Sindhi and Muhajirs.

What similarity does a Pashtun share with a Sindhi.

More similarity then say with Dravidians or rest of Indian population. Check out Harappa Ancestory Project. Indic word come from Indus river which is in Pakistan.

 

[INDIC]

Again you can believe anything, thats not the point. If it really was one civilization and same people then Tara Singh would have let Ambedkar and his Dalit followers to convert to Sikhsim to increase numbers. But he didn't like the idea of non-Punjabis dominating sikh religion. There were two civilizations, our is based on Indus and yours Ganges.

Pehaps you are forgetting that name of the Indus has Sanskrit Sindhu. Ganga is just one of the rivers of Indian civilization. Sindhu, Brahmaputra, Krishna, Cavery, Narmada all are the rivers of Indian civilization.

More similarity then say with Dravidians or rest of Indian population. Check out Harappa Ancestory Project. Indic word come from Indus river which is in Pakistan.

Indus flows in India even before it enters Pakistan.

 

[Bang Galore]

The main assertion in the OP's post itself is false. The article can make no claim on whether the Gaggar-Hakra was the Sarasvati or not. All it does is say that it was a rain fed river rather than glacial fed. The Rg veda makes only indirect references to the river flowing from the mountains, the people were of the plains in any case but make several direct references to where the Sarasvati was, i.e. between the Yamuna & the Sutlej. The OP dismisses this as being incorrect yet fails to see the irony in claiming that as the river's origin was supposedly not the same as supposedly mentioned in the Rg veda, therefore it is not. Obviously the OP is the only person capable of deciding where the Rg veda was correct & where it was wrong.

Every scholar of the Rg veda has for 200 years connected the Gaggar with the Sarasvati (the only exceptions are those who remove the entire Rg veda & all its rivers & places & move it elsewhere out of India). This connection has even been held when every scholar wondered about whether the puny Gaggar was indeed the mighty Sarasvati. The location & geographical references in the Rg veda was what convinced them. Now that we know that Gaggar indeed was a mighty river in times past & that it did dry up in almost the manner that is mentioned in scriptures including in the Mahabharata, this argument is sought to be brought. A valid point but essentially an minor one. No Rg vedic scholar, anywhere has suddenly changed his mind because of this supposed evidence, knowing fully well that the Rg veda has numerous references to the Sarasvati & they can't all be as dismissive as the OP lest they not be taken seriously as scholars of any repute.

The OP & others have an interest here, the Harappan sites are more numerous around the Gaggar Hakra (some 600 in all) than are found in the whole of Pakistan. A Sarasvati claim to that would be badly received across the border. The facts remain as they are. There are more Harappan sites in India than there are in Pakistan.

 

[rohitshubham]

We have been monotheists since Noah.

You invaded us and converted us to Hinduism and planted your monarchy on us.

That is we created Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism in pursuit of the singularity of God.

You converted us, we have reverted back to our true beliefs.

Do, you know where Jainism originated? Bihar
do you know where Buddhism originated? Bihar
spread of Buddhism was mostly due to the Ashoka's conversion and his various mission of buddhism around the globe most common being the likes of cambodia thailand and sri lanka

 

[INDIC]

Mauryans invaded modern day Pakistan towards the end of the Indus Valley Civilization.

This is after the Indus Valley civilization.

The empire was called the Mauryan Empire, not Indian empire.

Mauryans introduced Buddhism in Gandhara and Afghanistan. Mauyans saved the land from foreigners Greeks.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Pehaps you are forgetting that name of the Indus has Sanskrit Sindhu. Ganga is just one of the rivers of Indian civilization. Sindhu, Brahmaputra, Krishna, Cavery, Narmada all are the rivers of Indian civilization.



Indus flows in India even before it enters Pakistan.

And what? Sanskrit origen is Pakistan, panini was born near Rawalpindi. No one deny any of this. Indian civilization which extend to Afghanistan is product of recent Hindutvas rewriting history.

Mauryans invaded modern day Pakistan towards the end of the Indus Valley Civilization.

This is after the Indus Valley civilization.

The empire was called the Mauryan Empire, not Indian empire.

Chanakya who was responsible for Mauryan empire was born in Pakistan. They didn't conquer all of South India that mean Tamils are not part of Indian Civilization right?

 

[rohitshubham]

Mauryans invaded modern day Pakistan towards the end of the Indus Valley Civilization.

This is after the Indus Valley civilization.

The empire was called the Mauryan Empire, not Indian empire.

of course it's a later civilization but i was just quotiing a person who said that there was nothing between Muslim India (i suppose he referred to Mughal Dynasty) and the Indus valley Civilization. i Just wanted to show him that it was not a null period but a Great Ancient Indian Civilzation Flourished between these two civiliztions

 

[Bang Galore]

We have been monotheists since Noah.


That is we created Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism in pursuit of the singularity of God.

.

Buddhism & Jainism being monotheistic? Try atheistic..........

 

[INDIC]

More similarity then say with Dravidians or rest of Indian population. Check out Harappa Ancestory Project. Indic word come from Indus river which is in Pakistan.

I never said Indian civilization is about one race. The new genetic studies shows that there were two prominent races in India, ancestral North Indian(ANI) and Ancestral South Indian(ASI), who over the centuries intermarried with each other giving rise to the Indian civilization.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

The main assertion in the OP's post itself is false. The article can make no claim on whether the Gaggar-Hakra was the Sarasvati or not. All it does is say that it was a rain fed river rather than glacial fed. The Rg veda makes only indirect references to the river flowing from the mountains, the people were of the plains in any case but make several direct references to where the Sarasvati was, i.e. between the Yamuna & the Sutlej. The OP dismisses this as being incorrect yet fails to see the irony in claiming that as the river's origin was supposedly not the same as supposedly mentioned in the Rg veda, therefore it is not. Obviously the OP is the only person capable of deciding where the Rg veda was correct & where it was wrong.

Every scholar of the Rg veda has for 200 years connected the Gaggar with the Sarasvati (the only exceptions are those who remove the entire Rg veda & all its rivers & places & move it elsewhere out of India). This connection has even been held when every scholar wondered about whether the puny Gaggar was indeed the mighty Sarasvati. The location & geographical references in the Rg veda was what convinced them. Now that we know that Gaggar indeed was a mighty river in times past & that it did dry up in almost the manner that is mentioned in scriptures including in the Mahabharata, this argument is sought to be brought. A valid point but essentially an minor one. No Rg vedic scholar, anywhere has suddenly changed his mind because of this supposed evidence, knowing fully well that the Rg veda has numerous references to the Sarasvati & they can't all be as dismissive as the OP lest they not be taken seriously as scholars of any repute.

The OP & others have an interest here, the Harappan sites are more numerous around the Gaggar Hakra (some 600 in all) than are found in the whole of Pakistan. A Sarasvati claim to that would be badly received across the border. The facts remain as they are. There are more Harappan sites in India than there are in Pakistan.

Please post source because no matter where i look Sarasvati is always said to be fed by mountains in ancient times. But now its been proven that was not the case for at least 10.000 BC. Can it be Sarasvati? Maybe but then the description in Rig Veda doesn't match Ghaggar-Hakra.

And as i said before no need to go back 200 years when last year latest research by reputed institute is with us. Never mix religious book thousands of years old with science.

 

[pk_baloch]

@Ammyy
UR ANSWER IS SIMPLE .....

ENGLISH IS NOT EVEN UR LANGUAGE SO WHY R U GOING TO MAKE HISTORY

 

[Bang Galore]

Please post source because no matter where i look Sarasvati is always said to be fed by mountains in ancient times. But now its been proven that was not the case for at least 10.000 BC. Can it be Sarasvati? Maybe but then the description in Rig Veda doesn't match Ghaggar-Hakra.

Look at the geographical location given repeatedly. There is no doubt in any scholar of the Rg veda & hasn't been for 200 years even when they could not explain why this puny river was connected with the Sarasvati. The geographic location was that clear. The river didn't flow from the mountains even them but was still held as the Sarasvati.

 

[rohitshubham]

And what? Sanskrit origen is Pakistan, panini was born near Rawalpindi. No one deny any of this. Indian civilization which extend to Afghanistan is product of recent Hindutvas rewriting history.



Chanakya who was responsible for Mauryan empire was born in Pakistan. They didn't conquer all of South India that mean Tamils are not part of Indian Civilization right?

It was chandragupt Maurya who was responsible for Mauryan Empire and Chanaka was just the brain of the operation.
More over his Birth place has not been confirmed . Some say it's in taxila while some say it's in South India while many believe him to be born near Patliputra
BTW it's funny how pakistanis are proudly saying that chanakya was a pakistani where as in other threads you guys despise him and his philosophies and say that pakistanis are more related to the sand dwellers of middle east but are not at all related to the IVC people and the jungle dwellers which migratd to proper India after the end of civilization

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

I never said Indian civilization is about one race. The new genetic studies shows that there were two prominent races in India, ancestral North Indian(ANI) and Ancestral South Indian(ASI), who over the centuries intermarried with each other giving rise to the Indian civilization.

Pakistanis following Islam doesn't make them Arab as much as some like to believe. Same is the case with you all.

It was chandragupt Maurya who was responsible for Mauryan Empire and Chanaka was just the brain of the operation.
More over his Birth place has not been confirmed . Some say it's in taxila while some say it's in South India while many believe him to be born near Patliputra
BTW it's funny how pakistanis are proudly saying that chanakya was a pakistani where as in other threads you guys despise him and his philosophies and say that pakistanis are more related to the sand dwellers of middle east but are not at all related to the IVC people and the jungle dwellers which migratd to proper India after the end of civilization

Chanakaya was who raised Maurya after buying him from slave market. He is widely credited for having played an important role in the establishment of the Maurya Empire.