Impact of Bollywood on pakistani news channel

[oFFbEAT]

The point is it was not india.......

It WAS India.....but not 'Republic of India'...

India(ancient), Hindustan, Bharatvarsha.....all are different names of the same region.......

The name Bharatvarsha is the indigenous one.........all other names were given by outsiders to Bharatvarsha....

 

[Fuego]

The point is it was not india.

Right, it was Pakistanvarsha. Perfect.

The one in south asia.

Do you mean Pakistan Sub Continent???

 

[ALOK31]

The point is it was not india.

oh really tere ko ek chota sa ex. deta hu jo school me padha hoga"bete yedi gulab ko rose bol de to wo sugandh dena band nahi kar deti same with india.INDIA=BHARAT,HINDUSTAN"

 

[Don Jaguar]

India word came into existence during Roman period in 1 century AD from Greek word "Inde" in 300BC. Megasthanes, the Greek ambassador to Mauryas even wrote a book named as "Indica."

So, basically, word India is also 2000years old.

Ok make it 2000 but some people were claiming here that it was india since the beginning and no it was not.

It WAS India.....but not 'Republic of India'...

India(ancient), Hindustan, Bharatvarsha.....all are different names of the same region.......

The name Bharatvarsha is the indigenous one.........all other names were given by outsiders to Bharatvarsha....

Different names of the same region that's what i was saying.

 

[INDIC]

Right, it was Pakistanvarsha. Perfect.
Do you mean Pakistan Sub Continent???

Yes, they are taught the same thing in Pakistani textbooks.
Pakistani textbooks controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Text Book of Pakistan Studies claims that "Pakistan came to be established for the first time when the Arabs under Mohammad bin Qasim occupied Sindh and Multan'; by the thirteenth century 'Pakistan had spread to include the whole of Northern India and Bengal' and then under the Khiljis, Pakistan moved further south-ward to include a greater part of Central India and the Deccan'. [...] The spirit of Pakistan asserted itself', and under Aurangzeb the 'Pakistan spirit gathered in strength'; his death 'weakened the Pakistan spirit'."

 

[oFFbEAT]

Ok make it 2000 but some people were claiming here that it was india since the beginning and no it was not.

The name INDIA may be 2000 yrs old....but not Indian history......
as I said earlier, India is just a name given by outsiders to Bharatvarsha.......and history of Bharatvarsha is from time immemorial...

 

[persistent]

In 300 BC name of india was Bharatavarṣa. I mean to say names are changed with time but the real thing is separate identity.

Bharata is Name used by Bhartis , and "INDIA" is term refered by West to reconize peole beyond Indus its coined by persians same near about 300 B.C its romans used this term. BUT BHARTIS Were UNAWARE that someone is calling them with term "indians".

india been same from thousand of years with many changes with time because indian culture accepts changes with time thats why its worlds only survived culture from B.C time line where persian,greek,roman,egyptions all vanished.


Bharatavarṣa its mean forever existing Bharat its not new name its just complement or title like "MAHATMA" gandhi and you will get many names of Bahrata in indian scriptures its speciality of indians , LORD KRIHNA HAVE MANY NAMES even RAVANA had different names its just according their Mystic.

In 300 BC name of india was Bharatavarṣa. I mean to say names are changed with time but the real thing is separate identity.

Bharata is Name used by Bhartis , and "INDIA" is term refered by West to reconize peole beyond Indus its coined by persians same near about 300 B.C its romans used this term. BUT BHARTIS Were UNAWARE that someone is calling them with term "indians".

india been same from thousand of years with many changes with time because indian culture accepts changes with time thats why its worlds only survived culture from B.C time line where persian,greek,roman,egyptions all vanished.


Bharatavarṣa its mean forever existing Bharat its not new name its just complement or title like "MAHATMA" gandhi and you will get many names of Bahrata in indian scriptures its speciality of indians , LORD KRIHNA HAVE MANY NAMES even RAVANA had different names its just according their Mystic.

 

[kṣamā]

Music is to ears, what honey is to tongue. No matter wat the source it always taste sweet but differs with flavor. If people are still arguing on music then it would help if you know about Rabindranath Tagore. I think everyone knows what makes him stand apart from entire worlds musicians/writer. Apart from him we have great legends like Lata Mangeshkar, Mohd. Rafi, S D Burman, Asha Bhosle, Sudha Malhotra, .... (The list would require a Blog post to complete).

Believe me I am a "youngster" with a iPod full of Linkin Park, Green Day, Guns n Roses, Akon, .... but still they elude me. Hence they are called evergreen. You play them even after they long go by. As for nowadays Indian/Pakistani music ( Himesh, Atif and his lot) are "expendable" when the situation arises. Also there charm wears off quick. Though musicians like A R Rahman, Shankar-Ehasan-Loy etc are class apart.

On piracy. Even though I have enough resources and know-how to watch and distribute pirated movies, I don't. To all the members who are gloating about the feats of piracy done in their country, you should know its no heroic effort and is not encouraged or celebrated by anyone better other than you. It shows you in bad light.

On the language issue, I will use a visual aid.

I hope my point is made. FYI my username is from the same language which you say is dead. If you understand it then follow it.

 

[INDIC]

Ok make it 2000 but some people were claiming here that it was india since the beginning and no it was not.

So, do you think 2000years is a small time duration.

 

[Fuego]

Has any Pakistani here seen an Indian movie in Cinema Hall in Pakistan?

 

[Don Jaguar]

oh really tere ko ek chota sa ex. deta hu jo school me padha hoga"bete yedi gulab ko rose bol de to wo sugandh dena band nahi kar deti same with india.INDIA=BHARAT,HINDUSTAN"

Majority of the time in history present day Pakistan was not its part.

This is what i was trying to say it was a separate country.

 

[whythiskolaveridi]

The name INDIA may be 2000 yrs old....but not Indian history......
as I said earlier, India is just a name given by outsiders to Bharatvarsha.......and history of Bharatvarsha is from time immemorial...

Leave it mate. you can't keep hitting your head to a wall that too windowless.
make him happy - It was pakistan which Maurya Dynasty ruled over, It was pakistan which Columbus discovered, It is pakistan Ocean down south, It was Pakistan which British ruled over, It was pakistan all the way. India was created in 1947.
have a nice and sound sleep tonite my dear Pakistani friends.

 

[INDIC]

Majority of the time in history present day Pakistan was not its part.

This is what i was trying to say it was a separate country.

Majority of history even Sindh and Punjab were not united. Like the first 500 years of Islamic rule after Arab conquest, Sindh-Multan and North-Punjab-KP were two different entities.

 

[kṣamā]

On the language issue, I will use a visual aid.

I hope my point is made. FYI my username is from the same language which you say is dead. If you understand it then follow it.

For the ones discussing India/Pakistan's history, the above image posted earlier also act as a pointer.

 

[persistent]

Majority of the time in history present day Pakistan was not its part.

This is what i was trying to say it was a separate country.

please correct your stm.

Majority of the time in "KNOWN" history present day Pakistan was not its part.

kandhar in AF was "Gandhar" in ancient india but near about after 300 b.c pak and afghan was in and out many times in india due to invaders