India, Iran cradles of great civilizations: Iranian envoy

[roadrunner]

read: people born in the land area of part of Pakistan's history. It doesnt matter whether outsiders call them indian or brazilian.

 

[Jackdaws]

read: people born in the land area of part of Pakistan's history. It doesnt matter whether outsiders call them indian or brazilian.

Actually when one refers to a civilization the relatively modern nation state doesn't need to be taken into account. There is Ancient Arabia, but you would not refer to it as Ancient UAE because we are talking civilizations, not nations.

 

[oFFbEAT]

read: people born in the land area of part of Pakistan's history. It doesnt matter whether outsiders call them indian or brazilian.

Boasting again on kafir's achievements........you will not get Jannath

 

[roadrunner]

Actually when one refers to a civilization the relatively modern nation state doesn't need to be taken into account. There is Ancient Arabia, but you would not refer to it as Ancient UAE because we are talking civilizations, not nations.

If the reference was Ancient Saudi Arabia to mean all of Arabia, you would indeed need to qualify this as Ancient UAE.

 

[Polemos]

Much ado about nothing really. When you say "Indian History" you are really talking about the history of the sub-continent. Ditto with the Arabian peninsula. If you are talking about the history of the countries, Indian and Pakistani histories date from about 15th and 14th august, 1947 respectively.

 

[LaBong]

Only indic tribes of pakistan have claim on sub continents history, balooch, pashtuns have no claim whatsoever.

 

[Bhairava]

If the reference was Ancient Saudi Arabia to mean all of Arabia, you would indeed need to qualify this as Ancient UAE.

That is what you guys are claiming.

We say its a shared heritage/culture b/n India & Pak...like how the Arabian civilization is shared between today's KSA, UAE,Oman etc.

---------- Post added at 08:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:14 AM ----------

so as long as outsiders refer to everything as Indian history, it must be true? It is no wonder India (modern) doesnt have a history. You let outsiders write it for you.

Unfortunately the barbarians from the mountains chose to burn down the 'Written-in-India' history by sacking Nalanda, Taxila etc.

 

[roadrunner]

That is what you guys are claiming.

We say its a shared heritage/culture b/n India & Pak...like how the Arabian civilization is shared between today's KSA, UAE,Oman etc.

---------- Post added at 08:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:14 AM ----------

Ancient Arabia is a very acceptable description because there is no country called Arabia. You follow so far?

Because there is no country called Arabia people understand that it is a shared history from Tunisia till Oman.

Ancient India isn't acceptable because there is a country called India that appears to try and hog achievements that mostly don't belong to it. If there was no country called India, then it would be more acceptable, but even so the civilizations would be incorrectly skewed.

 

[roadrunner]

Only indic tribes of pakistan have claim on sub continents history, balooch, pashtuns have no claim whatsoever.

it's like talking to a brick wall.

obviously all the civilizations and scholars of note that came from baloch or pashtun lands are part of baloch or pashtun history. if these lands happen to fall within the land mass of modern pakistan, it is part of pakistan's history.

whether these would fall under subcontinent history depends on how you define the subcontinent. If they don't fall within, then remove them, if they do then keep. However saying they're part of Indian history is incorrect, they're part of the history of the country known today as Pakistan.

That is how all history is written.

 

[LaBong]

it's like talking to a brick wall.

obviously all the civilizations and scholars of note that came from baloch or pashtun lands are part of baloch or pashtun history. if these lands happen to fall within the land mass of modern pakistan, it is part of pakistan's history.

whether these would fall under subcontinent history depends on how you define the subcontinent. If they don't fall within, then remove them, if they do then keep. However saying they're part of Indian history is incorrect, they're part of the history of the country known today as Pakistan.

That is how all history is written.

Let me rephrase, they are not part of Indus Valley civilization and subsequent Vedic civilization. If a scholar of note was born in what now is Peshwar, then he is part of history of Peshwar/Purushpura, however he isn't part of Pashtun history as long as he didn't speak Pashto(or any early predecessor of it), followed Pakhtunwali, flaunt with AK 47 etc etc.

Ronald Ross was born in India, discovered the parasite that causes Malaria while working in Calcutta Medical college and got Nobel, however we as Bengalis can't claim his achievement as our own, however he is part of history of Calcutta; it's as simple as that.

 

[Kadamba]

No you dont,but you lose your history which you grossly insulted.
Especially when you convert into something which thinks low of your current practices/culture.

Of course you don't lose your history. If you convert from one job to another, is your previous job not part of your history?

What a pathetic comparison... Do you seriously think that Converting between religions is as simple as changing jobs. . Sorry to wake you up into reality but Do I need to remind you what is the punishment given for converting from Islam to other religion.

Your ancestors were lucky, since the Dharmic religions, which they were following before converting to Islam (by force or by choice), dont have the concept of punishing the follower who want to move away from them through religious conversions and now you guys lack that luxury.

I would suggest you guys (those share Indic culture), not to be adventurous by trying to put your feet on two moving boats simultaneously. Just stick to the principle laid by the founding fathers of your country (i.e Muslims are different race altogether than people following Dharmic religions) and forget your JAHIL ancestors to remain as a proud true Muslim.

 

[IndMaster]

India and Indians wholeheartedly support Iran when almost all of middle east is against Iran !

So India is joining Iran to form the axis of evils? Indeed, with Iraq becoming good, India takes up the place of the new axis of evils.

 

[DSingh04]

So India is joining Iran to form the axis of evils? Indeed, with Iraq becoming good, India takes up the place of the new axis of evils.

Between this post and the other thread, I really think you have something against Indians, brah.

 

[Subramanian]

the revisionists are you. The creation of Hinduism occurred sometime between the Artherveda and the Yajurveda somewhere in the gangetic plains.

---------- Post added at 08:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 PM ----------

buddhism isnt extinct. many people in the far east practise it.

whatever floats your boat,sweetheart.

 

[Bhairava]

Ancient Arabia is a very acceptable description because there is no country called Arabia. You follow so far?

Because there is no country called Arabia people understand that it is a shared history from Tunisia till Oman.

Ancient India isn't acceptable because there is a country called India that appears to try and hog achievements that mostly don't belong to it. If there was no country called India, then it would be more acceptable, but even so the civilizations would be incorrectly skewed.

Oh never mind.