We've been through this. It's a circular argument: India is a valid name because it's in the Constitution, and it's in the Constitution because it is a valid name.
Not so.
The name came from the colony that gained independence. Some members of the Constituent Assembly protested; they wanted a wholly indigenous name as well, one not tainted with the British legacy or with memories of foreign rule. Additional names were inserted. The only valid name was India, at that time. There was nothing stopping Pakistan from adopting the name Western India, or North West Indial; after all, until the 1956 constitution, the eastern province was known as East Bengal, not East Pakistan.
Islam might be the odd one out, in india - (I pity the hundred million Muslims in your country with that mind set) - but Islam is part and parcel of our identity.
Again stupid assumptions, we are taught to be proud of Porus and the IVC and the thousands of years of OUR history. And they don't belong to india, but us the sons of the soil. What right does a Tamil have to the IVC nothing at all.
That is not at all so evident. There is strong evidence that the language used in the Indus Valley at the time of the IVC was Tamil. Strangely for your argument, the Tamilian might have a better right to claim the IVC as his or her legacy than present residents of the area, who have been descended from several waves of immigrants, including those who later became known as Jats; descendants of the Scythians, Parthians and Kushana, and the White Huns. Others whose descent is traced to these immigrations are the Rajputs and the Gujjars. While their legacy dates back, perhaps, to these immigrants, the original Dravidian speaking inhabitants were pushed back, and converted from Dravidian speech, until they were confined to the lower one-third of India.
You are not a descendant of the son of the soil who built the IVC. The Tamilian might be.
Again people, I opened this thread and I know what my intent was. I am NOT saying that Bharat can't use the the name 'India'. I am NOT saying Pakistan should HAVE got that name in 1947 and I am NOT saying we want the name 'India' now. No sir, it is yours now to keep.
What I am saying ( that was my intent behind the initiating post ) is Bharat stop using thr name 'India' as a cover and excuse to rape our heritage - That is the 5,000 years of the Indus Valley Civilization which today is manifested in the nation state called Pakistan.
Again for those who are deaf and dumb ( or blind ) in bold letters ..........
THIS THREAD IS ABOUT HOW BHARAT HAS USED THE NAME INDIA TO RAPE OUR HERITAGE BASED ON NOTHING BUT A NAME. I USED THE WORD NOMENCLATURE HOAX.
and again I will say by our heritage I mean the Indus Valley, all the 5,000 years of drama played out in the Indus Valley starting from Mohenjo Daro and on and on and on through the millenia to 1947 and today's Pakistan. Lest anybody have issues about where the fr*gg*in Indus Valley is please consult a decent map and you will find Pakistan sits atop the Indus Valley region.
Yes, some incidental zones extend into India or even Afghanistan. EXAMPLE: The Kabul Valley and the River Kabul flow into the Indus Valley but that does not make Afghanistan a Indus Valley state. In the same way some parts of Indian Punjab or extremities of Rajasthan flow into the Indus Valley and even part of Tibet flows into the Indus Valley but that is incidental.Non of them are Indus Valley states.
Why because Indian Punjab is tiny part India ............ therefore it is i-n-c-d-e-n-t-a-l to the Indus Valley.
Therefore PAKISTAN = INDUS VALLEY = PAKISTAN.
So stop spoiling this thread with irrelevant garbage.
Let us address this separately. At the onset of the day, with a dozen other tasks demanding attention, it is not the best time to ponder over the legacy of a lost civilisation from 4,000 years or more ago.
Didnt know that.. Does that mean that the 1st independence celebration in Pakistan were done while it was still under British rule ???
Technically, yes.
It would be a cold day in hell before a Pakistani Muslim stands in front of the Brihadeeswara Temple and proclaims it as a part of his heritage. Even if some one claims it, he is just out of his mind.
What about the Hindutva fringe elements ? Any person with an iota of common sense will laugh at that attempt. Keep glorifying killers like Abdali, Ghaznavi, Ghori, Babur etc on one side and oh-so-cutely claim the same heritage that those barbarians tried [in vain] to finish off completely.Does anyone see the sense in it..for I don't see any.
Pakistan's identity is Islam. It starts and ends with it. Attempts on latching onto the pre-Islamic heritage that they disowned till now, for valid reason,a heritage that is all but absent in Pakistan, after failed attempts at marketing themselves as an extension of Central Asia or Middle East is nothing but lame.
Permit me this quibble - Pakistan's heritage and identity is Islam. It need not be the only facet of a
Pakistani's heritage. To an individual, as distinct from an individual, there are several affilliations which need to be acknowledged. A Pakistani, depending on his or her exact circumstances, may be a Muslim, a Sindhi, a Shia, all together. There is no contradiction.