What's new

What will happen if China and India switch their global position?

its like asking a photo of jesus christ or muahmmed.....sorry I cant comment....

he was a hindu kshatriya..thats what id know of Siddhartha (Buddha)

Well, which Bollywood celebrity has the most suitable appearance to play him?
 
Nepal was part of India at that time and when When he was in Lumbini, He was Hindu King. He become Buddhist in Bodhgaya (present India) and religion spereded by King Ashoka (who was another Hindu and we call him Ashoka the great).

There was no country back then called "India".

The Buddha was born in what is now present-day Nepal.

Well, which Bollywood celebrity has the most suitable appearance to play him?

In the Western movie Little Buddha, they got Keanu Reeves to play the role of the Buddha. Keanu Reeves is partially of Chinese descent.
 
I don't know many people know or not, But Gautam Buddha is till considered as Hindu God (9th Avatar of Lord Vishnu).
Gautama Buddha in Hinduism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hindus and Buddhist both worship him. Also, There is not much difference between Hinduism and Buddhism. Both are mostly similare. From karmas to Script (Sanskrit).

In Buddhism he is not considered a God, but a teacher and a role model.

In Buddhism, there is no supreme creator God. That's why many people call it a philosophy rather than a full religion.

God in Buddhism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Hinduism originated from the region known as present day Pakistan. It is an established fact that the Vedas were written in the region today known as present day Pakistan: the earliest verses of Rig-Veda were written in the Indus Valley of Pakistan. Hinduism has its origins 5000 years ago, & there are countless works written by Western historians & others (except Indian ones) about the Aryan Dravidian history. Furthermore, the Harappans and Rigvedic Aryans were NOT Hindus.

I think the present Indian may still have a Dravidian majority, using the invader usually consist a small group of males who would soon be merged with the aborigine population by marrying their women.

Same as Britain, while speaking a Germanic language, but genetically they still remain Iberian and Celtic.
 
There was no country back then called "India".

The Buddha was born in what is now present-day Nepal.

I think the term "India" back then is more used to refer to a geographical region as opposed to a nation-state.


In the Western movie Little Buddha, they got Keanu Reeves to play the role of the Buddha. Keanu Reeves is partially of Chinese descent.

Keanu Reeves is half Chinese? Wow, he looks like a full white lol.
 
Hinduism originated from the region known as present day Pakistan. It is an established fact that the Vedas were written in the region today known as present day Pakistan: the earliest verses of Rig-Veda were written in the Indus Valley of Pakistan. Hinduism has its origins 5000 years ago, & there are countless works written by Western historians & others (except Indian ones) about the Aryan Dravidian history. Furthermore, the Harappans and Rigvedic Aryans were NOT Hindus.

1) there is no conclusive proof of where or when hinduism originated...hinduism is an unique religion in the matter it does not owe its foundation to any one.
2)again there is no proof that rig veda was written in present day pakistan....the claims vary as disparate as from iran to ganges valley.
3)the westerners wrote about the aryan-dravidian divide to justify their rule on the sub-continent on the grounds that even aryans were foreign invaders...it has been busted long ago....
4)the harappans were proto-hindus....many tablets/seals of hindus like lord pashupathi have been discovered...

---------- Post added at 09:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:46 AM ----------

I think the present Indian may still have a Dravidian majority, using the invader usually consist a small group of males who would soon be merged with the aborigine population by marrying their women.

Same as Britain, while speaking a Germanic language, but genetically they still remain Iberian and Celtic.

there is no such thing as aryan, dravidian in ethnic context :hitwall:

Jolt to Aryan-Dravidian divide theory

arya in sanskrit means "noble"..thats to it....
 
1) there is no conclusive proof of where or when hinduism originated...hinduism is an unique religion in the matter it does not owe its foundation to any one.
2)again there is no proof that rig veda was written in present day pakistan....the claims vary as disparate as from iran to ganges valley.
3)the westerners wrote about the aryan-dravidian divide to justify their rule on the sub-continent on the grounds that even aryans were foreign invaders...it has been busted long ago....
4)the harappans were proto-hindus....many tablets/seals of hindus like lord pashupathi have been discovered...

They found many proto-Aryan remains from the Russian steppe, it is quite clear that Aryans were foreigners to India.
 
Modern day Nepalese are a mixture of South Asian and Mongoloid genetics.

So that is probably what the Buddha looked like. Not that it matters really.
 
There was no country back then called "India".

The Buddha was born in what is now present-day Nepal.

Read again, What I said earlier. At that time, There was no Nepal. When he was in Present Nepal, He was Hindu. He started Buddhism in India in BodhGaya (which is in Bihar, India).

At that time (2,000-2,500 years ago, There was no country on earth by same name including China)

Maurya_Dynasty_in_265_BCE.jpg

Map_2bc.jpg


Check Bodhgaya on Map - There Buddhism started
 
They found many proto-Aryan remains from the Russian steppe, it is quite clear that Aryans were foreigners to India.

dude do you understand english....im repeating there is no such thing as "aryans" in the ethnic context and you are again going to the same thing....the aryan-dravidian divide was a myth created by english historians to justify their rule in india as according to them aryans were also foreign to india....subsequent scientific research and anthropological studies including DNA analysis have busted that myth...well whatever...

---------- Post added at 09:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:52 AM ----------

Modern day Nepalese are a mixture of South Asian and Mongoloid genetics.

So that is probably what the Buddha looked like. Not that it matters really.

wrong.....they are not a mixture....the himalayan people of nepal are mongoloid while the plain people resemble indians....so Buddha being from present day indo-nepalese border would have looked indian....
 
Back
Top Bottom