India should change name of some Indian cities

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Its the same thing for me. Why do you think only Muslims wanted a seperate country and not others? It is clear that they didn't wanted to live with hindu majority India as they couldnt co exist. Lets hear your analogy...why only Muslims wanted a different country?

Because they feared discrimination from Hindus looking to settle scores after being under Muslim rule for two centuries before the British arrived. They did not believe they would get fair treatment as a minority compared to others. I believe that originally there was no call for a separate country, only after it became clear to Muslim leaders that there would be repercussions did they start a movement for Pakistan. To protect their status and their history I would imagine, and with the current mood in India, you can clearly see why they thought it might be necessary.

 

[mominsaigol]

What a weird thread? . Whats even the point of fixating on the name of a city?

It's like if I hated Sydney Sweeney and used that logic to get mad at the fact that the city i live in is called Sydney.

Probably the .most pointless thread in time pass history

 

[Rajdeep]

Because they feared discrimination from Hindus looking to settle scores after being under Muslim rule for two centuries before the British arrived. They did not believe they would get fair treatment as a minority compared to others. I believe that originally there was no call for a separate country, only after it became clear to Muslim leaders that there would be repercussions did they start a movement for Pakistan. To protect their status and their history I would imagine, and with the current mood in India, you can clearly see why they thought it might be necessary.

When someone can't co-exist with others it is backed by some reasoning. In this case, it is fear of discrimination from Hindus. Whether that reasoning is right or not, that is another debate. So what wrong did I say, that muslims couldnt co-exist with Hindus and that was not the case for people from any other faith?

 

[RexRex]

Both were invaders one ruled for 200 years other 300 years. If timurid m

Mughals married either into their own family or into a Rajput royal family they had military alliance with. Political marriages.

They continued their timurid culture. Their court and language of conversation in the family remained Farsi.

They showed no respect or acceptance to the indigenous people their culture or religion.

They oppressed the local hindu population.

Mughals also killed a number of Sikh Gurus.

Their royal titles called them Ghazi. You know what it means?

Where would these Mughals go? They didn't have a place to return to. Babur was driven out of Ferghana by his relatives. They had lost Kabul. British had london and UK to return to.

How does the subcontinent today have about 500 million muslims if all these dynasties like Mughals, Lodhi, Tughlaq etc. just kept to themselves and didn't interact or socialise with the indigenous hindus ?

 

[RexRex]

It's like if I hated Sydney Sweeney and used that logic to get mad at the fact that the city i live in is called Sydney.

Unless the city of Sydney was named after the voluptuous Sydney Sweeney, your analogy doesn't make sense.

 

[RexRex]

Indian Muslims having at least a tiny amount of Mongol, Turkic, Persian or Arab ancestry are in severe minority. 90% of Muslims in India are local converts.

Why did the locals convert; were they impressed by the religion of their conquerors ? If so, they'd have some affinity towards these various ruling dynasties that showed them the light.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Gulmarg is Gaurimarg
Kashmir is Kashyapamar

Break the Walls!
Reclaim Sanatan
Nothing can stop the march of the empire

 

[mominsaigol]

What is 'our culture' ?

There are mutiple cultures in India, not just one.

Yes but we need to Stop the Glorified these people's who had destroyed our culture .

Aurangzaib didn't destroy your culture, he shaped the entire history of the subcontinent and without him you wouldn't have even existed.

India as a country was non existent at the time. The British shaped India into what it is today since their overall influence has mixed into your culture in the same way the King's culture has been shaped.

India is a mix of mogul, British, African and various 5000 year old cultures once the country came into existence in 1947-1948.

You have zero clue about world history. This is the issue with non university qualified uneducated people make posts

 

[Champ_Pal]

Why did the locals convert; were they impressed by the religion of their conquerors ? If so, they'd have some affinity towards these various ruling dynasties.

Several ways.

Upper Caste converted to keep their hegemony in tact. Religions change, but the hegemony must continue.

Lower caste convert for various reasons. Egalitarian views of Islam and the perks offered to stay Muslim. Many were also forced. It does not happen in 1 or 2 generations. It takes 200-300 years of persistent effort for an entire village or city to forget their past and embrace the new law of land. No village converts in a single generation.

Islam is a proselytizing religion. They are very persistent and will keep pitching their religion. Humans go through many troubles and trails. At some point people convert in the hope of getting better life.

Indian subcontinent has always been pluralistic in nature. Islam and Christianity were latest entrants. They out-preached Buddhism and firmly defeated it when it comes to conversions. There was never any Hinduism. There were local cults with common festivals. Indian subcontinent always had massive population and poverty. Fertile grounds for missionaries of all religions to convert.

 

[RexRex]

Several ways.

Upper Caste converted to keep their hegemony in tact. Religions change, but the hegemony must continue.

Lower caste convert for various reasons. Egalitarian views of Islam and the perks offered to stay Muslim. Many were also forced. It does not happen in 1 or 2 generations. It takes 200-300 years of persistent effort for an entire village or city to forget their past and embrace the new law of land. No village converts in a single generation.

Islam is a proselytizing religion. They are very persistent and will keep pitching their religion. Humans go through many troubles and trails. At some point people convert in the hope of getting better life.

Indian subcontinent has always been pluralistic in nature. Islam and Christianity were latest entrants. They out-preached Buddhism and firmly defeated it when it comes to conversions. There was never any Hinduism. There were local cults with common festivals. Indian subcontinent always had massive population and poverty. Fertile grounds for missionaries of all religions to convert.

So it was largely a voluntary process, the locals were impressed by Islam. Which means the muslims of today will have an affinity for those historical figures who originally introduced the religion to hindustan.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Aurangzaib didn't destroy your culture, he shaped the entire history of the subcontinent and without him you wouldn't have even existed.

India as a country was non existent at the time. The British shaped India into what it is today since their overall influence has mixed into your culture in the same way the King's culture has been shaped.

India is a mix of mogul, British, African and various 5000 year old cultures once the country came into existence in 1947-1948.

You have zero clue about world history. This is the issue with non university qualified uneducated people make posts

India as a civilization always existed. Languages and cuisine might differ. But they all had common heroes in the legends of Ram, Krishna, Buddha, Mahavir etc. Indian subcontinent may not have been united since the Gupta period of 5th century. But people were aware of each other and the commonality between them.

Mughals did not unify anything. They conquered. They never gave India any identity. It was just part of Turkic Muslim empire. British simply conquered whatever Mughals had. They did not have to fight much to conquer the land. Easy peasy.

Not sure what is African about India. Other than the slaves from East and central Africa that were brought to the Gujarat coast by Muslim armies, India had nothing to do with Africa.

Rama was a UP Bhaiyya. But there were cities like Rameswaram, Ramagundam etc named after him in South India more than a thousand miles away.
Krishna was from Dwaraka(Gujarat). But there are cities named after him in the eastern, Northern and southern India. South India even has a river named after him.

You need to clearly brush up your knowledge on Bharat and its history before lecturing others.

 

[RexRex]

Neither does this thread. If anything you Indians ought to be ashamed of yourselves for once.

Cricket takes is one thing. Distorting history, hating it, going after Muslims and calling aurangzaib one of the greatest historical rulers of all time a bigot is pushing things too far

One is a feared ruler who's name is in the history books and has a city named after him, and India should change it because a racist moron on the Internet named @Vikram1989 @Devadwal and @cricketjoshila said so?

Good or bad, hes an iconic ruler who's name will live on for the rest of time while these 3 morons will be forgotten by their own grandchildren when they pass away, assuming they even have kids since I doubt anyone would be dumb enough to marry em.

I don't want these places to be renamed but this thought process is not unique to India.

There are movements in the US that want public statues of white supremacist military general heroes torn down and even the confederate flags that fly on govt buildings removed. Same in the UK .. conversations spring up occasionally about the racist past of their sacred WW2 leader Winston Churchill and other prominent Brits that are honored by society, some of whom owned slaves.

 

[mominsaigol]

India as a civilization always existed. Languages and cuisine might differ. But they all had common heroes in the legends of Ram, Krishna, Buddha, Mahavir etc. Indian subcontinent may not have been united since the Gupta period of 5th century. But people were aware of each other and the commonality between them.

Mughals did not unify anything. They conquered. They never gave India any identity. It was just part of Turkic Muslim empire. British simply conquered whatever Mughals had. They did not have to fight much to conquer the land. Easy peasy.

Not sure what is African about India. Other than the slaves from East and central Africa that were brought to the Gujarat coast by Muslim armies, India had nothing to do with Africa.

Rama was a UP Bhaiyya. But there were cities like Rameswaram, Ramagundam etc named after him in South India more than a thousand miles away.
Krishna was from Dwaraka(Gujarat). But there are cities named after him in the eastern, Northern and southern India. South India even has a river named after him.

You need to clearly brush up your knowledge on Bharat and its history before lecturing others.

As a civilization many existed and got changed over time.

China is older then India yet they have changed massively since the influence of mogul culture and many others.

If you're claiming Mughuls + British had absolutely no influence on your culture and disnt shape it then you've gone banana's.

The old Indian civilization is vastly different from your current ideals at present.

I can educate who I want. It is impossible for biased indians to ever be smarter then me. I repeat impossible

 

[mominsaigol]

I don't want these places to be renamed but this thought process is not unique to India.

There are movements in the US that want public statues of white supremacist military general heroes torn down and even the confederate flags that fly on govt buildings removed. Same in the UK .. conversations spring up occasionally about the racist past of their sacred WW2 leader Winston Churchill and other prominent Brits that are honored by society, some of whom owned slaves.

Both US and UK aren't exactly countries I'd be proud of lol.

 

[Champ_Pal]

As a civilization many existed and got changed over time.

China is older then India yet they have changed massively since the influence of mogul culture and many others.

If you're claiming Mughuls + British had absolutely no influence on your culture and disnt shape it then you've gone banana's.

The old Indian civilization is vastly different from your current ideals at present.

I can educate who I want. It is impossible for biased indians to ever be smarter then me. I repeat impossible

Every invading force alters the cultures of locals. Some more and some less.

Your point is that subcontinent had no identity until Mughals and Brit unified it. I just pointed out your BS.

Indian subcontinent had a variety of cults with common stories. Fully aware of the local heroes and heroes from other parts of the subcontinent. I do not want to get into personal insults. But your views on India before Mughal invasion and Turkic invasions in 11th century are ill informed.

 

[mominsaigol]

Every invading force alters the cultures of locals. Some more and some less.

Your point is that subcontinent had no identity until Mughals and Brit unified it. I just pointed out your BS.

Indian subcontinent had a variety of cults with common stories. Fully aware of the local heroes and heroes from other parts of the subcontinent. I do not want to get into personal insults. But your views on India before Mughal invasion and Turkic invasions in 11th century are ill informed.

Your point is that subcontinent had no identity until Mughals and Brit unified it. I just pointed out your BS.

Never said that. You need to stop strawmanning me. All indian posters have a habit of doing so when cornered

 

[cricketjoshila]

Every invading force alters the cultures of locals. Some more and some less.

Your point is that subcontinent had no identity until Mughals and Brit unified it. I just pointed out your BS.

Indian subcontinent had a variety of cults with common stories. Fully aware of the local heroes and heroes from other parts of the subcontinent. I do not want to get into personal insults. But your views on India before Mughal invasion and Turkic invasions in 11th century are ill informed.

The guy doesn't know how Mongol culture is hated in China and how Mongol invasions and Invader are considered tyrants in China.

 

[cricketjoshila]

What problem pakistanis have with what Indians do to Aurangzeb in India?

We Indians, don't ask what Islamic republic does to minorities.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Your point is that subcontinent had no identity until Mughals and Brit unified it. I just pointed out your BS.

Never said that. You need to stop strawmanning me. All indian posters have a habit of doing so when cornered

You said without Aurangzeb India would not exist. This is absolute flaming pile of super hot BS.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

When someone can't co-exist with others it is backed by some reasoning. In this case, it is fear of discrimination from Hindus. Whether that reasoning is right or not, that is another debate. So what wrong did I say, that muslims couldnt co-exist with Hindus and that was not the case for people from any other faith?

Because half of the Muslims clearly could co-exist with Hindus and they chose to stay in India. But for some reason instead of giving them credit as patriotic, you just ignore them and lump them in with Pakistan.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Because half of the Muslims clearly could co-exist with Hindus and they chose to stay in India. But for some reason instead of giving them credit as patriotic, you just ignore them and lump them in with Pakistan.

I believe majority of Muslims in India realize they are sons of the soil. Especially the educated people. Its the illiterate brainwashed folk that think they are Muslims before they are anything. Even educated Muslims can have those tendencies. But they do not go overboard about it.

A look at Indian Muslims tells us what they were before they were Muslims. They are as Indian as it gets. Their thought process is controlled by a few Ashrafi Muslims. They follow these Ashrafi ones as their unelected leaders.

 

[Rajdeep]

Because half of the Muslims clearly could co-exist with Hindus and they chose to stay in India. But for some reason instead of giving them credit as patriotic, you just ignore them and lump them in with Pakistan.

That is because India took the route of secularism where muslims got each and every right that majority hindus got. However, during independence, muslims believed in two state theory and demanded a seperate country for their own based on religion.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

That is because India took the route of secularism where muslims got each and every right that majority hindus got. However, during independence, muslims believed in two state theory and demanded a seperate country for their own based on religion.

Those who believed in the two-naion theory left India, so why target those who chose to stay?

 

[moghul]

Ahmedabad: - Who is Ahmed?
Moradabad: - Who is Murad?
Aurangabad: - Who is Aurangzeb?
Faizabad: - Who is Faiz?
Farooqabad: - Who is Farooq?
Adilabad: - Who is Adil?
Sahibabad- Who is Sahib?
Hyderabad: - Who is Haider?
Secunderabad: - Who is Sikander?
Firozabad: - Who is Firoz?
Mustafabad: - Who is Mustafa?
Ahmednagar: - Who is Ahmed?
Tughlaqabad: - Who is Tughlaq?
Fathabad: - Who is Fateh?
Usmanabad: - Who is Usman?
Baktiyarpur: - Who is Baktiyar?
Mahmudabad: - Who is Mahmud?
Muzaffarpur and Muzaffar Nagar: - Who is Muzaffar?
Burhanpur: -Who is Burhan?


Who are all these? These are the people who destroyed our culture, destroyed our temples, corrupted our idols and converted Hindus to Islam.

This is their contribution in the history of India. Why do we remember them by naming cities after them?

These cities should change names .

Good or bad, you can't change the history . And , who would decide those were good people or bad people ?

 

[moghul]

What’s the point of posting this thread on a Pakistani forum?

Write to your local MLA and push them to change the names, what is posting on PP gonna do? It will just cause Pakistanis to mock us for more pressing matters we face while diluting this issue.

Agree, its just nonsense , pure and simple.

 

[mominsaigol]

You said without Aurangzeb India would not exist. This is absolute flaming pile of super hot BS.

It would not, as India simply didn't exist until 1947-1948.

That's a fact, you came into existence then and their, before that you all were a disgruntled civilization and an overall mess with no guarantees of what was to come.

 

[Kriketer]

One can only laugh at these sanghi clowns and their hate filled delusions. Forget renaming cities, the way Sanghis and their facist government are going against minorities they need to start wondering what the new carved out country by 250 million will be eventually called? Should make a thread on names suggestion

From IOK down to Aurangzebad(Mumbai), out to east end to Bengal should become the new beautiful nation for minorities of India. So much polluted hatred there is bound to eventually cause communal turmoil, daily news and communal unrest from there tells you the story how it keeps getting worse.

 

[Vikram1989]

So it was largely a voluntary process, the locals were impressed by Islam. Which means the muslims of today will have an affinity for those historical figures who originally introduced the religion to hindustan.

One example of voluntary process per a noted author and maintained authentic records of church.All it happened the ruler suspected people have collaborated with his enemy because of common religion.

 

[sweep_shot]

One can only laugh at these sanghi clowns and their hate filled delusions. Forget renaming cities, the way Sanghis and their facist government are going against minorities they need to start wondering what the new carved out country by 250 million will be eventually called? Should make a thread on names suggestion

From IOK down to Aurangzebad(Mumbai), out to east end to Bengal should become the new beautiful nation for minorities of India. So much polluted hatred there is bound to eventually cause communal turmoil, daily news and communal unrest from there tells you the story how it keeps getting worse.

I asked ChatGPT this question. Here is the answer:

 

[sweep_shot]

One can only laugh at these sanghi clowns and their hate filled delusions. Forget renaming cities, the way Sanghis and their facist government are going against minorities they need to start wondering what the new carved out country by 250 million will be eventually called? Should make a thread on names suggestion

From IOK down to Aurangzebad(Mumbai), out to east end to Bengal should become the new beautiful nation for minorities of India. So much polluted hatred there is bound to eventually cause communal turmoil, daily news and communal unrest from there tells you the story how it keeps getting worse.

I also asked DeepSeek AI the same question. Here is the answer from DeepSeek:



I like the name "Dar-ul-Islam" or "Azadistan".

 

[Theanonymousone]

One can only laugh at these sanghi clowns and their hate filled delusions. Forget renaming cities, the way Sanghis and their facist government are going against minorities they need to start wondering what the new carved out country by 250 million will be eventually called? Should make a thread on names suggestion

From IOK down to Aurangzebad(Mumbai), out to east end to Bengal should become the new beautiful nation for minorities of India. So much polluted hatred there is bound to eventually cause communal turmoil, daily news and communal unrest from there tells you the story how it keeps getting worse.

I dont know where this thought or the slightest confidence that this could actually happen comes from?

India has 80% Hindus and is on a fast development path. Communal unrest? Sporadic events happen mainly due to organized crime by fringe elements like in Nagpur but they are far and few. State and army troops have very good structure in India that they can neutralize any such elements quickly. Compare that to Pakistan where, jobs for youth have become difficult.

Yet, you have the audacity to talk about India being broken??

 

[Hitman]

I dont know where this thought or the slightest confidence that this could actually happen comes from?

India has 80% Hindus and is on a fast development path. Communal unrest? Sporadic events happen mainly due to organized crime by fringe elements like in Nagpur but they are far and few. State and army troops have very good structure in India that they can neutralize any such elements quickly. Compare that to Pakistan where, jobs for youth have become difficult.

Yet, you have the audacity to talk about India being broken??

They don't have to worry as long as IMF is functional.

 

[Suleiman]

You can change the name of every city, street corner, build a memorial for every cow used for a steak, beef nihari, kebab or whatever it may be, or every idol demolished into tiny bits- none of it will ever erase the reign of Muslims and Mughals upon the subcontinent of India.

These are the same Kumar types dancing around fires and doing pooja for cows, elephants and monkeys when we had to fight British occupation. Could’ve achieved independence much sooner if not for their incompetence. By the way are you going to stop speaking English too? Cuz you know… the other batch of people that enslaved you were also foreign invaders whose dress you wear and whose language you *attempt* to speak, while they mock your accent and feeble attempt to try and be one of them

 

[Rajdeep]

You can change the name of every city, street corner, build a memorial for every cow used for a steak, beef nihari, kebab or whatever it may be, or every idol demolished into tiny bits- none of it will ever erase the reign of Muslims and Mughals upon the subcontinent of India.

These are the same Kumar types dancing around fires and doing pooja for cows, elephants and monkeys when we had to fight British occupation. Could’ve achieved independence much sooner if not for their incompetence. By the way are you going to stop speaking English too? Cuz you know… the other batch of people that enslaved you were also foreign invaders whose dress you wear and whose language you *attempt* to speak, while they mock your accent and feeble attempt to try and be one of them

Even Osama Bin Laden and Adolf Hitlers name will not be erased from history but it doesnt say much. Being infamous is different from becoming great. Likes of Khans and Abduls and other converted muslims from Pakistan may find tyrants like Aurangazeb and Islamist invaders great but pls dnt force it upon us. You guys demanded and got a seperate country. Now what Kumars and Kapoors do in the remaining land of India is our interest. We all can see which country is growing rapidly and which one is a shinning light in the world riddled with terrorism 70 years after partition.

 

[pillionrider]

These are the same Kumar types dancing around fires and doing pooja for cows, elephants and monkeys when we had to fight British occupation.

When you say 'we', what do you mean. Are you claiming to be a Mughal?

Or are you a mogul and therefore a Mughal

 

[Kriketer]

I asked ChatGPT this question. Here is the answer:

View attachment 152541

I love Mughalistan, I almost suggested that with my post. Knowing the rich beautifull properous history of Moghuls of Maha Bharat, it only makes sense to name the new beautiful nation after them

 

[Kriketer]

I dont know where this thought or the slightest confidence that this could actually happen comes from?

India has 80% Hindus and is on a fast development path. Communal unrest? Sporadic events happen mainly due to organized crime by fringe elements like in Nagpur but they are far and few. State and army troops have very good structure in India that they can neutralize any such elements quickly. Compare that to Pakistan where, jobs for youth have become difficult.

Yet, you have the audacity to talk about India being broken??

If 250 million+ have to reside among the facist hatefilled sanghi Terrorists, and things keep getting worse in India, which seems to be the case then they have every right to be on their own and be a free nation.

The amount of hatred we see among Indian public like on PP, them supporting a facist Hindudva extremist government into power, bulldozing Muslim houses and religious places, attacking minorities, killing over simplest thing like beef, government spewing hate for minority, making countless movies showing Muslims as bad people etc, things only seem to be getting worse in that facist land. Internationally India is being called out for Facism so you can tell where it's sadly headed

 

[RexRex]

One example of voluntary process per a noted author and maintained authentic records of church.All it happened the ruler suspected people have collaborated with his enemy because of common religion.

What book is this screenshot from ?

 

[Rajdeep]

If 250 million+ have to reside among the facist hatefilled sanghi Terrorists, and things keep getting worse in India, which seems to be the case then they have every right to be on their own and be a free nation.

The amount of hatred we see among Indian public like on PP, them supporting a facist Hindudva extremist government into power, bulldozing Muslim houses and religious places, attacking minorities, killing over simplest thing like beef, government spewing hate for minority, making countless movies showing Muslims as bad people etc, things only seem to be getting worse in that facist land. Internationally India is being called out for Facism so you can tell where it's sadly headed

No one calls Sanghis as terrorists. RSS is not a banned terrorist organization. It is mostly a figment of imagination from Pakistanis because top 10 banned terror outfits as per UN are Islamist organizations. Just bcoz Pakistan is an Islamic republic as well, they would like to share the shame and accuse Sanghis as terrorists to make themselves feel good. The world know who terrorists aware...its time you smell the coffee as well.

 

[Vikram1989]

What book is this screenshot from ?

Tipu Sultan: The Saga of Mysore's Interregnum (1760–1799)
By Vinay Sampath.it was quite an impassioned book just laying down the facts. Praising Haider ali for his tactfulness while blaming tippu for the lack of it.

One of the passages.
A muslim ulema comes to haider demanding his intervention. He requests Haider to put an end to idolatry, specifically the procession of utsava murti in front of a mosque, as it should not be permitted in an islamic dominion. To this Haider responds airily: Who said this was an Islamic dominion?

 

[RexRex]

Tipu Sultan: The Saga of Mysore's Interregnum (1760–1799)
By Vinay Sampath.it was quite an impassioned book just laying down the facts. Praising Haider ali for his tactfulness while blaming tippu for the lack of it.

One of the passages.
A muslim ulema comes to haider demanding his intervention. He requests Haider to put an end to idolatry, specifically the procession of utsava murti in front of a mosque, as it should not be permitted in an islamic dominion. To this Haider responds airily: Who said this was an Islamic dominion?

This Vikram Sampath seems like an activist historian sympathetic to the indian rightwing.

 

[Champ_Pal]

It would not, as India simply didn't exist until 1947-1948.

That's a fact, you came into existence then and their, before that you all were a disgruntled civilization and an overall mess with no guarantees of what was to come.

India was a name given by Foreigners including Greeks, Persians and Arabs.. Bharat existed for over 3000 years. Bharata Varsha or the land of Bharata is mentioned in Ancient Puranic Texts and Bhagavad Gita. It is the Indian Subcontinent. It includes your favorite Bangladesh too.

 

[Vikram1989]

This Vikram Sampath seems like an activist historian sympathetic to the indian rightwing.

Yeah looks like it.but everyone praised the book for the historical accuracy and authenticity even by sashi tharoor. So going through it .He just laid down the facts and asked readers to judge. First half is how haider ali raised from rags to riches with his brilliance and co operation with all people in sacred hindu temple town .second half is about tipu spoiling his relations with his erstwhile friends.

 

[mominsaigol]

India was a name given by Foreigners including Greeks, Persians and Arabs.. Bharat existed for over 3000 years. Bharata Varsha or the land of Bharata is mentioned in Ancient Puranic Texts and Bhagavad Gita. It is the Indian Subcontinent. It includes your favorite Bangladesh too.

India, as a modern nation-state, came into existence on August 15, 1947, with the independence from British rule and the partition of the British Indian Empire into India and Pakistan.

In 1947, the British government decided to grant independence to the Indian subcontinent, but the partition of the British Indian Empire into two independent dominions, India and Pakistan, was also decided.

India did not exist as an identity before 1947. Or rather, before the British rule, just like "USA" did not exist before the British. The Indian Subcontinent (named after the river Indus) has always existed, and was ruled by multiple cultures over thousands of years. The Maurya empire, the Tamil kings, and the Maratha empire were different from each other culturally, and autonomously ruled over parts of "The land beyond Indus" (India) without any overarching power. Even their idea of hinduism or buddhism was fairly different from each other.

^^ You came into existence in 1947, plain and simple. Dont whine and complain about your city names. They were shaped by others and their idea and norms don't reflect current ideas and norms.

You were born in 1947-1948. Black and blue.

Don't try to rewrite history. ^^ I listed the words in bolds. Please don't make me list the citations as well.

 

[Champ_Pal]

India, as a modern nation-state, came into existence on August 15, 1947, with the independence from British rule and the partition of the British Indian Empire into India and Pakistan.

In 1947, the British government decided to grant independence to the Indian subcontinent, but the partition of the British Indian Empire into two independent dominions, India and Pakistan, was also decided.

India did not exist as an identity before 1947. Or rather, before the British rule, just like "USA" did not exist before the British. The Indian Subcontinent (named after the river Indus) has always existed, and was ruled by multiple cultures over thousands of years. The Maurya empire, the Tamil kings, and the Maratha empire were different from each other culturally, and autonomously ruled over parts of "The land beyond Indus" (India) without any overarching power. Even their idea of hinduism or buddhism was fairly different from each other.

^^ You came into existence in 1947, plain and simple. Dont whine and complain about your city names. They were shaped by others and their idea and norms don't reflect current ideas and norms.

You were born in 1947-1948. Black and blue.

Don't try to rewrite history. ^^ I listed the words in bolds. Please don't make me list the citations as well.

So according to you, prior to 1947, Indian people did not know which land they were living on. Thanks to British and Mughals for giving us identity


Brilliant logic of some people on the board.

A quick snippet of what is written about Bharat Varsha in the old Hindu texts.


Carry on with your agenda. Your nation of an Islamic Bangladesh existed only since 1972. That is a fact. Don't apply it on the Bharateeyas.

 

[mominsaigol]

So according to you, prior to 1947, Indian people did not know which land they were living on. Thanks to British and Mughals for giving us identity


Brilliant logic of some people on the board.

A quick snippet of what is written about Bharat Varsha in the old Hindu texts.
View attachment 152555

Carry on with your agenda. Your nation of an Islamic Bangladesh existed only since 1972. That is a fact. Don't apply it on the Bharateeyas.

Yup, Indians didn't know anything, all hail British for giving India its name and its country.

Brilliant logic of some people on the board.

logic and facts arent the same thing, what i state are facts, what you state is nonsense.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Yup, Indians didn't know anything, all hail British for giving India its name and its country.

Brilliant logic of some people on the board.

logic and facts arent the same thing, what i state are facts, what you state is nonsense.

You are confusing Bangladesh with Bharat. I gave you proof from Hindu Texts. You gave me Nagin dance.

Bharat is over 3000 yrs old.
Bangladesh is 50 yrs old.

 

[mominsaigol]

You are confusing Bangladesh with Bharat. I gave you proof from Hindu Texts. You gave me Nagin dance.

Bharat is over 3000 yrs old.
Bangladesh is 50 yrs old.

I will repeat myself. WHAT WAS THE DATE THE COUNTRY OF INDIA WAS FORMED.

don't give me this civilization crap. Bangladeshi people are almost as old as Indian by race.

I'm asking for the date. What's your date and day of formation and independence.

 

[mominsaigol]

I will repeat myself. WHAT WAS THE DATE THE COUNTRY OF INDIA WAS FORMED.

don't give me this civilization crap. Bangladeshi people are almost as old as Indian by race.

I'm asking for the date. What's your date and day of formation and independence.

@Champ_Pal typical Indians. They can't respond but can only react.

It took anuskha sharma 30+ years to learn how to do something most toddlers learn how to do by age 5.

 

[Suleiman]

@Champ_Pal typical Indians. They can't respond but can only react.

It took anuskha sharma 30+ years to learn how to do something most toddlers learn how to do by age 5.

Leave it brother. Enjoy your Ramadan. Don’t let human shayateen distract you and drain your energy for worship in the last 10 nights- I realize that too, it’s not worth it. May Allah guide them.

 

[Champ_Pal]

@Champ_Pal typical Indians. They can't respond but can only react.

It took anuskha sharma 30+ years to learn how to do something most toddlers learn how to do by age 5.

Cool story bro.

It’s funny when I am the one that showed you about the existence of Bharat as a nation while all you did was troll and dance.

You ignore every proof you posted and only talk about Independence Day of India from British. Can’t do anything but laugh when someone is willfully ignorant and obviously trolling.

 

[mominsaigol]

Cool story bro.

It’s funny when I am the one that showed you about the existence of Bharat as a nation while all you did was troll and dance.

You ignore every proof you posted and only talk about Independence Day of India from British. Can’t do anything but laugh when someone is willfully ignorant and obviously trolling.

Again

WHEN WAS INDIA GIVEN INDEPENDENCE AND FORMED AS A NATION.

say the words. It's easy, it's 1947-1948

 

[Champ_Pal]

Again

WHEN WAS INDIA GIVEN INDEPENDENCE AND FORMED AS A NATION.

say the words. It's easy, it's 1947-1948

Independence has nothing to do with national state concept of Bharat that existed since 1000 BC.

If a slave is emancipated, it does not mean that he never had a mother, father and family prior to his freedom. You are clutching at straws now.

If you want to argue, show me evidence of the fact that Bharat did not exist prior to 1947. Not just parroting when India got its independence. You very well know you are trolling and willfully playing dumb just to win a petty internet argument.

Now show me evidence that Bharat as a nation did not exist before 1947. It’s not hard with internet at your finger tips. Google is your friend.

 

[mominsaigol]

Independence has nothing to do with national state concept of Bharat that existed since 1000 BC.

If a slave is emancipated, it does not mean that he never had a mother, father and family prior to his freedom. You are clutching at straws now.

If you want to argue, show me evidence of the fact that Bharat did not exist prior to 1947. Not just parroting when India got its independence. You very well know you are trolling and willfully playing dumb just to win a petty internet argument.

Now show me evidence that Bharat as a nation did not exist before 1947. It’s not hard with internet at your finger tips. Google is your friend.

Bharat has nothing to do with modern india. You have zero relevance to that version Bharat now. You're a 1947 boy, and you people don't exist before then.

Show me an Indian passport before 1947. Show me evidence of people being citizens of India before 1947

 

[Champ_Pal]

Bharat has nothing to do with modern india. You have zero relevance to that version Bharat now. You're a 1947 boy, and you people don't exist before then.

Show me an Indian passport before 1947. Show me evidence of people being citizens of India before 1947

It has everything to do with modern India. Without the concept of Bharat and the common culture British would not be able to define its boundaries and most states would have been different countries in 1947.

Your Bangladesh and Pakistan had no existence prior to your independence. It was just a portion of land carved out of Bharat. What was remaining after removing Pak and later BD is now India.

Ever wonder why India is called Bharat in India? Even in south India, it is called Bharat Desam in Telugu, Bharatham in Tamil and Bharatha in Kannada.

Anyways, you can live in your fairytale world of make believe that Bharat as a nation concept never existed until British conned all the people of various regions of India and told them in 1947 that from here on you will be called Indians. All the people of modern day India lapped up this idea and thanked wonderful British for giving them an identity they never had

 

[mominsaigol]

It has everything to do with modern India. Without the concept of Bharat and the common culture British would not be able to define its boundaries and most states would have been different countries in 1947.

Your Bangladesh and Pakistan had no existence prior to your independence. It was just a portion of land carved out of Bharat. What was remaining after removing Pak and later BD is now India.

Ever wonder why India is called Bharat in India? Even in south India, it is called Bharat Desam in Telugu, Bharatham in Tamil and Bharatha in Kannada.

Anyways, you can live in your fairytale world of make believe that Bharat as a nation concept never existed until British conned all the people of various regions of India and told them in 1947 that from here on you will be called Indians. All the people of modern day India lapped up this idea and thanked wonderful British for giving them an identity they never had

Australia existed for 5000+ years before the British. Ab originals occupied the land long before the British came.

Then when the British first arrived I believe they named it new Holland and in 1804 the name was changed to Australia.

Do you see anyone with a new Holland or a ab original land passport .

Show me an Indian passport pre 1947. This civilization argument is irrelevant.

Ancient China doesn't exist since Mongols changed their language, their culture and even their cuisines.

Ancient India doesn't exist unless you wish to be associated with Africa. Anyway I ask again

Show me an Indian passport pre 1947.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Australia existed for 5000+ years before the British. Ab originals occupied the land long before the British came.

Then when the British first arrived I believe they named it new Holland and in 1804 the name was changed to Australia.

Do you see anyone with a new Holland or a ab original land passport .

Show me an Indian passport pre 1947. This civilization argument is irrelevant.

Ancient China doesn't exist since Mongols changed their language, their culture and even their cuisines.

Ancient India doesn't exist unless you wish to be associated with Africa. Anyway I ask again

Show me an Indian passport pre 1947.

Did the aboriginals have any scriptures to back up that their land was called Australia or by any other name?
Me showing Indian passport is akin to you showing an intelligent point.

This dude thinks that just because a passport did not exist before 1947, there is no nation concept of Bharat.

I am sure you think Persians, Greeks etc also never existed and they are all made up stuff.

 

[mominsaigol]

Did the aboriginals have any scriptures to back up that their land was called Australia or by any other name?
Me showing Indian passport is akin to you showing an intelligent point.

This dude thinks that just because a passport did not exist before 1947, there is no nation concept of Bharat.

I am sure you think Persians, Greeks etc also never existed and they are all made up stuff.

This dude thinks that just because a passport did not exist before 1947, there is no nation concept of Bharat

Who says a passport didnt exist in 1947? They came into existence in 1920?

I am sure you think Persians, Greeks etc also never existed and they are all made up stuff.

Persians are an ethnic group in Iran and idk what youre even talking about.

No one is denying that Indians aka Bharati Hindu's didnt exist in the same way no one is denying that Muslims didn't exist in sub continent.

Just that India as a country didnt exist. It was formed in 1947 hence theirs no need to change the names of Indian cities. Except it, as your emperor was the seed who set things into motion, now Show me a passport before 1947.

Google it and you'll find out it doesn't exist.

 

[BouncerGuy]

THREAD IS ABOUT DISCUSSING NAMES OF INDIAN CITY... NOT TO DISCUSS THE HISTORY OF PASSPORTS HERE

WILL REMOVE IRRELEVANT POSTS NOW

 

[Champ_Pal]

This dude thinks that just because a passport did not exist before 1947, there is no nation concept of Bharat

Who says a passport didnt exist in 1947? They came into existence in 1920?

I am sure you think Persians, Greeks etc also never existed and they are all made up stuff.

Persians are an ethnic group in Iran and idk what youre even talking about.

No one is denying that Indians aka Bharati Hindu's didnt exist in the same way no one is denying that Muslims didn't exist in sub continent.

Just that India as a country didnt exist. It was formed in 1947 hence theirs no need to change the names of Indian cities. Except it, as your emperor was the seed who set things into motion, now Show me a passport before 1947.

Google it and you'll find out it doesn't exist.

This is exasperating. Did I ever say that modern day India is same as nation concept of Bharat?
Bharat varsha or the nation concept existed for millennia. It was ruled by many kings, emperors for thousands of years. It is mentioned even in Rigveda which is 3000 yrs old. It is mentioned in Mahabharata. It is called Mahabharata. Not Maha Jndia.
People in modern day India did not know they were called Indians. It was Sanatana Dharma. It encompassed all Dharmic cults, Animism of tribals and outcasts(DALITS), worship of celestial beings(Yakshas) etc. Everyone was fully aware of others beliefs.

Even British could see that inspite of diversity of languages and traditions, all of the people of subcontinent are very similar and no part of modern day India objected to joining the Indian union in 1947.

I have given you evidence of scriptures which are super old. If you do not want to believe it, it is your choice. You as a Bangladeshi and a former Pakistani do not have to believe in Bharat Varsha. There is a reason why Muslims wanted out of it. They never accepted a Hindu Bharat. To cover up the evidence I M providing you are asking g about passport before 1947. You already know that a physical passport with. Picture ID is a modern concept. Yet you choose to ask for it just to troll.

Give me evidence that Bharat inception never existed. I have given proof from Vedas, Puranas about it. All you are asking for is Passport for Bharat

 

[Champ_Pal]

THREAD IS ABOUT DISCUSSING NAMES OF INDIAN CITY... NOT TO DISCUSS THE HISTORY OF PASSPORTS HERE

WILL REMOVE IRRELEVANT POSTS NOW

Well, I hope the BD poster got the message. He is asking for a Bharat passport from centuries ago.

 

[mominsaigol]

This is exasperating. Did I ever say that modern day India is same as nation concept of Bharat?
Bharat varsha or the nation concept existed for millennia. It was ruled by many kings, emperors for thousands of years. It is mentioned even in Rigveda which is 3000 yrs old. It is mentioned in Mahabharata. It is called Mahabharata. Not Maha Jndia.
People in modern day India did not know they were called Indians. It was Sanatana Dharma. It encompassed all Dharmic cults, Animism of tribals and outcasts(DALITS), worship of celestial beings(Yakshas) etc. Everyone was fully aware of others beliefs.

Even British could see that inspite of diversity of languages and traditions, all of the people of subcontinent are very similar and no part of modern day India objected to joining the Indian union in 1947.

I have given you evidence of scriptures which are super old. If you do not want to believe it, it is your choice. You as a Bangladeshi and a former Pakistani do not have to believe in Bharat Varsha. There is a reason why Muslims wanted out of it. They never accepted a Hindu Bharat. To cover up the evidence I M providing you are asking g about passport before 1947. You already know that a physical passport with. Picture ID is a modern concept. Yet you choose to ask for it just to troll.

Give me evidence that Bharat inception never existed. I have given proof from Vedas, Puranas about it. All you are asking for is Passport for Bharat

Him, since when am I Bangladeshi .

I'm am an overseas Lahori east Pakistani living in Australia formerly recognised as an Australian citizen?

Now I'm still waiting for proof of citizenship before 1947 for India.

 

[mominsaigol]

Well, I hope the BD poster got the message. He is asking for a Bharat passport from centuries ago.

I'm not a bangladeshi though? You're confusing me for @sweep_shot

 

[Rajdeep]

@mominsaigol - bhaisaab yeh kis line pe aa gaye hai aap? Your forte is cricket and Travis Head, remember?

 

[mominsaigol]

@mominsaigol - bhaisaab yeh kis line pe aa gaye hai aap? Your forte is cricket and Travis Head, remember?

Read my introduction forumn. I protect History even more then Travis Head and Steve Smith . History cannot be changed or tarnished