Why do we stil call ourselves *India*? - Page 3

right i agree with you on the most parts

i dont say any more that my religion is hinduism
because thats foreigner word
i just say my relgion is hindu 😆
but i have used "hinduvta" sometimes because it sounds more indian than "hinduism"

and i dont usually say hindustan... i say bharat mostly
but when i am talking in all english sentence and then i say bharat then it is just like using only 1 hindi word 😆
and foreigners dont know what bharat is so i have to tell them india

and instead of saying Jai Hind should se say Jai Sind(h)? 😆
i am sindhi hehe
yea but i guess we could always say Jai Bharat 😉
but its habit for me to say Jai Hind
seems like same thing to me but now i will also start saying Jai Bharat also
thanks for making me realize 😛

if we dont call ourselves hindus than what should we say? sindhus?
because hind came from sindh as you said
and hindu came from sindhu

Jai Bharat

Originally posted by: egghatcher

very berry verry well said sai ji 😉😛

thanks bhai😉

Jai Bharat😃

Originally posted by: SolidSnake

IMO it was mistake to include that line "India that is Bharat...", we should have opted for Bharat only. I wouldn't mind if we were to correct that mistake today.

same here. 😊

Originally posted by: ani11

What is in a name.....a rose will smell as beautiful if called by any other name.....KDNBKD.. 😳

haan yaar. wonder why people bother with naming ceremonies and all. baby would still be a junior even if it was called senior, no?😛

Originally posted by: sareg

there are two ways to look at the term politically correct

politically the term has to be correct, Bharat in real sense means the entire subcontinent, India Pakistan, Burma, Nepal etc, so that is wrong those are 4 different countries

PC fashion, the term originates from the mahabharata(or even older the vedas), you know that goes to the religion, and that is Hinduism's defination of India, and as we know in current India, any defination by/of Hinduism towards our country whether it is a national song or name is incorrect, hence politically incorrect

and you took a totally tangential third route😆

And ur post went like a tangent over my head!! 😕 Simple English will be highly appreciated... I am an Indian after all...😉😉😉
Now back to the word Bharat... That is not *Hinduism's* definition of India... It is the definition of the original inhabitants of India!! Its just tht since *Hinduism* (Sanatan Dharm) is much older than the word *India* .... We see the use of *Bharat* in Hindu scriptures... Doesnt make Bharat a HINDU word!!

Btw... If Bharat means 4 countries... The LARGEST of which is India.... *India* means a country which is Pakistan!! Nomenclature cannot be more incorrect than tht!!

... Now me fails to understand how the definition given by some foreign colonialists can be more PC than the Original name!!

Originally posted by: Swar_Raj

How did the word Hindu come into existence?

http://www.esamskriti.com/html/new_inside.asp?cat_name=qanda &sid=113&count1=1&cid=460

According to our ex-President and scholar Dr S Radhakrishnan, the term Hindu had originally a territorial and not credal significance. It implies residence in a well-defined geographical area. As a modern term, Hindu has evolved from the Indo-Iranian root Sindhu. This Proto-Indo-Iranian word sindhus literally refers to the "Indus River" and the culture pertaining to its long expansive valley. This is where Hindu culture first developed.

Historically, however, at a very early date, Persian explorers entered the Indian subcontinent from the far Northwest. After they returned, they published chronicles. But due to the phonetics of their native Persian language, the 'S' of Sind became an aspirated 'H.' This is how the people of the Indus Valley came to be known generically as "Hindus" by the Persians. This flawed intonation inevitably stuck.


And was later re-imported when the invading Moguls conquered India. Since they always referred to the locals as "Hindus," the term was adopted by the Indians themselves as a way of distinguishing native culture from that of the foreign Muslims.


But it should be noted that still today there is a region, a people and a language called Sind.



Net net there was no word Hindu till the Muslims came to India. It was called Sanathan Dharam. Hindu is a modified version of Sindhu, was a term to indicate the region round the Sindhu river (modern day Indus) and then the whole of India. The Iranians substituted H for S making it Hindu. When the Muslims came in, there became two sets of people, one the Muslims and two the Hindus.

The 10thSikh Guru in Dasam Granth in Ugradanti Chhake Chhand Vani under the description of 'Chandi Ki Var' stated, "Let Khalsa be victorious all over the world to awaken Hindu Dharma, so all falsehood or ignorance may be removed". In another verse he has used the word 'Hinduka'. Probably it was the word used in medieval times and the word may have been a prototype of the modern word Hindoo (Hindu) as the British would say.

2. How did Hindu become Hinduism?

The word Hinduism is an incorrect nomenclature, which was coined by the British. Thereafter, it has stuck due to the ignorance of its followers. The term 'ism' refers to an ideology that is to be propagated and by any method imposed on others for e.g. Marxism, socialism, communism, imperialism and capitalism but the Hindus have no such 'ism'. Hindus follow the continuum process of evolution; for the Hindus do not have any unidirectional ideology, therefore, in Hindu Dharma there is no place for any 'ism'. Hindus are democratic in approach, for each individual is free to adopt any philosophy or way to self-realization.

Well Said.... 😛 👏👏

Originally posted by: egghatcher

very berry verry well said sai ji 😉😛

Hmm... First things first...
a) Bharat aka India was associated with the river Sindhu by foreigners... We ourselves do not massively associate ourselves with this river...

b) If Hinduism is a flawed terminilogy.... Sindhusim is equally flawed.... The word is Sanatan Dharm... Thats the real name of the religion

c) Jai Bharat anyday.... 😉

Originally posted by: qwertyesque

true but does name matter they have screw*d many states and cities by renaming to the point i dont cant pronounce some of them... its better they leave it as they are...

but bharat looks elegant - even bharat rajya sounds elegant... Bharat India,.....bharat... hmmm...you are right bharat is elegant... and alphabetically we are before china and just after America.. maye be if like vastu there is something like namstu which can change our fortune after renaming.... sounds really great.. 😉

ur missing the point... theres no need to rename... 😆😆 Bharat is THE name... Just tht it isnt used.... Isnt used half as much as India is... even domestically

Originally posted by: Maya_M

Is India or Indian a racial slur? NO.

Well... Its how a word is percieved.... Negro and Indian were names bestowed by foreigners....
Just tht Indians never considered the word offensive... Negro was considered a racial slur... Just like *Paki* would be considered a racial slur these days... Though its hardly more than a short form for Pakistani... I have a coupla Pakistani friends... The surprising part is Pakistanis living in Pakistan have no major problems being called Paki... But the Indians and Pakistanis living in the UK have a BIG problem with it!!

But the sad thing is... Forgetting ur real identity addressing urself with a name thts been given by some total stranger... The word was essentially used for conveinence... But just tht its usage has gone soo deep tht the real name has been forgotten....

hindu and india both the words are originated from 'sindh' river ... which now is in pakistan ... so pakistan deserves the name 'india' more than the indians :p