page
of
1
Poor Saif Ali Khan isn't getting any support here for his tukde tukde views. Looks like gang of chrislamocommies of the forum have lost the steam to fight for their ideology. #Acchedin
what's wrong with him
Does he not know the concept of akhand bhaarat
It was called Jambu dweepa,
Chandragupta Maurya , Asoka etc ruled over entire India stretching from Afganisthan, Pakistan to Sri Lanka
Afganisthan is called Gandhar desh (Gandharvas were beautiful celestials and that is true also, people from Afganistan , Pakistan are really beautiful )
We have recorded history from thousands of years of Akhand bhaarat. We have prayers which specifically detail the borders of India.
Saif go back to London. You belong there.
Originally posted by: arnavfluffywhat's wrong with him
Does he not know the concept of akhand bhaarat
It was called Jambu dweepa,
Chandragupta Maurya , Asoka etc ruled over entire India stretching from Afganisthan, Pakistan to Sri Lanka
Afganisthan is called Gandhar desh (Gandharvas were beautiful celestials and that is true also, people from Afganistan , Pakistan are really beautiful )
We have recorded history from thousands of years of Akhand bhaarat. We have prayers which specifically detail the borders of India.
Saif go back to London. You belong there.
This is historically inaccurate. While those dynasties did rule large chunks of the subcontinent, there was never a ruler who ruled the entirety of it, with or without Sri Lanka. Parts of south were forced to pay tribute to the Mauryas, but they weren't full members of the empire. Sort of like what the Brits later did to their colonies. What was said in the quoted post would be like saying those Indians were British. No, they weren't. British conquered those lands. Same with Mauryas.
Also, Jambudvipa in the original sense meant the entire planet, not India. Ashoka used it to refer to his realm... still not entire India.
Even during Mahabharata days, Dakshinavarta was separate. That was the whole point of Yudhishtira's imperial campaign (to unite the subcontinent, north to south, east to west).
Originally posted by: arnavfluffywhat's wrong with him
Does he not know the concept of akhand bhaarat
It was called Jambu dweepa,
Chandragupta Maurya , Asoka etc ruled over entire India stretching from Afganisthan, Pakistan to Sri Lanka
Afganisthan is called Gandhar desh (Gandharvas were beautiful celestials and that is true also, people from Afganistan , Pakistan are really beautiful )
We have recorded history from thousands of years of Akhand bhaarat. We have prayers which specifically detail the borders of India.
Saif go back to London. You belong there.
The problem with liberals has always been they don't the raw human nature and have this unrealistic utopia syndrome, every powerful ruler in Indian subcontinent dreamed of ruling the whole Indian subcontinent, they just don't get it. But that is because we have been taught so much in school syllabus about the merits of British rule, one of which was, "the common hatred against colonial rulers, united the Indian subcontinent", forgetting that whether Mughals or Sultanate or Mauryas or Guptas or Maratha or Harsha among others, everyone strived for whole Indian subcontinent.
Originally posted by: MahanalayakKarn
This is historically inaccurate. While those dynasties did rule large chunks of the subcontinent, there was never a ruler who ruled the entirety of it, with or without Sri Lanka. Parts of south were forced to pay tribute to the Mauryas, but they weren't full members of the empire. Sort of like what the Brits later did to their colonies. What was said in the quoted post would be like saying those Indians were British. No, they weren't. British conquered those lands. Same with Mauryas.
Also, Jambudvipa in the original sense meant the entire planet, not India. Ashoka used it to refer to his realm... still not entire India.
Even during Mahabharata days, Dakshinavarta was separate. That was the whole point of Yudhishtira's imperial campaign (to unite the subcontinent, north to south, east to west).
yes they didn't ruled entire sub continent but the goals was always to unite the whole subcontinent. Maratha also strived for that, the context in which Saif is talking. So this concept of entire country being a British thing isn't accurate either.
Originally posted by: RegressiveThug
yes they didn't ruled entire sub continent but the goals was always to unite the whole subcontinent. Maratha also strived for that, the context in which Saif is talking. So this concept of entire country being a British thing isn't accurate either.
I wasn't talking about Saif, only the quoted post. Saif Ali Khan isn't as smart as he thinks he is.
Problem when refuting an argument is that the counter needs to be scrupulously accurate. Or it muddies the waters. That was the point I was trying to make. Basically, (not you) don't exhibit the same level of ignorance as whatshisname.
After doing a PhD in genetics and eugenics, Prof. Saif is trying his hands at Indian subcontinent's history.
Originally posted by: FreeTheNippleAfter doing a PhD in genetics and eugenics, Prof. Saif is trying his hands at
Indiansubcontinent's history.
He thinks he's smart. In his defense, his comparison is KKK.
comment:
p_commentcount