patrick.net

Rin says

indc says

Rin say India is always a bitch

For a person who's only contributed a tidbit here & there, I'm being rather focused upon, as if I'm the 80%.

BTW, I'd told my Parsi friend to listen to the above, which he did. Here's the thing, his grandparents were Zoroastrians and thus, don't have anything vested in the so-called Islamic Golden Age, which he and others believe, never existed. Islamic scholasticism was the theft of Persia and Byzantine.

Plus, the story of Alexander is kinda lame in the sense that Alexander's armies which went into today's Pakistan/India area were from middle Persia and not Greece/Macedonia, at that point in time. So sure, it was the last expedition of a person who'd spent much of his resources, defeating Darius. And like anyone who'd overextended himself, he lost everything on his way to Babylon, through the southern Iranian deserts but so what? ... ma...

I didnt want to pick on you because you are a level headed guy who doesn't want to be stuck in a rat race of propagating your genes. But here come the truth bombs;
Rin says: India was always a bitch to white hordes from its north-west. Even Alexander the great came and conquered India.
When given counter argument: Oh Alexander is a spent force using only mercenaries from persia so obviously he lost.

I dont care about history of the world until you bring it to my shore. I care even less about islam. Just want it to be eliminated or modernised.

Do you even know history of zoroastrianism? Zoroaster was follower of a religion similar to hinduism. Then he created his own religion.
https://www.history.com/topics/religion/zoroastrianism

You think the fire temple idea came out of the blue to him. No he copied what he already has see mostly. Because FIre is an important element of Hinduism.
So yes all those places you listed are influenced by Hinduism. You think it is a coincidence that their name ends with -stan? its a sanskrit word for "place" Which could be root for "stand"

When they were kicked out by muslim hordes where did they go to India. And what did they say We are your sister religion and we will melt into your "culture" please accept us.

When was buddha born before 400bce. Was he a hindu when he was born yes. Did he quote vedas yes. So he created his ideas from hinduism?
Was buddhism at the border with persia yes because it was propagated by the mauryan kings. It was in china too and all over India.

And who are you calling shamanistic. Is that what you are taught? No wonder you dont want to believe hinduism is older than buddhism.
It had all codified laws even before anything was happening in europe. And why cant europe and norther Asia doesn't have any culture. Because they were under a huge ice cap until 12000 years ago and mostly had neanderthals living there.

And I wanted you to listen to the his-story lesson because what they were talking about happened atleast 5000yrs ago. Much before zoraster in persia.

indc says

Ok lets make a deal you watch the video and make a comment on what you think of it. I promise I will reply to everyone of your comments?

No deal. As I already explained in my previous post, I'm not interested in adding to the view count of a youtube video that you bring. If you have a counter-point to what I wrote, make the point here in your own words.

I too dont care about maps but how do you explain that to people who dont even know abcs of other civilization. We need to debunk their narratives through their own lenses.

You are the one who brought 260BC map and 400AD map in an attempt to prove India was a united country in 1600AD and 1760AD. Either you are utterly clueless or you are a nationalistic propagandist accustomed to lying.

Indian "culture" spread all the way from west asia to southeast-asia and far-east asia. And there is no record of anyone forcing it on them.

Many cultures spread across a wide area and inter-space with other cultures. The Vendic culture very much came from outside of modern day Hindustan and was imposed on the natives by force.

But people like Rin say India is always a bitch. People of sword only understand the meaning of sword. And think whole world will respect and listen to only it.

Governments throughout history were almost always imposed by "the sword" . . . that is not to say people fighting each other to have their turn at manipulating the government machinery necessarily lead a happier life than those who try to stay away from tyrannic governments. Large land-based political monopolies tend to become corrupt and inefficient very quickly (within a handful of generations), therefore frequently had to be replaced by a more efficient "new bureaucracy" (i.e. dumping the old existing bureaucrats / monopolists), especially given the general antipathy of the ruled harbor towards their own rulers after a few decades of monopolistic exploitation; that's why big continental countries tend to have frequent invasions, conquests by foreigners, internal revolutions and fragmentation/unification cycles.

Ok, so here it is ... Zoroaster, let's say the father of the Persian culture, if not nation, was a 'northeast' Vedic guy before ancient era nation-states were delineated.

I'm guessing that the above statement is your counter thrust to the Parsi guy's theory.

If so, it still doesn't change what happened in the centuries ahead ... the kings leading to Cyrus (the Great) built an Imperial state from today's Pakistan, to Kazakhstan, west out to Ukraine & Greece, and southwest out to Sudan/Ethiopia. Can you name an Empire larger than that, which survived for centuries (albeit w/ Roman rivalry) up until Islam?

So was Cyrus's Supersized Empire, an extension of India's Religious 'Imperial Largess' to the rest of the known ancient world?

And yes, the argument that Alexander the Great only defeated Darius's dynasty is really, the only true damage which that remarkable ancient Empire sustained prior to Abu Bakr's barbarian hordes. Alexander's generals had to retain the old Persian system, starting a new dynasty, after both kings were deads. This also happened to China, between family lines, which is why China was one nation between 220 BC and 1900 AD, and I suppose since foreign stakeholders were only on the coastline, it stayed one nation till today. In Persia's case, it was between Cyrus (~550 BC) and Yazdegrid III (~650 AD). There was no Persian Empire afterwards.

And as for India, didn't Alexander defeat Porus in conflict? Sure, Alexander left shortly afterwards, since his men were completely exhausted and then, he proceeded to lose his entire army in the southern Iranian deserts but how's that important?

Let me be more succinct in my comparison ... elements of Hatha Yoga are practiced in many nations worldwide today. And yes, that even includes Joseph Pilate's workout as his original source material was Hatha Yoga, along with some western physical culture.

With that said, most of these practitioners are not considered Hindus (and/or overseas Indians), even though some elements deriving from Hinduism are in their daily lives.

And thus, one can't say that the nationalistic/spiritual torchbearers of Zoroaster, a.k.a Cyrus the Great and all the emperors (before the Caliphate) which succeeded him, are of Indian origin due to Zo's education of Vedic scrolls.

And yes, in the west, Pilates is considered one of the best conditioning programs out there. So I guess it's time to hand Joe an Indian passport for all of his efforts in getting yoga into the hands of countless nations. FYI, I use a lot of Pilates and yes, it's great for toning, balance, and building core strength.