Guest guest Posted June 7, 2004 Report Share Posted June 7, 2004 INDOLOGY, alexandra_108 <alexandra_108> wrote: > So from the viewpoint of sacred geography, Sri Lanka may be seen as part of Bharata Mata? Sacred geography of Bharata and Hinduism are not identical, even though largely coincidental. Places in Srilanka as well as Nepal are part of the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2004 Report Share Posted June 7, 2004 Alexandra, It would be unwise to make a comment on what parts of South Asia were parts of Bhaarat/India. You must define the period. Thousands of years back, Sri Lanka and parts of South East Asia were one large land mass. Interestingly, in the recent past, Nepal has been independent for longer than India - the British ruled India but never Nepal. As far back as the Mahaabhaarata, Afghanistan was a part of 'collective' Bhaarat.Central Asia could have been too ... but we need a definite time frame to answer this question. Smarth alexandra_108 <alexandra_108 wrote: As I see it its a matter of time also. For when Afganisthan was part of India for long ages, it depends on when you locate the beginn of (ancient) India. Alexandra peekayar wrote: Why Afganistan is excluded from old India? Here is what Nehru says. "Afganistan, which for long ages was part of India, was now cut off and became part of Nadir Shah's dominions. Some time afterwards a local rebellion resulted in the murder of Nadir Shah by a group of his own officers and Afganistan became an independent state." Discovery of India. alexandra_108 wrote: So from the viewpoint of sacred geography, Sri Lanka may be seen as part of Bharata Mata? INDOLOGY/ INDOLOGY Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2004 Report Share Posted June 7, 2004 And Malaysia, Campuchia and Indonasia were part of kingdoms in India too [cholas] once upon a time so could the greeks claim India too as being part of greece. So time frame is really important I think. > Alexandra, > > It would be unwise to make a comment on what parts of South Asia were > parts of > Bhaarat/India. You must define the period. Thousands of years back, Sri > Lanka > and parts of South East Asia were one large land mass. Interestingly, in > the > recent past, Nepal has been independent for longer than India - the > British > ruled India but never Nepal. > > As far back as the Mahaabhaarata, Afghanistan was a part of 'collective' > Bhaarat.Central > Asia could have been too ... but we need a definite time frame to answer > this > question. > > Smarth > > > > alexandra_108 <alexandra_108 wrote: > As I see it its a matter of time also. > For when Afganisthan was part of India for long ages, it depends on when > you > locate the beginn of (ancient) India. > > Alexandra > > peekayar > wrote: > Why Afganistan is excluded from old India? > > Here is what Nehru says. > > "Afganistan, which for long ages was part of India, was now cut off and > became > part of Nadir Shah's dominions. Some time afterwards a local rebellion > resulted > in the murder of Nadir Shah by a group of his own officers and > Afganistan became > an independent state." Discovery of India. > > alexandra_108 wrote: > So from the viewpoint of sacred geography, Sri Lanka may be seen as part > of > Bharata Mata? > > > > Sponsor > > > > Links > > > INDOLOGY/ > > > INDOLOGY > > > > > > > > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger > > Links > > > > Sponsor > > > Links > > > INDOLOGY/ > > > INDOLOGY > > -- /*With eyes that speak of the Stars, and magick my very soul, A Dragon I am Eternal.*/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.