@@saptarsi7868 few years ago I saw a video on TH-cam where a Pakistani senior person was claiming that Yoga was invented in Pakistan during International Yoga Day 🤣😂😂😂
@@descendantofbharatbharatva7155 don't pay heed to those clowns. They will call themselves arab and turks and at the same time will claim thay indus valley civilization is pakistan's history 🤣
Study - Participate in our Tradition - Promote our culture as much as possible - Become rich(with honesty) - Buy Swadeshi and promote swadeshi -Know about Financial planning and investing in the Indian share market - Make our country proud individually and collectively - Overall This is our National Duty. We have to do this.
Ang Pradesh is in Bihar people here still speak "Angika", he is believed to do "Chaat Puja" which makes complete sense when we know he is "Surya Putra" karna. 🇮🇳🙏❤️
As a practioner of Buddhism ☸ let me clarify once and for all about Buddha being born in Nepal 🇳🇵 debate. It's true that Prince Siddhartha Gautama was born in Lumbani but at that time, Lumbani was just a thick forest through which his mother queen Maha Maya was passing by in order to get to her parents kingdom. Prince Siddhartha only attained enlightenment after meditation in Bodhgaya for a long time and that is where he became the Buddha. All practioners of Buddhism consider Bodhgaya as the most sacred Buddhist site for that is where he attained enlightenment, not Lumbani. Not to say that Lumbani isn't sacred but as far as the most sacred site for Buddhists is concerned, it's Bodhgaya.
Finally, someone with common sense. Hope more Buddhists read their actual texts & history instead of repeating imaginary stories invented by politicians.
@ironman-nq7zs nice imaginary propaganda. None of the stuff you wrote has any proof. Lumbini is not even the top 3 most visited religious locations. Read any of the actual Buddhist texts from earliest periods. Buddha himself claimed that he was multiple Hindu avatars in previous birth & uses the same deities & sages as mentioned in Hindu texts. You people just love to claim stuff you have 0 idea about.
@@Fe-ironman nice shifting goalposts. Because you cannot prove what you claimed, you are now making up another imaginary quote. Show me when & where did he say that? Were all followers of buddha from Afghanistan to Japan idiots that they made statues of him? Maybe you should open your eyes & see there exists multiple sects within your own religion, o bhante., which you ignore because they don't suit your political agenda.😂😂
@@Fe-ironmanispute being never colonised directly you have been poor through history and still most poor nation on the planet. And to put cherry on top you want to claim so much but your girls are going freek for Bollywood songs, Punjabi boys and now even copying Indian wedding cultural events like haldi. And still you got balls to talk crap
Karna was ruler of anga Anga pradesh is today's East bihar Here's language is also called angika and there is also a fort in munger which is said to be of karna and there is a bath where karna gave his kundal to indra. It was up to bengal but munger was his capital where he used to stay
According to Puranic legends, the Ānava King Bali requested Rishi Dīrghatamas Māmateya to raise a few wise sons through his wife Sudeṣṇā. Rishi Dīrghatamas had five children, namely, Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Punḍra and Suhma from Sudeṣṇā. The kingdom of Bali (Balia of Uttar Pradesh) was divided into his five children. Thus, five janapadas in the names of Aṅga (east of Magadha), Vaṅga (South Bengal), Kaliṅga (Orissa), Punḍra (North Bengal) and Suhma (Bangladesh) came into existence during the early Rigvedic period and Aṅga emerged as Mahājanapada. King Aṅga and his descendants reigned over the Aṅga janapada. King Bṛhadratha, son of Uparichara Vasu of the Kuru dynasty reigned over Aṅga janapada during the Rigvedic era as indicated in Mahābhārata. Karna became the king of Aṅga during the Mahābhārata era. The Bṛhadratha kings of Magadha dominated over Aṅga in the post Mahābhārata era but the Aṅga kingdom had survived till the lifetime of Buddha.
Buddha was Nepali but hey Mughals, Turks etc were Indians since some entitled elite class proponents claims that "they became us"🤲🤲🤲 even though in reality they never considered them as Indians. This is the level of consciousness that is indoctrinated in the minds of Indians. According to Puranic legends, the Ānava King Bali requested Rishi Dīrghatamas Māmateya to raise a few wise sons through his wife Sudeṣṇā. Rishi Dīrghatamas had five children, namely, Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Punḍra and Suhma from Sudeṣṇā. The kingdom of Bali (Balia of Uttar Pradesh) was divided into his five children. Thus, five janapadas in the names of Aṅga (east of Magadha), Vaṅga (South Bengal), Kaliṅga (Orissa), Punḍra (North Bengal) and Suhma (Bangladesh) came into existence during the early Rigvedic period and Aṅga emerged as Mahājanapada. King Aṅga and his descendants reigned over the Aṅga janapada. King Bṛhadratha, son of Uparichara Vasu of the Kuru dynasty reigned over Aṅga janapada during the Rigvedic era as indicated in Mahābhārata. Karna became the king of Aṅga during the Mahābhārata era. The Bṛhadratha kings of Magadha dominated over Aṅga in the post Mahābhārata era but the Aṅga kingdom had survived till the lifetime of Buddha.
Buddha was not Nepalese and Karna was not Bangladeshi. Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis, because Nepal and Bangladesh did NOT exist when Buddha and Karna were alive - ONLY Bharat existed at that time and there were many different kingdoms in Bharat at that time. India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words: "The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis." So there you have it, Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Nepalese nationalists can keep seething. lol
Mark Tully is a Bengali because he was born in Calcutta! And Manmohan Singh is a Pakistani. Shudhodhan's actual kingdom was in UP even by today's map. Maybe Buddha's mother, Maha Maya, can be claimed as Nepali anachronistically.
@@buddhaneverest Ancestors of Shakyas came from Ayodhya. Also Nepali population was not alienated from Indian population. They had marital relationships .
Well no one is really saying that Buddha was "Nepalese". The modern "Nepalese" (I personally prefer "Nepali", but that is beside the point) identity is barely 300 years old but, the culture groups that form modern day Nepal include at the very least 2 mahajanapadas that were existent during Buddhas time. Buddha was born in a place that in modern day falls in Nepal, Lumbini. This is undisputed fact. Another point is that Nepal is the only state aside from India that still holds on to its identity as a people of the "Bharat Varsh" in the subcontinent. Other countries of the indian subcontinent, namely Pakistan and Bangladesh are happy to let the modern day state of India formed in 1947 claim all the heritage of the Sanatan dharma and its culture because they identify as muslims. If Pakistanis continued to pride themselves as descendents of the people of the land of Takshasheela, they would claim of to be part of their identity. But they dont, they identify themselves as descendents of muslim rulers who came here from the middle east, which is perfectly fine, but is also the reason they do not mind not being associated with the canonical history of the subcontinent. We Nepali (atleast the hindus living in the Terai and Pahads) continue to see ourselves as part of the "Bharat Varsh" which is why we claim Buddha to be part of our history and heritage. Buddha is not exclusively Nepal's, that is a stupid idea. He is a product of the spiritual and philosophical heritage of this land, just like how Adi Sankaracharya was and Raja Janak was. Karna was not Indian or Bangladeshi. He was born in a kingdom which falls partly in todays Bihar and partly in Bangladesh. It is illogical to think of ancient subcontinental figures as being of a modern day state. At the end of the day, what is important is we respect each others emotions best we can.
Thank you. Nationalism gets in the way of the history and the (respecting of) ancestry that has, indeed, shaped or formed the present day nations. As well as acknowledging certain fair and just leaders claiming land and peoples for betterment of future prospects (of course in which there have also been unjust leaders). In which the future is not written -- borders, civilisations, kingdoms and states have changed time and again; it is not set in stone that it will stay as is. It's even more likely that in the next 100 years some major shifts will take place again. But people's identities and reclamation of heritage can certainly be a motivator for a desire or need to future change.
if you have your permanent resident in certain country like india or nepal and live there then you will be indian or neapli. by that logic isn't Lord Shiv become chinese, he lives in mt kailash i.e. in now days tibet- china🙃
Shiva isn't Chinese, Shiva is a Bharati. What is now Tibet was originally a part of Bharat. Buddha was not Nepalese and Karna was not Bangladeshi. Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis, because Nepal and Bangladesh did NOT exist when Buddha and Karna were alive - ONLY Bharat existed at that time and there were many different kingdoms in Bharat at that time. India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words: "The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis." So there you have it, Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Nepalese nationalists can keep seething. lol
@@Rishi123456789 bro I don't get you guys how come you say everything thing was part of India and you are still poor in every aspects. Try to respect all religions before focusing on Buddha or shiva or ram Such a marvellous empire bharat khanda and can't stand against the british
@@Rishi123456789 bharat with the context of vishnu puran then it is are right but i refferd in the context of shiva being chinese in mordern day term in perspective of countires like nepal, india or china and their resident nepali, indian or chinese. And thanks for not using term india or indain in the first paragraph.
@@lautheimpaler4686 Tibet is a part of Ancient Bharat and (unfortunately) Modern China. India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words: "The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis." So there you have it, Tibet was a part of Bharat because Tibet is in the Himalayas and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Also, the holy mountain home of our Hindu god Shiva is Mount Kailash and Mount Kailash is in Tibet. Also, major rivers of Bharat/India like the Indus river (which India is named after), the Ganges river and the Brahmaputra river all originate in Tibet. Also, the Dalai Lama is widely considered by Tibetans to be the spiritual leader of Tibet and the Dalai Lama is a Buddhist. In fact, most Tibetans in general are Buddhists and Buddhism originated in Bharat/India. Also, the Tibetan script belongs to the Indic family of scripts (which is also known as the Brahmic family of scripts).
@AbhijitChavda To start with, to say Buddha was Nepalese and Buddha was born in Nepal are two different things if we analyze in broad historical spectrum. Ram was born in Ayodhya which is in India, Ravana was born in Sri-Lanka. It would not be possible or practical to say where Ravana was born if we do not say Sri-Lanka. It's a way of communication also. If some European talk, they say all three were born in Asia even though there was no such term as Asia at that time. BTW in your opinion where was Gandhi born and was Gandhi Indian then? What about Bhagat Singh and Subhas Chandra Bose?
@@rahulterwade Please read carefully what I wrote in my first comment. I did not say anybody Nepalese or Indian. Where was Ghengis Khan born? Mongolia, where was Lao Tse born? China - that's all. I do not say them Mongolian or Chinese respectively. BTW you should have replied my 2 questions before questioning me further.
you are right I agree with you. the concept of nation state is very new. the best way we can refer to that land is Indian subcontinent or South Aisa.. it is a little arrogant and biased to say that before Nepal, it was nothing but India referring to not the Ancient but current nation of India.. I'm saying that being Indian
If Carthage had sent army and supplies to Hannibal instead of defending the Spanish front they would have had Rome in their hands and the world hostory would be different now
#askabhijit Was there a civilization contemporary to Sindu saraswati civilization in the Gangatic plains?? how old is vedic civilization exactly? was it contemporary, before or after Sindhu saraswati civilization? what is exactly the link between sindhu saraswati civilization and Vedic civilization?
According to Buddhist tradition, he was born in Lumbini, in what is now Nepal,[b] to royal parents of the Shakya clan, but renounced his home life to live as a wandering ascetic (Sanskrit: śramaṇa).[7][h] After leading a life of begging, asceticism, and meditation, he attained enlightenment at Bodh Gaya in what is now India. From Wikipedia
"Buddha was not born in Nepal. He was 'born' in Bihar, India. Prince Siddhartha was born in Nepal and he became Buddha by attaining Nirvana in Bihar" You are correct and I completely agree with you. Siddhartha Gautama founded the religion of Buddhism in the city of Gaya, which is a part of Bihar and Bihar is in India. Buddha was not Nepalese and Karna was not Bangladeshi. Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis, because Nepal and Bangladesh did NOT exist when Buddha and Karna were alive - ONLY Bharat existed at that time and there were many different kingdoms in Bharat at that time. India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words: "The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis." So there you have it, Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Nepalese nationalists can keep seething. lol
Sir Anga is actually Andhra pradesh. In sarala Mahabharat it is mentioned. Anga Banga and Kalinga . Anga is Andhra , banga is Bengal and Kalinga is Odisha
As per my knowledge Anga is eastern Bihar, western Bengal. Even today there is Angika language in present day Purnea- Malda districts. Vanga is Eastern Bengal and Kalinga is coastal south Odisha and north Andhra.
Let's get to the little more backwards in time. The species Homosapiens are from the African continent which Mr. Abhijit Chavda also happens to mentioned in his certain video. Acoording to his theory all the humans are African by default. So Lord Gautam Buddha and Karna was not Nepali, not Indian but African..
At the time of early humans(migration from Africa) there was no concept of nationality or civilisation. So you are wrong either way. Also at that time, there were no difference races of humans. There were only dark skinned humans. We are talking about a time after new races of humans were established(caucasians, mongloids, Indian, Africans etc).
@@phoenixj1299 sorry brother if i hurt your feelings. i am just putting my thought in sarcastic way and criticizing Mr AC statement. Lord Gautam Buddha was born in Nepal. At the time of gautham budhha there was no nation as india or bharat or a single nation called aakhanda bharat. the Prince Siddartha Gautam was born in seperate nation ruled by the King Suddhodhan and Queen Mayadevi. which was then conqured later and became part of india and now in Nepal. So Lord Gautam buddha was born in nepal. And i have a question if you have your permanent resident in certain country like india or nepal and live there then you will be indian or neapli. by that logic isn't Lord Shiv become chinese because he lives in mt kailash i.e. in now days china tibet.
@@Shreeshantato begin with there was no African itself, they were homo sapien. You contradict yourself. African, indian , Chinese all these term established because they had civilization. Nepal was always part of earlier indian kingdoms. Script of nepali is itself indian. Culture of nepal is indian. Nothing new in Nepal which in India doesn't exist.
@@Shreeshanta I agree with you bro I am not against anyone but I see Indian people are very blind for religious sentiments I see country like Nepal where they respect each and every religion And then I see India who shouts for Buddha born in India but are andabhakts Hindus who cannot respect other religions
I am from Nepal and I agree with what you said about Buddha not being Nepalese. But by your logic, he is not Indian as well. The current state of India did not exist before 1947 AD. Buddha was born in the Shakya kingdom. Your videos consider the modern day India and the ancient region of India of having the same meaning. Historically, India was a cultural and political region that encompassed much of the Indian subcontinent, including present-day India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, and parts of Afghanistan. The region was ruled by various empires and dynasties over the centuries, including the Maurya, Gupta, Mughal, and British empires. But these empires have eventually collapsed into smaller nations just like what we have now. Claiming Nepal has always been a part of India gives the narrative that the modern day India has claims to Nepal. I fully support the idea of Nepal always being a part of the ancient region of India not as a truly Independant nation but as a vassal state to much larger Empires in the region. Culturally we are the same.
@@Ishant007 Āryāvarta is not a country but a subcontinent. Will you consider Europe a country? Nepal has existed for at least 2000 years. It was a lot smaller back then. During the time of the Gupta Empire, the Indian emperor Samudragupta recorded Nepal as a "frontier kingdom" which paid an annual tribute. Even the Mahabharata mentions the Kirat People of Nepal.
@@griwankhakurel1687 "By your logic, he is not Indian as well." Wrong. India is not just a post-colonial nation-state. 'Indian' is also a cultural, ethnic and even racial identity. Not just internally but also identitied as such by outsiders for thousands of years. "East Indian" is still what you tick when filling forms in western countries irrespective of whether you're Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan, Nepali, Maldivian or whatever else. India is a civilizational state unlike other nation-states in the subcontinent. If saying Buddha is Indian and what is today Nepal has been a part of India for most of history makes you insecure that it "gives the narrative that modern day India has claims to Nepal", then that is an issue of you not being able to cope with reality and facts. It does not imply a claim over the territory of modern-day Nepal by the Union of India, apart from in some deranged people's heads.
@@thedescanteer Yes exactly. Its a racial and cultural identity. But the country India did not exist before. But if you say Buddha was Indian, the cultural identity then yeah I agree. But you cannot say he is an Indian, the citizen of present day nation. What if Mexicans claim they are American, because they are north american. But are they entitled to the ctitizenship of the nation America. If you use words that can have different meaning it can get tricky. I will never say Buddha is Nepalese. That is nonesense. The country Nepal has existed for 2000 years at least, before the British. We were able to expand on the smaller countries that surrounded Nepal. We got into war with the British once we messed with their borders. Historically the north Indian region from Gandhar to Anga has been different independent smaller countries. Like Nepal, Banaras, Kashmir, Sikkim. These were countries which were sometime part of a larger empire like the Gupta or Maurya. But is the current nation state of India a continuation of these ancient empire? Or did we inherit our borders from the British empire which Nepal was never a part of.
Q1) what guides the nature to always evolve in the betterment of the organisms, does it implies that nature has some sort of a hidden mighty brain or something is incorporated in our non coding part of DNA that had any unknown function?
Its like saying bhagat singh was pakistani bcoz the place he was born is located in punjab but if u ask bhagat singh he doesn't even know a nation like pakistan exist
What is your opinion on a historical proof of ramayana that there is a mountain in Sri Lanka which has the same vegetation and properties that of Himalayan mountains and showing that hanuman ji brought it from Himalayas jai Shri ram 🙏
ppl dont understand the concept of nation state and civilisation.nepal and bangladesh r part of indic civilisation now they r nation state,now our region has also became nation state of india,but the term india is not defined for nation state or particular region ppl..similarly origin of indic civilsisation began in indus valley(possibly) which is today in so called nation of pakistan.
Ha fir to taliabn bhi afghanistan ka buddha murti par hakk jatayega Turkey ka hakk hai Greek history par Par jabh wo log khud ko mange hi nahi nahi unka culture religion rehan sahen wo log kese khud ko buddhist or greek bata sakte hai
@@shirokun4742 afganistan was itself part of indic civilization specially during buddha era,it was completely india and turkey has been a part of greek civilization itself go learn first the country turkey came very later.. similarly there was nothing called nepal or nepali at buddhas era,pali was a language which was spoken in modern region of nepal and northern part of india,the pali script still use by both nepali and hindi today
Just look at the Nepali School texts books, they have no ancient history, even if they have made it some by their own, so I don't blame Nepali people for their ignorance, they were never taught about that, it's just like the students of Pakistan's Punjab province where students actually believes Hindustan was a part of Pakistan, and they have won all the wars, but in reality before 14th August 1947 Pakistan didn't exist. I wonder if Nepali people from Nepal actually know that there is a major chunk of Nepali speaking people live in India.
Hello, I am from Afghanistan. I am Persian (Tajik). Persians are being murd6rd in Afghanistan by the Tal!ban ( Tal!ban are Pashtuns). How do u see the Future of the Tal!ban and AFG. Is their (Tal!ban) gvnt going to last long? What if the gvnt in Iran changes? How would that effect AFG.
Prithvi Narayan Shah wasn't even born so how could it be Nepal? Also in Nepali exams, if the question says, where was buddha raised and you wrote Nepal, you are not getting that point. It's Kapilvastu for those who want a point. I am a Nepali and had been making this point for years because what we are so nationalistic about, didn't exist when our gods did.
Buddha was born in Nepal but he wasn't from Nepal. The reason he was born in Nepal was because his mother was travelling to her maternal home and he was born in midway which falls in Nepal. He was a Shakya, A Suryavanshi Kshatriya from Kapilvastu (now in Piprahawa, Up) Which was then part of Ancient Vajji Republic of Magadh. So yes, he was born in Nepal its a Fact but He was From India and Lived his entire Life in India.
During Nepal whole was a kingdom India wasn't yet formed at that time. Today's India was divided into various princely states. The east India company merged the princely states and ruled there.After the 1947 when British rule ended , Sardar Ballav Vai Patel Convinced the princely states to join India. After that only India was formed.It is relatively new country compared to Nepal.
Sir I think "Anga rajya" is situated in present Bihar ( champaran district) , not in bengal. I'm a Bengali . Present West Bengal and Bangladesh was part of "Paundra Vardhan Dynasty" ,, I think.
Hi, abhijit. Its alrite to discuss history with you as you seem to be balanced. I have heard many podcasts feat. you and I learn and enjoy everytime. yes!, the emphasis on bhagwan buddha being of nepali origin nowadays is a nationalist borderline racist rant, i agree, but factually speaking, he was born in 'present day nepal'. if there was no nepal then, say, there was no india (as a country) then too. seondly, when i was a student in the university, a fellow hosteller, an american from kansas, mr mark lenny, was doing his thesis (in banaras hindu univ.) about karna and anga desh. his research was extensive, he managed to visit ruins and traces of even the smallest temples of remote villages, and he undertook a long 10 plus years of research where he said anga desh was in present day bihar neighbouring UP. not present day bangladesh.
@@Ram-gj7ws First of all, you should remove the name of our holy deity. And lastly don't do this kind of nuisance over here, go spread your propaganda in some other Anti-hindu channel.
#AskAbhijit What if Asian Union happens in the Future like uniting countries like India , China , Bangladesh , Pak , Nepal , And other south Asian countries like Indonesia , Japan , Mongolia , Tai , Singapore , South Korea etc.... What are the outcomes in the geopolitical perspective Please can you explain sir like economy , currency standards etc...
Land can be conquered and claimed. Historically in this biases we override our timeline. Buddha - ‘three things cannot be long hidden; the sun, the moon and the truth’.
Namaste 🕉🙏🕉🙏::Buddhism the Buddha Dharma also known as Dharmavinaya is an Indian religion or philosophical tradition based on a series of original teachings that are attributed to Gautama Buddha (born Siddhārtha Gautama in the 5th century (BCE meaning Before Common Era), Originating in ancient India as a movement professing śramaṇa , Lord Gautama Siddhartha Buddha a indian prince from Kashtriya Hindu clan,,🕉🙏🕉🙏🕉🙏..
list out the similarities between hinduism and buddhism and also how the teachings of both converge into the idea of dharma im not against you just asking for knowledge saving my timw
@@Ram-gj7ws Hey, fool ever known of Shankaracharya who wrote UPANISHADS with his colleague guru's ? Actually it came out of Hinduism only, as mentioned in it Gautam Buddha was Siddharth. Who belonged to Kshatriya family (now don't argue on caste) which followed ideal Hinduism🚩
Buddhism is just a path within Sanatan Dharma (which is also known as Hinduism). Buddha was not Nepalese and Karna was not Bangladeshi. Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis, because Nepal and Bangladesh did NOT exist when Buddha and Karna were alive - ONLY Bharat existed at that time and there were many different kingdoms in Bharat at that time. India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words: "The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis." So there you have it, Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Nepalese nationalists can keep seething. lol
I see nothing wrong with thinking that karna was bengali, because it's a language, and they might have spoken some variation of it, because all indian languages have a common origin, but calling him bangladeshi is ridiculous af. 😂😂😂 Our neighbouring cats desperately want something rooted in history to make them also feel important 😝😝😝
Yes there is a lot of difference between bengal & Muslim leagues East Pakistan ...All they want the world to show they r OG bengalis who r actually converted brainwashed population
Bro, Bangladesh has almost erased its hindu ancestory... So dont expect such things Bangladesh would do like nepal... People here even dont consider themselves as Bengali because of the west Bengal hindu culture...
"But sadly no body will agree it." Wrong, I completely agree with everything that Abhijit said in this video. Buddha was not Nepalese and Karna was not Bangladeshi. Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis, because Nepal and Bangladesh did NOT exist when Buddha and Karna were alive - ONLY Bharat existed at that time and there were many different kingdoms in Bharat at that time. India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words: "The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis." So there you have it, Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Nepalese nationalists can keep seething. lol
No one is saying Buddha is Indian bro. Buddha was born in kapilvastu which is part of present day Nepal. Buddha is not Nepali that's the point. The name "India" is originally derived from the name of the river Sindhu (Indus River) and has been in use in Greek since Herodotus (5th century BCE). The term appeared in Old English as early the 9th century and reemerged in Modern English in the 17th century. Nepal was name of Kathmandu valley only not the whole region. Did u know gopala or abihira aka yadavas were once rules of Kathmandu then kirat then lichevvi and malla and then shah who conquered the whole region and named it Nepal. Thus Buddha was not Nepali nor he was indian. The place where siddhart gautama was born is part of present day Nepal The place where Siddhart Gautama became Budda is part of present day India. It's that simple Other facts did you know prithivi Narayan shah ansestor migrated in to Gorkha from Rajasthan lol
He was form Bihar search on Google and scriptures and listen local folklore, and people of that region still speak "Angika" and fighting for recognise it as scheduled language.
most of the freedom fighter comes from east bengal(bangladesh). bipin chandra pal, sri aurobindu ghose, batukeshawar dutt, surya sen, jagdish chandra bose, etc etc etc.
Yes but he was still born in modern day Nepal. That's a fact my brother whether you want to accept it or not. He was born within the lands that is know a homeland of the Nepali, a diverse group of people from northern south asia / MahaBharata.
Sir jaise aapne kaha ki Nepal 🇳🇵 1700s se pehle exist nahi karta to India 🇮🇳 kaise karta h? Agar Buddha Nepal me born nahi hue the to kushan empire indian empire kaise hua? Kushans were people migrated from North West China 🇨🇳 Kushan empire me modern day India ka part aata h to wo indian empire Modern day Nepal me Buddha ka janm hua to wo Nepali nahi?
We were part of same civilization often termed as Bharat, Aryavart... No nepal and India were there before 1947.. We are the part of the greatest civilization on the planet 🙏
I reckon we can say Buddha was born in modern day Nepal... Or present day Nepalese land ... And its very obvious that he wasn't Nepali ... As the country Nepal was just unified a few hundred years ago... So we couldn't technically say buddha was born in Nepal.. it just happenstance to be his place of birth is in the territory of Nepal.. now .
India wasn't formed at that time either. Nepal was formed much before than India modern day India was not as a whole in History. It was unified after British rule only and India and Pakistan got formed
@@buddhaneverestindia as we know it has been unified multiple times in the past. It was during the time of mahabharat, as well as ramayana. India is just a name, the same country did exist with just a different name. That's like saying this youtuber abhijit didn't exist in the past if he changes his name to something else( let's say he changes his name to nepali). Doesn't mean he didn't exist he existed with a different name. Race shouldn't matter in buddhism. The fact you named your profile containing buddha in the name. It's shameful to be giving physical features this much importance. I wouldn't have been like this if I was buddhist. And even when we consider the possibility that seperate states constituted ancient India during the time of buddha. They still had very clear idea that the people of different states still belong to a single but broad group- the aryan people. The thing that makes it even more evident is the fact that ancient indians had specific words to refer to foreigners but didn't use the word for people of ancient India. This proves that even if multiple factions existed in ancient india, there was stilla clear idea of belonging to one single group even with the distinctions.
there was no concept of Nepal before pirthivi narayan shah but the it was also not indians kathmandu valley was ruled by mallas ,gurkha by shahs,west by shains,lamjung by gurungs, but not indians or bartiya.
Bharta name is dated back to Mahabharat times also the battle of the ten Dasaraja war was won by the Bharta/ kuru tribes. So Bharta's name is almost 5k years old Also Buddha was not mongoloid at all. He was like a mainland Indian. He was dark-brown caucasoids.
By that logic historically far shout is always ruled by Cholas Cheras and Pandeyas. So how can they become Bharatiya? Bro you are also Bhartiya and be proud of it! उत्तरं यत् समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र सन्ततिः
Please do your research right on the origin of Nepal. Nation of Nepal is mentioned in the Puranas (Skanda Mahapurana: Himavat Khanda), so it existed at the time of Buddha. PN Shah just reunified Nepal. जय नेपाल 🇳🇵
As your concept, sir there was no nation as India was at that time. Based on your concept at that time no nation named India was there. All kingdom was free at that time
just to extend the argument, buddha was neither nepalese, nor indian, and by that i mean by nationality for very obvious reasons. When we say buddha was indian, we mean he is culturally a bharatiya, from the land of dharma, which is exactly the common link in all the regions of this subcontinent. was there a nepalese identity back when buddha was alive? how do you define the nepalese identity? its like sir said, linked to the formation of the nation of nepal in 17th century. the people in nepal, and in all of bharat, were and are considered as dharmic, or followers of dharma. due to this identity politics we forget we are the same people, albeit a few differences.
@Ex muslim cool 😎 my point being whatever name we use for our culture and identity, its what we were back then and so was buddha. Good to know tho, didnt know even greeks used to call us indians
@@truetoolAs a sri lankan i doubt about your Facts. Pls get your facts right. 🇱🇰 obviously he was Sri Lankan. He was mainly Adivasi veddada way before tamil came to sri lanka
#AskAbhijitji , how the past (history)is calculated, which type of calendar is used, what are the parameters. Our scriptures says the Ramayana(in tretayug) happened in hundreds of thousand years ago but in modern day they say it as 7000year ago. How to calculate the yuga cycle's in terms of solar years
what's the actual problem if people were saying buddha born in nepal not india. Yeah! world knows india and nepal are two different country but they have similar religion and culture. And if karna was ruling the present day of bangladesh then he should also be Bangladeshi if those people must be hindu that also living in bangladesh as bangladeshi not indians or bharatis.
Truly said Buddha wasn't born in Nepal. But neither was he born in India. India was only a united country after the British.There were many kingdoms in the past. Even during the Mahabharat ,the Pandavas had help from neighbouring kingdom for the army. Even the Kirats which ruled over present day Kathmandu had sent some help to the Pandavas.The Pandavas had fought the alongside many Armies against the Kauravas. By the same logic Akhand Bharat was never present. The most common thing binding most present day Indian states was the Sanatan Dharma. They had divided stated throughout most history.
To correct you Nepal has existed for thousands of years. What is Kathmandu now was Nepal since forever this is not a name Prithivi Narayan Shah came up with or something. But I am going to agree with you on the rest. Buddha was born in what is now present day Nepal which doesnt make him Nepali straight away but then again India as we know it didnt exist back then during his birth either so it doesnt make him Indian straight away. Ehhhh who cares now that im reading what I wrote, people should just focus on his teachings he definitely wouldnt want people arguing over such things.
Goddess Sita was also born in Janakpur,Nepal not present day of india.Every nepalese should admit that their was no border at that time like india and nepal because their were only kingdom not countries. They were named as their kingdom just like ma sita kingdom was called mithila raaja just like aayodha of lord ram.Hindu is the cetre of us not buddhism because buddha was also hindu before followers of buddha make another religion with him.
bhai buddha lai chindina vaneu ta? buddha lai timlenachiney pani timro 10 pusta le puja gareko thiyo ra timro aaune pusta le pani puja garne xa. alikati laaj sharam ta lagnu partho buddha lai chindina vannu aghi
He actually was....until he joined muslim league he was fighting for India freedom after he saw his chances to become pm were bleak he asked for land and resources and call it pakistan..
sir bangladeshi and bangali are not same things... yes if someone's mothertoung is bangla then he is bangali but end of the day Bangladesh is run by a Islamic parliament their constitution is accept islamic laws.... but in actual bangali culture there is no islamic influence ... todays bangladesh is not a representation of bangali community its representing the arabic version of bangali community ... i as a proud Hindu bangali bharatiyo (those three thing are equally important to me )don't accept Bangladesh
Fr, they don't represent any Bengali culture at all. That being Bengali title is just their Nationality. And Bengali was never supposed to be Nationality or something. It's just a culture among hundreds of cultures across Bharat.
Even though 😂 it doesn't represent bengali culture ...but outside India everyone knows that bengali culture = bangladeshi muslim culture. Because majority are bangladeshi muslims, bengali Hindus are minority. 66 percent of all Bengalis living in world are muslims and only 34 percent are Hindus. In coming days it will change more . So accept the fact.
@@rationalindian1409 that doesn't matter! Bengali culture means hindu culture...........if we accept otherwise then what's the diff between us and westerners?
If that's what people think about it then the people those take born in pakistan,bangladesh,afganistan,maynmar,,nepal shouldn't call themself pakistanis,bangladesdi,nepalese,etc because it was never a country before. Everyone are indians that british named it after capturing india. If that's the case then american should call themself british because their ancestor were from britain.
There is no nation state of Bharat(ie Republic of India) before 1947 AD and also there is no nation state of Nepal (ie kingdom of Gorkha ) before 1790 AD.
Okay sir Now let me tell you another logic... Britain united India and gifted it to you people. But still you people demonized Britain. And all that happened in 1947, that clearly means India was born in 1947, then do you mean that Buddha is less than 80 years old? We say Buddha was born in Nepal, but if you like talking about logic then we should say Buddha was born in our land.
I am sorry to say this but you are very wrong good sir. India has always existed. The nation-state of India is 76 years old, not India itself. The concept of a nation was non-existent pre French Revolution, so people back then, and historians today, grouped people based on shared culture history traditions and customs. It would be silly to say that North Korea and South Korea are two different regions compared to Korea just because they are politically divided for now. Similarly, saying that India is a gift from the British who mercifully united us is not only inaccurate, but a disgrace to the entire existence of this great land.
If buddha is indian then, lord Shiva, Mata Parvati, lord ganesha, kartik are chinese. And lord Hanuman is also said to be living in Tibet. So are they chinese. And there was Nepal from satya yug it was called satyavati, and other yugs too, you can Google it. And few days back the map during mahabharata time also shows there is Nepal. Hence proved.
Recently US Pentagon top official said that Iran will make 86.6 percent of enriched uranium which is enough for making an atomic bomb. Sir is it alarming and if it is than what actions US can/will take, can US is able to stop it if it happens. #AskAbhijit
Industrialization is the only solution to this issue. The government will have to actively working on expanding the industrial infrastructure of our economy.
This is result of past governments not building proper infrastructure which is making us play a catch up game with developed nations as we have missed the industrialization wave of 90s. This current government will have to spend crazy amount of money into building industrial infrastructure while still growing the economy in order to stop this cycle of playing catch up game with rest of the developed world. For example we recently found one of the largest (2nd largest i think) deposits of lithium in Jammu area but we lack the industrial technology and expertise to extract and turn this lithium in EV batteries and other products.
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.83[2/2] ประสบการณ์ขนหัวลุกจากตำนานวงการผี!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/T_kFecQw7Ds/mqdefault.jpg)
With that logic Guru Nanak was Pakistani😂
And rishi sunak paxtani
those sikh dimand khalistan go to pakistan
@@saptarsi7868 few years ago I saw a video on TH-cam where a Pakistani senior person was claiming that Yoga was invented in Pakistan during International Yoga Day 🤣😂😂😂
@@descendantofbharatbharatva7155 don't pay heed to those clowns. They will call themselves arab and turks and at the same time will claim thay indus valley civilization is pakistan's history 🤣
@@machpet you speak as paxtan will take anyone
They don't have the honesty to accept people, they will only put fuel on other country's matters
Instead of saying he is born in Nepal!
People should say He was born in the present day Nepal.
You're right. Stay based.
Agreed
Yep
Perfection 👌
No one said, Buddha was NEPALI. He clearly said He was born in Nepal. Are you serious sir? Why are you strwmanning that statement??
DIED LAUGHING AFTER THE THUMBLINE
_IF BUDDHA WAS NEPALESE,THEN THE GREAT ASHOKA WAS CHINESE_ 😁😁🤣🤣
They are the students of Romila Thapar 💀
@@user-ho3un1vu4w and Audrey too 😆
Not Crynese, but Tibetan at best.
How? Ashoka was a Bihari
& Great Samudragupta was Bihari.
🤣🤣🤣
Porus was greek
Study - Participate in our Tradition - Promote our culture as much as possible - Become rich(with honesty) - Buy Swadeshi and promote swadeshi -Know about Financial planning and investing in the Indian share market - Make our country proud individually and collectively - Overall This is our National Duty. We have to do this.
And we will do it
Common lets make a grp with this aim
I want to add one thing to your beautiful list to do. Donate for Dharmic causes . 🙏
Yup !! Brother
I already have set these as my life goals even before we met on TH-cam
My cousin was born in a ship dispensary in the sea, so technically he is a mermaid
🤣 lmao 🤣😂🤣😂👍👍👍👍
Logic and Emotions are two different things.
What a impactfull line sir.
No one said, Buddha was NEPALI. He clearly said He was born in Nepal. Are you serious sir? Why are you strwmanning that statement??
Ang Pradesh is in Bihar people here still speak "Angika", he is believed to do "Chaat Puja" which makes complete sense when we know he is "Surya Putra" karna. 🇮🇳🙏❤️
Ang was not a Pradesh it was a mahajanpad that time that include area of Bihar,west bengal,Bangladesh and the area of East India.
As a practioner of Buddhism ☸ let me clarify once and for all about Buddha being born in Nepal 🇳🇵 debate. It's true that Prince Siddhartha Gautama was born in Lumbani but at that time, Lumbani was just a thick forest through which his mother queen Maha Maya was passing by in order to get to her parents kingdom. Prince Siddhartha only attained enlightenment after meditation in Bodhgaya for a long time and that is where he became the Buddha. All practioners of Buddhism consider Bodhgaya as the most sacred Buddhist site for that is where he attained enlightenment, not Lumbani. Not to say that Lumbani isn't sacred but as far as the most sacred site for Buddhists is concerned, it's Bodhgaya.
Finally, someone with common sense. Hope more Buddhists read their actual texts & history instead of repeating imaginary stories invented by politicians.
@@rajputa_na You look like a disguised andhnamazi. We consider buddhists our own. So buzz off with your hate messages.
@ironman-nq7zs nice imaginary propaganda. None of the stuff you wrote has any proof. Lumbini is not even the top 3 most visited religious locations. Read any of the actual Buddhist texts from earliest periods. Buddha himself claimed that he was multiple Hindu avatars in previous birth & uses the same deities & sages as mentioned in Hindu texts. You people just love to claim stuff you have 0 idea about.
@@Fe-ironman nice shifting goalposts. Because you cannot prove what you claimed, you are now making up another imaginary quote. Show me when & where did he say that? Were all followers of buddha from Afghanistan to Japan idiots that they made statues of him? Maybe you should open your eyes & see there exists multiple sects within your own religion, o bhante., which you ignore because they don't suit your political agenda.😂😂
@@Fe-ironmanispute being never colonised directly you have been poor through history and still most poor nation on the planet. And to put cherry on top you want to claim so much but your girls are going freek for Bollywood songs, Punjabi boys and now even copying Indian wedding cultural events like haldi. And still you got balls to talk crap
Just like, Takshashila is in Ancient Pakistan 😂😂😂
People then: We belonged to our mother India
People now: We are Paxtani, Bangladeshi and Nepali 🤡
@@Ali-ld6tg bro he is sarcasm
*Afghanistan I suppose
@@PROLLY_EDGELORD not India, it is Bharat
@@Ali-ld6tg no you just forgot your father 😔
Karna was ruler of anga
Anga pradesh is today's East bihar
Here's language is also called angika and there is also a fort in munger which is said to be of karna and there is a bath where karna gave his kundal to indra. It was up to bengal but munger was his capital where he used to stay
According to Puranic legends, the Ānava King Bali requested Rishi Dīrghatamas Māmateya to raise a few wise sons through his wife Sudeṣṇā. Rishi Dīrghatamas had five children, namely, Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Punḍra and Suhma from Sudeṣṇā. The kingdom of Bali (Balia of Uttar Pradesh) was divided into his five children. Thus, five janapadas in the names of Aṅga (east of Magadha), Vaṅga (South Bengal), Kaliṅga (Orissa), Punḍra (North Bengal) and Suhma (Bangladesh) came into existence during the early Rigvedic period and Aṅga emerged as Mahājanapada. King Aṅga and his descendants reigned over the Aṅga janapada. King Bṛhadratha, son of Uparichara Vasu of the Kuru dynasty reigned over Aṅga janapada during the Rigvedic era as indicated in Mahābhārata. Karna became the king of Aṅga during the Mahābhārata era. The Bṛhadratha kings of Magadha dominated over Aṅga in the post Mahābhārata era but the Aṅga kingdom had survived till the lifetime of Buddha.
Angika is still spoken in Bhagalpur and Munger district of bihar
Champa was his rajdhani which is in bhagalpur district
@@rahulranjan1318 kana chai bauwa rai. Angikaa is maithili believe me . I can understand and speak angika lol.
@@krishnashah2542Angika is independent of maithali language.
And mama sakuni was Afghanistani 😂😂🤣🤣🤣
😂😂😂
Mama shakuni hailing from Kandahar, Afghanistan. 😂😂😂 Hence, he's Afghan 😂😂😂
Same goes for Gandhari and Kaikeyi 😂😂😂
And he used to bring khajur, pesta-badam, morabba for kauravas
and his language was Peshto
@@normal-reaction 😂😂😂
@@normal-reaction also, karna was a bangladeshi, hailing from dhaka😂😂😂
Buddha was Nepali but hey Mughals, Turks etc were Indians since some entitled elite class proponents claims that "they became us"🤲🤲🤲 even though in reality they never considered them as Indians. This is the level of consciousness that is indoctrinated in the minds of Indians.
According to Puranic legends, the Ānava King Bali requested Rishi Dīrghatamas Māmateya to raise a few wise sons through his wife Sudeṣṇā. Rishi Dīrghatamas had five children, namely, Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Punḍra and Suhma from Sudeṣṇā. The kingdom of Bali (Balia of Uttar Pradesh) was divided into his five children. Thus, five janapadas in the names of Aṅga (east of Magadha), Vaṅga (South Bengal), Kaliṅga (Orissa), Punḍra (North Bengal) and Suhma (Bangladesh) came into existence during the early Rigvedic period and Aṅga emerged as Mahājanapada. King Aṅga and his descendants reigned over the Aṅga janapada. King Bṛhadratha, son of Uparichara Vasu of the Kuru dynasty reigned over Aṅga janapada during the Rigvedic era as indicated in Mahābhārata. Karna became the king of Aṅga during the Mahābhārata era. The Bṛhadratha kings of Magadha dominated over Aṅga in the post Mahābhārata era but the Aṅga kingdom had survived till the lifetime of Buddha.
Buddha was not Nepalese and Karna was not Bangladeshi. Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis, because Nepal and Bangladesh did NOT exist when Buddha and Karna were alive - ONLY Bharat existed at that time and there were many different kingdoms in Bharat at that time.
India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words:
"The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis."
So there you have it, Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Nepalese nationalists can keep seething. lol
Mark Tully is a Bengali because he was born in Calcutta! And Manmohan Singh is a Pakistani.
Shudhodhan's actual kingdom was in UP even by today's map. Maybe Buddha's mother, Maha Maya, can be claimed as Nepali anachronistically.
The kingdom of Buddha's Father is in Kapilvastu district, lumbini province of Nepal
@@buddhaneverest Ancestors of Shakyas came from Ayodhya. Also Nepali population was not alienated from Indian population. They had marital relationships .
Well no one is really saying that Buddha was "Nepalese". The modern "Nepalese" (I personally prefer "Nepali", but that is beside the point) identity is barely 300 years old but, the culture groups that form modern day Nepal include at the very least 2 mahajanapadas that were existent during Buddhas time.
Buddha was born in a place that in modern day falls in Nepal, Lumbini. This is undisputed fact.
Another point is that Nepal is the only state aside from India that still holds on to its identity as a people of the "Bharat Varsh" in the subcontinent. Other countries of the indian subcontinent, namely Pakistan and Bangladesh are happy to let the modern day state of India formed in 1947 claim all the heritage of the Sanatan dharma and its culture because they identify as muslims.
If Pakistanis continued to pride themselves as descendents of the people of the land of Takshasheela, they would claim of to be part of their identity. But they dont, they identify themselves as descendents of muslim rulers who came here from the middle east, which is perfectly fine, but is also the reason they do not mind not being associated with the canonical history of the subcontinent.
We Nepali (atleast the hindus living in the Terai and Pahads) continue to see ourselves as part of the "Bharat Varsh" which is why we claim Buddha to be part of our history and heritage. Buddha is not exclusively Nepal's, that is a stupid idea. He is a product of the spiritual and philosophical heritage of this land, just like how Adi Sankaracharya was and Raja Janak was.
Karna was not Indian or Bangladeshi. He was born in a kingdom which falls partly in todays Bihar and partly in Bangladesh. It is illogical to think of ancient subcontinental figures as being of a modern day state.
At the end of the day, what is important is we respect each others emotions best we can.
Exactly, My thought on it as well ❤
Thank you. Nationalism gets in the way of the history and the (respecting of) ancestry that has, indeed, shaped or formed the present day nations. As well as acknowledging certain fair and just leaders claiming land and peoples for betterment of future prospects (of course in which there have also been unjust leaders). In which the future is not written -- borders, civilisations, kingdoms and states have changed time and again; it is not set in stone that it will stay as is. It's even more likely that in the next 100 years some major shifts will take place again. But people's identities and reclamation of heritage can certainly be a motivator for a desire or need to future change.
if you have your permanent resident in certain country like india or nepal and live there then you will be indian or neapli. by that logic isn't Lord Shiv become chinese, he lives in mt kailash i.e. in now days tibet- china🙃
Shiva isn't Chinese, Shiva is a Bharati. What is now Tibet was originally a part of Bharat. Buddha was not Nepalese and Karna was not Bangladeshi. Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis, because Nepal and Bangladesh did NOT exist when Buddha and Karna were alive - ONLY Bharat existed at that time and there were many different kingdoms in Bharat at that time.
India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words:
"The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis."
So there you have it, Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Nepalese nationalists can keep seething. lol
@@Rishi123456789 Tibet is not Bharat.
@@Rishi123456789 bro I don't get you guys how come you say everything thing was part of India and you are still poor in every aspects. Try to respect all religions before focusing on Buddha or shiva or ram
Such a marvellous empire bharat khanda and can't stand against the british
@@Rishi123456789 bharat with the context of vishnu puran then it is are right but i refferd in the context of shiva being chinese in mordern day term in perspective of countires like nepal, india or china and their resident nepali, indian or chinese.
And thanks for not using term india or indain in the first paragraph.
@@lautheimpaler4686 Tibet is a part of Ancient Bharat and (unfortunately) Modern China.
India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words:
"The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis."
So there you have it, Tibet was a part of Bharat because Tibet is in the Himalayas and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Also, the holy mountain home of our Hindu god Shiva is Mount Kailash and Mount Kailash is in Tibet. Also, major rivers of Bharat/India like the Indus river (which India is named after), the Ganges river and the Brahmaputra river all originate in Tibet. Also, the Dalai Lama is widely considered by Tibetans to be the spiritual leader of Tibet and the Dalai Lama is a Buddhist. In fact, most Tibetans in general are Buddhists and Buddhism originated in Bharat/India. Also, the Tibetan script belongs to the Indic family of scripts (which is also known as the Brahmic family of scripts).
We are living in a era where most are forgetting what happened last week. So there is no end to illogical questions/arguments.
@AbhijitChavda To start with, to say Buddha was Nepalese and Buddha was born in Nepal are two different things if we analyze in broad historical spectrum. Ram was born in Ayodhya which is in India, Ravana was born in Sri-Lanka. It would not be possible or practical to say where Ravana was born if we do not say Sri-Lanka. It's a way of communication also. If some European talk, they say all three were born in Asia even though there was no such term as Asia at that time. BTW in your opinion where was Gandhi born and was Gandhi Indian then? What about Bhagat Singh and Subhas Chandra Bose?
If tomorrow China invalid Nepal, so by your logic buddha was Chinese ?
@@rahulterwade Please read carefully what I wrote in my first comment. I did not say anybody Nepalese or Indian. Where was Ghengis Khan born? Mongolia, where was Lao Tse born? China - that's all. I do not say them Mongolian or Chinese respectively. BTW you should have replied my 2 questions before questioning me further.
you are right I agree with you. the concept of nation state is very new. the best way we can refer to that land is Indian subcontinent or South Aisa.. it is a little arrogant and biased to say that before Nepal, it was nothing but India referring to not the Ancient but current nation of India.. I'm saying that being Indian
You should say "present day"... And I don't see any logic in mentioning gandhi or Bhagat Singh or Subhash Chandra Bose
if buddha was Nepalese , Guru Nanak was Pakistani
Guru gobind singh was born in Patna Bihar
GURU NANAK*
@@Ali-ld6tg Pakistan is not even 100 years old. Bharat is ancient. Go find your roots first.🤣
Punjabi king toh ek hi tha maharaja ranjeet singh, jisne chun chun kar muslamano ko khadega tha..
@@puresoul5559 i wanted to say guru Nanak 😭
If Carthage had sent army and supplies to Hannibal instead of defending the Spanish front they would have had Rome in their hands and the world hostory would be different now
No one said, Buddha was NEPALI. He clearly said He was born in Nepal. Are you serious sir? Why are you strwmanning that statement??
@@RogueIntel why are you copying and pasting everywhere?
#askabhijit Was there a civilization contemporary to Sindu saraswati civilization in the Gangatic plains?? how old is vedic civilization exactly? was it contemporary, before or after Sindhu saraswati civilization? what is exactly the link between sindhu saraswati civilization and Vedic civilization?
According to Buddhist tradition, he was born in Lumbini, in what is now Nepal,[b] to royal parents of the Shakya clan, but renounced his home life to live as a wandering ascetic (Sanskrit: śramaṇa).[7][h] After leading a life of begging, asceticism, and meditation, he attained enlightenment at Bodh Gaya in what is now India.
From Wikipedia
Buddha was not born in Nepal. He was 'born' in Bihar, India. Prince Siddhartha was born in Nepal and he became Buddha by attaining Nirvana in Bihar
👍🏻 logic
"Buddha was not born in Nepal. He was 'born' in Bihar, India. Prince Siddhartha was born in Nepal and he became Buddha by attaining Nirvana in Bihar"
You are correct and I completely agree with you. Siddhartha Gautama founded the religion of Buddhism in the city of Gaya, which is a part of Bihar and Bihar is in India.
Buddha was not Nepalese and Karna was not Bangladeshi. Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis, because Nepal and Bangladesh did NOT exist when Buddha and Karna were alive - ONLY Bharat existed at that time and there were many different kingdoms in Bharat at that time.
India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words:
"The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis."
So there you have it, Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Nepalese nationalists can keep seething. lol
All major Indian religions were born in Bihar.
@@DisProfundis hinduism be like am i jokwa to youwa
@@anil2584 We ignore this fact.
Sir Anga is actually Andhra pradesh. In sarala Mahabharat it is mentioned. Anga Banga and Kalinga . Anga is Andhra , banga is Bengal and Kalinga is Odisha
As per my knowledge Anga is eastern Bihar, western Bengal. Even today there is Angika language in present day Purnea- Malda districts. Vanga is Eastern Bengal and Kalinga is coastal south Odisha and north Andhra.
Anga is Eastern bihar at current time.
I think its in Bihar near Munger and a lot region around it is still refer as Ang Pradesh people speak "Angika" and and it have folk Lore too about it
Anga is munger + bhagalpur + banka districts of Bihar
Kudos to those who say Nepal was never part of India 😂
Nepal came into being in 1768 AD.
India came into being in 1947 AD.
BUT you go on
@@nirabkarki2838 that is why we call it bharat not india you donut
@@nirabkarki2838 Nepal was a part of indian civilization, not present day india 😊
@@G.O.A.T_653 Not Indian civilization but Aryavrata/Jamvudwipa/Bharatvarsa civilization.
India and Bharat are different.
@@nirabkarki2838 👍
This is also known as the Romila Thapar Effect
Let's get to the little more backwards in time. The species Homosapiens are from the African continent which Mr. Abhijit Chavda also happens to mentioned in his certain video. Acoording to his theory all the humans are African by default. So Lord Gautam Buddha and Karna was not Nepali, not Indian but African..
At the time of early humans(migration from Africa) there was no concept of nationality or civilisation. So you are wrong either way. Also at that time, there were no difference races of humans. There were only dark skinned humans. We are talking about a time after new races of humans were established(caucasians, mongloids, Indian, Africans etc).
@@phoenixj1299 sorry brother if i hurt your feelings. i am just putting my thought in sarcastic way and criticizing Mr AC statement. Lord Gautam Buddha was born in Nepal. At the time of gautham budhha there was no nation as india or bharat or a single nation called aakhanda bharat. the Prince Siddartha Gautam was born in seperate nation ruled by the King Suddhodhan and Queen Mayadevi. which was then conqured later and became part of india and now in Nepal. So Lord Gautam buddha was born in nepal.
And i have a question
if you have your permanent resident in certain country like india or nepal and live there then you will be indian or neapli. by that logic isn't Lord Shiv become chinese because he lives in mt kailash i.e. in now days china tibet.
@@Shreeshantato begin with there was no African itself, they were homo sapien.
You contradict yourself.
African, indian , Chinese all these term established because they had civilization.
Nepal was always part of earlier indian kingdoms.
Script of nepali is itself indian.
Culture of nepal is indian.
Nothing new in Nepal which in India doesn't exist.
@@Shreeshanta I agree with you bro I am not against anyone but I see Indian people are very blind for religious sentiments
I see country like Nepal where they respect each and every religion
And then I see India who shouts for Buddha born in India but are andabhakts Hindus who cannot respect other religions
@@Shreeshanta It was called Bharat. Not "akhanda" bharat.
I am from Nepal and I agree with what you said about Buddha not being Nepalese. But by your logic, he is not Indian as well. The current state of India did not exist before 1947 AD. Buddha was born in the Shakya kingdom. Your videos consider the modern day India and the ancient region of India of having the same meaning. Historically, India was a cultural and political region that encompassed much of the Indian subcontinent, including present-day India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, and parts of Afghanistan. The region was ruled by various empires and dynasties over the centuries, including the Maurya, Gupta, Mughal, and British empires. But these empires have eventually collapsed into smaller nations just like what we have now. Claiming Nepal has always been a part of India gives the narrative that the modern day India has claims to Nepal. I fully support the idea of Nepal always being a part of the ancient region of India not as a truly Independant nation but as a vassal state to much larger Empires in the region. Culturally we are the same.
bharat was ,aryavat was
but where is nepol before prithvi narayan saha??
@@Ishant007 Āryāvarta is not a country but a subcontinent. Will you consider Europe a country? Nepal has existed for at least 2000 years. It was a lot smaller back then. During the time of the Gupta Empire, the Indian emperor Samudragupta recorded Nepal as a "frontier kingdom" which paid an annual tribute. Even the Mahabharata mentions the Kirat People of Nepal.
@@griwankhakurel1687 nepal word doesn't exists before
@@griwankhakurel1687 "By your logic, he is not Indian as well." Wrong. India is not just a post-colonial nation-state. 'Indian' is also a cultural, ethnic and even racial identity. Not just internally but also identitied as such by outsiders for thousands of years. "East Indian" is still what you tick when filling forms in western countries irrespective of whether you're Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan, Nepali, Maldivian or whatever else. India is a civilizational state unlike other nation-states in the subcontinent. If saying Buddha is Indian and what is today Nepal has been a part of India for most of history makes you insecure that it "gives the narrative that modern day India has claims to Nepal", then that is an issue of you not being able to cope with reality and facts. It does not imply a claim over the territory of modern-day Nepal by the Union of India, apart from in some deranged people's heads.
@@thedescanteer Yes exactly. Its a racial and cultural identity. But the country India did not exist before. But if you say Buddha was Indian, the cultural identity then yeah I agree. But you cannot say he is an Indian, the citizen of present day nation. What if Mexicans claim they are American, because they are north american. But are they entitled to the ctitizenship of the nation America. If you use words that can have different meaning it can get tricky. I will never say Buddha is Nepalese. That is nonesense. The country Nepal has existed for 2000 years at least, before the British. We were able to expand on the smaller countries that surrounded Nepal. We got into war with the British once we messed with their borders. Historically the north Indian region from Gandhar to Anga has been different independent smaller countries. Like Nepal, Banaras, Kashmir, Sikkim. These were countries which were sometime part of a larger empire like the Gupta or Maurya. But is the current nation state of India a continuation of these ancient empire? Or did we inherit our borders from the British empire which Nepal was never a part of.
Q1) what guides the nature to always evolve in the betterment of the organisms, does it implies that nature has some sort of a hidden mighty brain or something is incorporated in our non coding part of DNA that had any unknown function?
Buddham Sharanam Gacchami 🙏🙏 .
Buddha was from Ancient Bharata Land
Its like saying bhagat singh was pakistani bcoz the place he was born is located in punjab but if u ask bhagat singh he doesn't even know a nation like pakistan exist
Who cares where one comes from! It’s the destination of the journey one takes!
What is your opinion on a historical proof of ramayana that there is a mountain in Sri Lanka which has the same vegetation and properties that of Himalayan mountains and showing that hanuman ji brought it from Himalayas jai Shri ram 🙏
Name of the mountain?
ppl dont understand the concept of nation state and civilisation.nepal and bangladesh r part of indic civilisation now they r nation state,now our region has also became nation state of india,but the term india is not defined for nation state or particular region ppl..similarly origin of indic civilsisation began in indus valley(possibly) which is today in so called nation of pakistan.
Ha fir to taliabn bhi afghanistan ka buddha murti par hakk jatayega
Turkey ka hakk hai
Greek history par
Par jabh wo log khud ko mange hi nahi nahi unka culture religion rehan sahen wo log kese khud ko buddhist or greek bata sakte hai
@@shirokun4742 afganistan was itself part of indic civilization specially during buddha era,it was completely india and turkey has been a part of greek civilization itself go learn first the country turkey came very later.. similarly there was nothing called nepal or nepali at buddhas era,pali was a language which was spoken in modern region of nepal and northern part of india,the pali script still use by both nepali and hindi today
Just look at the Nepali School texts books, they have no ancient history, even if they have made it some by their own, so I don't blame Nepali people for their ignorance, they were never taught about that, it's just like the students of Pakistan's Punjab province where students actually believes Hindustan was a part of Pakistan, and they have won all the wars, but in reality before 14th August 1947 Pakistan didn't exist. I wonder if Nepali people from Nepal actually know that there is a major chunk of Nepali speaking people live in India.
Abhijit sir Is expert at those logics 😀😎😁😊🙏
What a legendary master i found in TH-cam 🎉📯🎊
Bharat Mata ki jay 🇮🇳
There was no country named bharat😂
Hello, I am from Afghanistan. I am Persian (Tajik). Persians are being murd6rd in Afghanistan by the Tal!ban ( Tal!ban are Pashtuns). How do u see the Future of the Tal!ban and AFG. Is their (Tal!ban) gvnt going to last long? What if the gvnt in Iran changes? How would that effect AFG.
Prithvi Narayan Shah wasn't even born so how could it be Nepal? Also in Nepali exams, if the question says, where was buddha raised and you wrote Nepal, you are not getting that point. It's Kapilvastu for those who want a point. I am a Nepali and had been making this point for years because what we are so nationalistic about, didn't exist when our gods did.
If that's the case, then how is that region always indian when india was formed only after 1947.
Logic left the chat india was formed in 1947 bruh r u okay ancient Indian text mentioned the land as Bharat aaryavarta geographical it's one nation
Buddha born in ancient India and today the country of nepal.
Buddha was born in Nepal but he wasn't from Nepal.
The reason he was born in Nepal was because his mother was travelling to her maternal home and he was born in midway which falls in Nepal. He was a Shakya, A Suryavanshi Kshatriya from Kapilvastu (now in Piprahawa, Up) Which was then part of Ancient Vajji Republic of Magadh. So yes, he was born in Nepal its a Fact but He was From India and Lived his entire Life in India.
During Nepal whole was a kingdom India wasn't yet formed at that time. Today's India was divided into various princely states. The east India company merged the princely states and ruled there.After the 1947 when British rule ended , Sardar Ballav Vai Patel Convinced the princely states to join India. After that only India was formed.It is relatively new country compared to Nepal.
As per my knowledge...Bihar was known as Ang Pradesh and Bengal as Vang Desh or Pradesh....
Karna was from Ang desh/Pradesh
Sir I think "Anga rajya" is situated in present Bihar ( champaran district) , not in bengal. I'm a Bengali . Present West Bengal and Bangladesh was part of "Paundra Vardhan Dynasty" ,, I think.
Hi, abhijit. Its alrite to discuss history with you as you seem to be balanced. I have heard many podcasts feat. you and I learn and enjoy everytime.
yes!, the emphasis on bhagwan buddha being of nepali origin nowadays is a nationalist borderline racist rant, i agree, but factually speaking, he was born in 'present day nepal'. if there was no nepal then, say, there was no india (as a country) then too.
seondly, when i was a student in the university, a fellow hosteller, an american from kansas, mr mark lenny, was doing his thesis (in banaras hindu univ.) about karna and anga desh.
his research was extensive, he managed to visit ruins and traces of even the smallest temples of remote villages, and he undertook a long 10 plus years of research where he said anga desh was in present day bihar neighbouring UP. not present day bangladesh.
yes!!...the same way, Indus valley civilisation is Indian...but most of the parts are in Pak
wrong it isn't indian either
it belongs to a particular ideology or culture
Saraswati Valley civilization.
Hindu civilization
@@Ram-gj7ws First of all, you should remove the name of our holy deity. And lastly don't do this kind of nuisance over here, go spread your propaganda in some other Anti-hindu channel.
@@PROLLY_EDGELORD tu khud brainwashed Hindu hai
Gen G.D bakshi ka Saraswati Valley civilisation padle
@@Ali-ld6tg toh phir shik ban ja
#AskAbhijit What if Asian Union happens in the Future like uniting countries like India , China , Bangladesh , Pak , Nepal , And other south Asian countries like Indonesia , Japan , Mongolia , Tai , Singapore , South Korea etc....
What are the outcomes in the geopolitical perspective Please can you explain sir like economy , currency standards etc...
नेपाली लोगों का दिल रखने के लिए उन्हें बताएं कि बुद्ध का जन्म नेपाल में हुआ था। वैसे भी इन दिनों नेपाल चीन के बहकावे में आकर अजीब हरकतें कर रहा है।
Land can be conquered and claimed. Historically in this biases we override our timeline. Buddha - ‘three things cannot be long hidden; the sun, the moon and the truth’.
If Buddha is Nepali, then Lord Shiva is Tibetan. His home kailash is in Tibet 😂
Namaste 🕉🙏🕉🙏::Buddhism the Buddha Dharma also known as Dharmavinaya is an Indian religion or philosophical tradition based on a series of original teachings that are attributed to Gautama Buddha (born Siddhārtha Gautama in the 5th century (BCE meaning Before Common Era), Originating in ancient India as a movement professing śramaṇa , Lord Gautama Siddhartha Buddha a indian prince from Kashtriya Hindu clan,,🕉🙏🕉🙏🕉🙏..
list out the similarities between hinduism and buddhism and also how the teachings of both converge into the idea of dharma
im not against you just asking for knowledge saving my timw
Buddhism is a part Sanatan Dharma.
Bhagwan Buddha never came out from Sanatan Dharma.
All teaching of Bhagwan Buddha are from Upanushad
@@Ram-gj7ws Hey, fool ever known of Shankaracharya who wrote UPANISHADS with his colleague guru's ?
Actually it came out of Hinduism only, as mentioned in it Gautam Buddha was Siddharth. Who belonged to Kshatriya family (now don't argue on caste) which followed ideal Hinduism🚩
Buddhism is just a path within Sanatan Dharma (which is also known as Hinduism). Buddha was not Nepalese and Karna was not Bangladeshi. Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis, because Nepal and Bangladesh did NOT exist when Buddha and Karna were alive - ONLY Bharat existed at that time and there were many different kingdoms in Bharat at that time.
India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words:
"The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis."
So there you have it, Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Nepalese nationalists can keep seething. lol
No one said, Buddha was NEPALI. He clearly said He was born in Nepal. Are you serious sir? Why are you strwmanning that statement??
Bilkul sahi kaha sir ji aapne 🙏🏻🙏🏻🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳
I see nothing wrong with thinking that karna was bengali, because it's a language, and they might have spoken some variation of it, because all indian languages have a common origin, but calling him bangladeshi is ridiculous af. 😂😂😂 Our neighbouring cats desperately want something rooted in history to make them also feel important 😝😝😝
Yes there is a lot of difference between bengal & Muslim leagues East Pakistan ...All they want the world to show they r OG bengalis who r actually converted brainwashed population
Bro, Bangladesh has almost erased its hindu ancestory...
So dont expect such things Bangladesh would do like nepal...
People here even dont consider themselves as Bengali because of the west Bengal hindu culture...
Siddhartha Gautama was born in Nepal, became Buddha in India. Is this right?
But sadly no body will agree it.
Doesn't matter.........a fact is a fact!
Why make ignorant people understand anything
Let them live in their closet
Everyone have to agree 🙂
why
"But sadly no body will agree it."
Wrong, I completely agree with everything that Abhijit said in this video. Buddha was not Nepalese and Karna was not Bangladeshi. Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis, because Nepal and Bangladesh did NOT exist when Buddha and Karna were alive - ONLY Bharat existed at that time and there were many different kingdoms in Bharat at that time.
India (as in the Indian Subcontinent, but by India's original Sanskrit name 'Bharat') has been a civilisational region with a broad cultural continuity for literally thousands of years. The ancient Indian scripture known as the Vishnu Purana confirms this with these words:
"The region spanning from the snowy mountains (Himalayas) in the north to the sea (Indian Ocean) in the south is Bharat and its inhabitants are Bharatis."
So there you have it, Buddha and Karna were BOTH Bharatis and this fact is backed up by ancient Indian scriptural evidence. Nepalese nationalists can keep seething. lol
From what i understand is that people view history from a very narrow perspective!! Most of the people are close minded!
There were different kingdoms but not a single country
Buddha was born in Nepal (present day)
Not Nepalese or Indian or anyone
Just simply an enlightened being, Born in Nepal
If u use common sense a little more, The video made it clear there was nothing like Nepal at Buddha's time
No one is saying Buddha is Indian bro.
Buddha was born in kapilvastu which is part of present day Nepal. Buddha is not Nepali that's the point.
The name "India" is originally derived from the name of the river Sindhu (Indus River) and has been in use in Greek since Herodotus (5th century BCE). The term appeared in Old English as early the 9th century and reemerged in Modern English in the 17th century.
Nepal was name of Kathmandu valley only not the whole region.
Did u know gopala or abihira aka yadavas were once rules of Kathmandu then kirat then lichevvi and malla and then shah who conquered the whole region and named it Nepal.
Thus
Buddha was not Nepali nor he was indian.
The place where siddhart gautama was born is part of present day Nepal
The place where Siddhart Gautama became Budda is part of present day India.
It's that simple
Other facts did you know prithivi Narayan shah ansestor migrated in to Gorkha from Rajasthan lol
@@akergincelik8066 yup ... you tell em!
@Ex-buddhist(Buddha is elephant puttra) communists in nepal have brainwashed full 2 generations of nepal... so it's no surprise
Is it true that there were 28 buddhas and gautam buddha might not be the only one preaching the Buddhism in Asia? Would like to understand your views.
As Karna is Bangladeshi, we should address him as "Karna Miya"
He was just king of present day Bangladesh but he was not born there
🤣 It should be Mr. Karna Ali
😂Bhaijan
He was form Bihar search on Google and scriptures and listen local folklore, and people of that region still speak "Angika" and fighting for recognise it as scheduled language.
most of the freedom fighter comes from east bengal(bangladesh). bipin chandra pal, sri aurobindu ghose, batukeshawar dutt, surya sen, jagdish chandra bose, etc etc etc.
But in bangladeshi history books they are not even taught.........they only know miyabhais!!
Yes but he was still born in modern day Nepal. That's a fact my brother whether you want to accept it or not.
He was born within the lands that is know a homeland of the Nepali, a diverse group of people from northern south asia / MahaBharata.
Sir jaise aapne kaha ki Nepal 🇳🇵 1700s se pehle exist nahi karta to India 🇮🇳 kaise karta h?
Agar Buddha Nepal me born nahi hue the to kushan empire indian empire kaise hua? Kushans were people migrated from North West China 🇨🇳
Kushan empire me modern day India ka part aata h to wo indian empire
Modern day Nepal me Buddha ka janm hua to wo Nepali nahi?
We were part of same civilization often termed as Bharat, Aryavart... No nepal and India were there before 1947.. We are the part of the greatest civilization on the planet 🙏
Nepal, Bangladesh, And my son Pakistan were and are Indian. Learn your history
I reckon we can say Buddha was born in modern day Nepal... Or present day Nepalese land ... And its very obvious that he wasn't Nepali ... As the country Nepal was just unified a few hundred years ago... So we couldn't technically say buddha was born in Nepal.. it just happenstance to be his place of birth is in the territory of Nepal.. now .
India wasn't formed at that time either.
Nepal was formed much before than India modern day India was not as a whole in History. It was unified after British rule only and India and Pakistan got formed
@@buddhaneverestindia as we know it has been unified multiple times in the past. It was during the time of mahabharat, as well as ramayana.
India is just a name, the same country did exist with just a different name. That's like saying this youtuber abhijit didn't exist in the past if he changes his name to something else( let's say he changes his name to nepali). Doesn't mean he didn't exist he existed with a different name.
Race shouldn't matter in buddhism. The fact you named your profile containing buddha in the name. It's shameful to be giving physical features this much importance. I wouldn't have been like this if I was buddhist.
And even when we consider the possibility that seperate states constituted ancient India during the time of buddha. They still had very clear idea that the people of different states still belong to a single but broad group- the aryan people.
The thing that makes it even more evident is the fact that ancient indians had specific words to refer to foreigners but didn't use the word for people of ancient India.
This proves that even if multiple factions existed in ancient india, there was stilla clear idea of belonging to one single group even with the distinctions.
Karna was only ruler of present day Bangladesh (i think his state was in present day Bihar), but he was not even born in present day Bangladesh
Washington DC is in Nepal.
there was no concept of Nepal before pirthivi narayan shah but the it was also not indians kathmandu valley was ruled by mallas ,gurkha by shahs,west by shains,lamjung by gurungs, but not indians or bartiya.
Siddhart
Does this name sound mongoloid, gurkha or naga by any means?
This is the name of lord shiva and this name was very common between Indians.
Bharta name is dated back to Mahabharat times also the battle of the ten Dasaraja war was won by the Bharta/ kuru tribes. So Bharta's name is almost 5k years old
Also Buddha was not mongoloid at all. He was like a mainland Indian. He was dark-brown caucasoids.
That is very narrow minded thinking. Since gurkha, mallas and shahs . All the people you named were not aliens. They were bharati too.
By that logic historically far shout is always ruled by Cholas Cheras and Pandeyas. So how can they become Bharatiya? Bro you are also Bhartiya and be proud of it!
उत्तरं यत् समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम्
वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र सन्ततिः
Gorkhas ar hindus. Mofo
Please do your research right on the origin of Nepal. Nation of Nepal is mentioned in the Puranas (Skanda Mahapurana: Himavat Khanda), so it existed at the time of Buddha. PN Shah just reunified Nepal. जय नेपाल 🇳🇵
There was no nation of Nepol, patheitc Nepoli.
As your concept, sir there was no nation as India was at that time. Based on your concept at that time no nation named India was there. All kingdom was free at that time
just to extend the argument, buddha was neither nepalese, nor indian, and by that i mean by nationality for very obvious reasons. When we say buddha was indian, we mean he is culturally a bharatiya, from the land of dharma, which is exactly the common link in all the regions of this subcontinent. was there a nepalese identity back when buddha was alive? how do you define the nepalese identity? its like sir said, linked to the formation of the nation of nepal in 17th century. the people in nepal, and in all of bharat, were and are considered as dharmic, or followers of dharma. due to this identity politics we forget we are the same people, albeit a few differences.
@Ex muslim cool 😎 my point being whatever name we use for our culture and identity, its what we were back then and so was buddha. Good to know tho, didnt know even greeks used to call us indians
Respect and embrace the religion🙏
as per present geography, yes he was nepalese , but in past, it was all Bharat
Ravan the sri Lankan 😆
He was
@@HinduPhoenix No, Ravan was the ruler of Lanka but he wasn't born there. Ravan was the son of sage Vishrava who resided near present day Delhi.
@@truetoolAs a sri lankan i doubt about your Facts. Pls get your facts right. 🇱🇰 obviously he was Sri Lankan. He was mainly Adivasi veddada way before tamil came to sri lanka
@@iamwithmychinesefriendChingCho Read the Ramayana
@@truetool i Don't read those fuc*king content i am proud tamizhan
Are you sure Anga was Bengal? Isn't Anga present day munger in Bihar?
#AskAbhijitji , how the past (history)is calculated, which type of calendar is used, what are the parameters. Our scriptures says the Ramayana(in tretayug) happened in hundreds of thousand years ago but in modern day they say it as 7000year ago. How to calculate the yuga cycle's in terms of solar years
what's the actual problem if people were saying buddha born in nepal not india. Yeah! world knows india and nepal are two different country but they have similar religion and culture. And if karna was ruling the present day of bangladesh then he should also be Bangladeshi if those people must be hindu that also living in bangladesh as bangladeshi not indians or bharatis.
Truly said Buddha wasn't born in Nepal. But neither was he born in India. India was only a united country after the British.There were many kingdoms in the past.
Even during the Mahabharat ,the Pandavas had help from neighbouring kingdom for the army. Even the Kirats which ruled over present day Kathmandu had sent some help to the Pandavas.The Pandavas had fought the alongside many Armies against the Kauravas.
By the same logic Akhand Bharat was never present. The most common thing binding most present day Indian states was the Sanatan Dharma. They had divided stated throughout most history.
To correct you Nepal has existed for thousands of years. What is Kathmandu now was Nepal since forever this is not a name Prithivi Narayan Shah came up with or something. But I am going to agree with you on the rest. Buddha was born in what is now present day Nepal which doesnt make him Nepali straight away but then again India as we know it didnt exist back then during his birth either so it doesnt make him Indian straight away. Ehhhh who cares now that im reading what I wrote, people should just focus on his teachings he definitely wouldnt want people arguing over such things.
Goddess Sita was also born in Janakpur,Nepal not present day of india.Every nepalese should admit that their was no border at that time like india and nepal because their were only kingdom not countries. They were named as their kingdom just like ma sita kingdom was called mithila raaja just like aayodha of lord ram.Hindu is the cetre of us not buddhism because buddha was also hindu before followers of buddha make another religion with him.
I don't know who's Buddha but i know Prince Siddharth, he was born in Limbini, present day Nepal
bhai buddha lai chindina vaneu ta? buddha lai timlenachiney pani timro 10 pusta le puja gareko thiyo ra timro aaune pusta le pani puja garne xa. alikati laaj sharam ta lagnu partho buddha lai chindina vannu aghi
And to add With that logic Mohammed Ali Jinnah is an Indian though he was born in Karachi now pakistan but once a part India unlike Nepal.
He actually was....until he joined muslim league he was fighting for India freedom after he saw his chances to become pm were bleak he asked for land and resources and call it pakistan..
Shaukuni was Afghan, Jayadrat was pakistani. Pandav to Hariyana ke kaunde the. Shri Krishna was UP and carried katta all the time😂
It's Sounds Like Pakistani Claims Over Kimg Porush Katoch Or Harappan Civilization ?? 😂
@@Ali-ld6tg
Yeep Its Pak "
You People Still Uses Hindu Surname Like Chauhan, Bajwa, Gujjer, Bhatt !
Nepal should be part of india to end this discussion...also we will reach fifa world cup sooner then
sir bangladeshi and bangali are not same things... yes if someone's mothertoung is bangla then he is bangali but end of the day Bangladesh is run by a Islamic parliament their constitution is accept islamic laws.... but in actual bangali culture there is no islamic influence ... todays bangladesh is not a representation of bangali community its representing the arabic version of bangali community ... i as a proud Hindu bangali bharatiyo (those three thing are equally important to me )don't accept Bangladesh
be safe brother
Are u from bangladesh bro?
Btw agree with u totally
Fr, they don't represent any Bengali culture at all. That being Bengali title is just their Nationality.
And Bengali was never supposed to be Nationality or something. It's just a culture among hundreds of cultures across Bharat.
Even though 😂 it doesn't represent bengali culture ...but outside India everyone knows that bengali culture = bangladeshi muslim culture. Because majority are bangladeshi muslims, bengali Hindus are minority. 66 percent of all Bengalis living in world are muslims and only 34 percent are Hindus. In coming days it will change more . So accept the fact.
@@rationalindian1409 that doesn't matter!
Bengali culture means hindu culture...........if we accept otherwise then what's the diff between us and westerners?
If that's what people think about it then the people those take born in pakistan,bangladesh,afganistan,maynmar,,nepal shouldn't call themself pakistanis,bangladesdi,nepalese,etc because it was never a country before. Everyone are indians that british named it after capturing india.
If that's the case then american should call themself british because their ancestor were from britain.
Same energy which claims Sidhu Saraswati Civilization as "Ancient Paxtan" 🥴🤡
There is no nation state of Bharat(ie Republic of India) before 1947 AD and also there is no nation state of Nepal (ie kingdom of Gorkha ) before 1790 AD.
I will correct you Siddhartha Gautama was born in Current Nepal( Lumbini) Thats a fact
Okay sir Now let me tell you another logic...
Britain united India and gifted it to you people. But still you people demonized Britain. And all that happened in 1947, that clearly means India was born in 1947, then do you mean that Buddha is less than 80 years old? We say Buddha was born in Nepal, but if you like talking about logic then we should say Buddha was born in our land.
I am sorry to say this but you are very wrong good sir.
India has always existed.
The nation-state of India is 76 years old, not India itself.
The concept of a nation was non-existent pre French Revolution, so people back then, and historians today, grouped people based on shared culture history traditions and customs.
It would be silly to say that North Korea and South Korea are two different regions compared to Korea just because they are politically divided for now.
Similarly, saying that India is a gift from the British who mercifully united us is not only inaccurate, but a disgrace to the entire existence of this great land.
@@intenjikuOkay, now read what I said but slowly, you and I saying the same thing lol
@@SummitStatement How so?
If buddha is indian then, lord Shiva, Mata Parvati, lord ganesha, kartik are chinese. And lord Hanuman is also said to be living in Tibet. So are they chinese. And there was Nepal from satya yug it was called satyavati, and other yugs too, you can Google it. And few days back the map during mahabharata time also shows there is Nepal. Hence proved.
Nepal wasn't even existing that time bro
But india was there
Yeah by the logic, Pandavas are central Asians !!😄😄
gandhari is afghanistani
Soros is jew💀💀💀💀💀💀
How tf are pandavas central asians lol. They were literally born in present day uttar pradesh.
People then :we came from great Bharat
People now : we are bangldeshi , nepali , pakistani 😂😂😂🤡
Lord Budhha was a Shakya born in Nepal. Karna was a Kaurav from Hastinapur.
By that logic there was no concept of India before 1947
I think Lord Buddha served to the whole world , not to a specific country . But still origin is a different matter ,
@@rajputa_na Nah man. Don't. Bhimtas and not the followers of buddh. They have lost their common and Dharma sense.. but we do.
No nation state … no boundaries… epic times
Cool times. Just regular slaughters for living on piece of land not owned by the invader😍
Recently US Pentagon top official said that Iran will make 86.6 percent of enriched uranium which is enough for making an atomic bomb.
Sir is it alarming and if it is than what actions US can/will take, can US is able to stop it if it happens.
#AskAbhijit
#ask Abhijit
What are your views on massive
Trade defasit of India.
Industrialization is the only solution to this issue. The government will have to actively working on expanding the industrial infrastructure of our economy.
This is result of past governments not building proper infrastructure which is making us play a catch up game with developed nations as we have missed the industrialization wave of 90s. This current government will have to spend crazy amount of money into building industrial infrastructure while still growing the economy in order to stop this cycle of playing catch up game with rest of the developed world. For example we recently found one of the largest (2nd largest i think) deposits of lithium in Jammu area but we lack the industrial technology and expertise to extract and turn this lithium in EV batteries and other products.
Following this logic, shakuni mama was an Afghan!!!