Bharat gillidhanda league

[JackSeal]

Stop promoting british cricket

[8pm]

lol

[Paamu]

Uncle inka padukovaa.....

[Deadp0ol2]

Thanks for the suggestion ra Yes, we should promote Gillidanda to make it big.

[Dallas_c_how_dare]

1 hour ago, JackSeal said:

Stop promoting british cricket

 

1 hour ago, 8pm said:

lol

Deenikanna mundu /razakar/britisher descendents ni and tharimi mingali, what say?

[JackSeal]

1 minute ago, Dallas_c_how_dare said:

 

Deenikanna mundu /razakar/britisher descendents ni and tharimi mingali, what say?

Yes dhanikanna mundhu aryan jathi ne tharimi mingali. Akkada nundo vachi place between himalayas and vindhyas ne akraminchi dhanki aryavarta ani name kuda pettukunnaru.

[Guest]

English Culture is as much part of our culture as Islamic culture. Just because we play cricket doesn't mean we have to keep everything left by the British. Even the Irish play Cricket. And they hate the Brits to the level you can't even imagine.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, JackSeal said:

Yes dhanikanna mundhu aryan jathi ne tharimi mingali. Akkada nundo vachi place between himalayas and vindhyas ne akraminchi dhanki aryavarta ani name kuda pettukunnaru.

Do tell us who they are. @Telugodura456 @Tryad will also joing the discussion

With @CanadianMalodu 

[8pm]

23 minutes ago, Dallas_c_how_dare said:

 

Deenikanna mundu /razakar/britisher descendents ni and tharimi mingali, what say?

 

19 minutes ago, JackSeal said:

Yes dhanikanna mundhu aryan jathi ne tharimi mingali. Akkada nundo vachi place between himalayas and vindhyas ne akraminchi dhanki aryavarta ani name kuda pettukunnaru.

galiki poye .... 

[JackSeal]

11 minutes ago, rushmore said:

Do tell us who they are. @Telugodura456 @Tryad will also joing the discussion

With @CanadianMalodu 

Mana sanathana dharmam lo bhagam aeina manu smriti telling like this: The Region between those two mountains of Himalayas and Vindhyas is called Aryavarta (the Region of the Aryans); that land where the black deer freely roam was fit for the performance of Yaginas or sacrifices. The region as different from the rest of the country was of the Mlecchas (barbarians).

As per this all members of this DB are barbarians.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, JackSeal said:

Mana sanathana dharmam lo bhagam aeina manu smriti telling like this: The Region between those two mountains of Himalayas and Vindhyas is called Aryavarta (the Region of the Aryans); that land where the black deer freely roam was fit for the performance of Yaginas or sacrifices. The region as different from the rest of the country was of the Mlecchas (barbarians).

As per this all members of this DB are barbarians.

Eighteenth-century philologists Sir William Jones and Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel assigned Manusmriti to the period of around 1250 BCE and 1000 BCE respectively, . The medieval era Buddhist law of Myanmar and Thailand are also ascribed to Manu, and the text influenced past Hindu kingdoms in Cambodia and Indonesia.

 Modern scholarship states this presumed authenticity is false, and the various manuscripts of Manusmriti discovered in India are inconsistent with each other, and within themselves, raising concerns of its authenticity, insertions and interpolations made into the text in later times.

So you're saying a text that was written some 800 years ago after Islamic, Buddhist & Christian conquest of present day India which is agreed by the historians & scholars that the text had been edited & defiled is your main source of criticism of Hinduism? 

[JackSeal]

2 minutes ago, rushmore said:

Eighteenth-century philologists Sir William Jones and Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel assigned Manusmriti to the period of around 1250 BCE and 1000 BCE respectively, . The medieval era Buddhist law of Myanmar and Thailand are also ascribed to Manu, and the text influenced past Hindu kingdoms in Cambodia and Indonesia.

 Modern scholarship states this presumed authenticity is false, and the various manuscripts of Manusmriti discovered in India are inconsistent with each other, and within themselves, raising concerns of its authenticity, insertions and interpolations made into the text in later times.

So you're saying a text that was written some 800 years ago after Islamic, Buddhist & Christian conquest of present day India which is agreed by the historians & scholars that the text had been edited & defiled is your main source of criticism of Hinduism? 

First place lo Hindi, India, Hinduism all names put by foreigners so those needs to be changed. So don't quote hinduism to reference my religion.

Inthaki em antav manuamriti fake antava ?

I told what I found in kanchi kamakoti peetam official website

https://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/books/ESSENCE OF MANU SMRITI.pdf

 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, JackSeal said:

First place lo Hindi, India, Hinduism all names put by foreigners so those needs to be changed. So don't quote hinduism to reference my religion.

Inthaki em antav manuamriti fake antava ?

I told what I found in kanchi kamakoti peetam official website

https://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/books/ESSENCE OF MANU SMRITI.pdf

 

100%.

What Kanchi Kamakoti says has no bearing on me or anyone who disagree with the authenticity. I disregard them as much as any peetham for that matter.

It's not like Catholic church or Madarasa to have some kind of strict adherence to the guidelines of what they say. 

 

[JackSeal]

13 minutes ago, rushmore said:

Eighteenth-century philologists Sir William Jones and Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel assigned Manusmriti to the period of around 1250 BCE and 1000 BCE respectively, . The medieval era Buddhist law of Myanmar and Thailand are also ascribed to Manu, and the text influenced past Hindu kingdoms in Cambodia and Indonesia.

 Modern scholarship states this presumed authenticity is false, and the various manuscripts of Manusmriti discovered in India are inconsistent with each other, and within themselves, raising concerns of its authenticity, insertions and interpolations made into the text in later times.

So you're saying a text that was written some 800 years ago after Islamic, Buddhist & Christian conquest of present day India which is agreed by the historians & scholars that the text had been edited & defiled is your main source of criticism of Hinduism? 

Manu smriti written in 1250 BCE. Xtianity born in 1st century CE and islam 7th century CE. India lo those two religions conquest chesaka rayadam enti ?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, JackSeal said:

Manu smriti written in 1250 BCE. Xtianity born in 1st century CE and islam 7th century CE. India lo those two religions conquest chesaka rayadam enti ?

There's no proof that what had been written & what is being circulated as "The Manu" is  original. The year & the century it was written are also heavily disputed. Some say it was written some 800 years ago, some say 1000 years ago. These texts are not similar to Bible or Quran with respect to authenticity. The fact that people don't regard as anything close to vedas or even Purans, Ithihasas which have had so many disputes with many different versions should tell you something.