Showing posts with label india. Show all posts
Showing posts with label india. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 8, 2016

अद्भुत मंदिर यहां गुप्त स्त्रोत से प्रवाहित होतीं है माँ गँगा-GALTAJI Temple Jaipur,India

यह मंदिर है राजस्थान की राजधानी जयपुर में स्तिथ गलता तीर्थ पर जंहा आज भी श्रद्धालु दूर दूर से मौके बे मौके स्नान करने आते है, इस तीर्थ को जितनी महानता मिलनी चाहिए थी उतनी मिली नहीं क्योंकि ज्यादा लोग इसके बारे में कुछ जानते ही नहीं। आइये जानते है क्या है खास इस गलता तीर्थ में और क्यू जाना चाहिए यहाँ।

ऋषि विश्वामित्र के शिष्य ऋषि गलवा ने यहाँ तपस्या की तब उनके लिए गँगा यहाँ गुप्त रूप से प्रकट हुई, जिसका पानी आज भी अंजान स्त्रोत से निकलता है. लोगो का मानना है की जब भी तीर्थो पे सनान होता है तो यहाँ त्रिदेव समेत सभी देवता स्नान करने आते है इसलिए यहाँ के लोग यहाँ स्नान करने को किसी कुम्भ में स्नान के बराबर मानते है।
गलता जी में मुख्य मंदिर त्रिदेवो का है जो शायद भारत का एकमात्र ऐसा मंदिर है, जहां मान्यता है की ऋषि गलवा के तप से पर्सन हो कर तीनो देवो ने एक साथ उन्हें दर्शन दिए और इसी कारण वो यहाँ विराजमान है। ( इस मंदिर में प्रतिमूर्ति स्वरुप ),  अथवा इस मंदिर में सूर्य देव का मंदिर भी है जिसका निर्मा अठारहवीं सदी में हुआ था।
संत शिरोमणि नाथ जी जो की जानते थे की भगवान् किस वक्त क्या करते है यो यह घुमने आय थे , फिर यही उनका सत्संग स्थान भी बन गया तब से यो यही अपने सत्संग किया करते थे l इन्होने ही नाभाजी भक्तमाल की रचना की जिसमे उहोने भगवान् के समस्त भक्तो का चरित्र लिखा हुआ है।
गलता जी में ही एक और मंदिर है जहा एक ऐसी प्रतिमा है जिसमे श्रीराम और श्रीकृष्ण दोनों के दर्शन एक ही प्रतिमा में हो जाते है, तो कही ऐसा तो नही तुलसीदास जी को इसी मंदिर में तो नहीं हुए थे श्रीकृष्ण की मूर्ति में श्रीराम के दर्शन ?


Pallavi Sharma- Contributor

Wednesday, December 31, 2014

DECODING ORIGINS OF LIFE- BIGGEST LIE- 30 million year old Hindu GODESS IN LAMP IN London

a hand craftedd
Original article- maltanow.com.mt
In 1944, as a ten year old boy, Newton Anderson, dropped a lump of coal in his basement and it broke in half as it hit the floor. Discovery was aginst scientific orthodoxy.
Inside the coal was a hand crafted brass alloy bell with an iron clapper and sculptured handle AND HINDU GODESS STATUE.
During analysis  it was discovered that the bell was made from an unusual mix of metals, different from any known modern alloy production (including copper, zinc, tin, arsenic, iodine, and selenium).
The seam from whence this lump of coal was mined is estimated to be 300,000,000 years old!
Link to other article-CLICK HERE
June 1936 Max Hahn and his wife Emma were on a walk beside a waterfall near to London, Texas, when they noticed a rock with wood protruding from its core. They decided to take the oddity home and later cracked it open with a hammer and a chisel. What they found within shocked the archaeological and scientific community. Embedded in the rock was what appeared to be some type of ancient man made hammer, was dated >400 million years old. The hammer itself turned out to be more than 500 million years old. A section of the wooden handle had begun the metamorphosis into coal. The hammer’s head, made of more than 96% iron, is far more pure than anything nature could have achieved without assistance from relatively modern smelting methods.
In 1889 near Nampa, Idaho, whilst workers were boring an artesian well, a small figurine made of baked clay was extracted from a depth of 320 feet. To reach this depth the workers had to cut through fifteen feet of basalt lava and many other strata below that. That in itself does not seem remarkable, until one considers that the very top layer of lava has been dated to at least 15 million years old!
It is currently accepted by science and geology that coal is a by-product of decaying vegetation. The vegetation becomes buried over time and is covered with sediment. That sediment eventually fossilises and becomes rock. This natural process of coal formation takes up to 400 million years to accomplish.
Anything that is found in lumps of coal or in coal seams during mining, had to have been placed or dropped into the vegetation before it was buried in sediment.
There are many other unusual reported finds including the following:
The Morrisonville, Illinois Times, on June 11, 1891, reported how Mrs. S. W. Culp found a circular shaped eight-carat gold chain, about 10 inches long, embedded in a lump of coal after she broke it apart to put in her scuttle. The chain was described as “antique” and of “quaint workmanship.”
cast ironDisplayed in a museum at Glen Rose, Texas, is a cast iron pot reportedly found in a large lump of coal in 1912 by a worker feeding coal into the furnace of a power plant. When he split open the coal the worker said the pot fell out, leaving its impression in the coal.
Another report found in the Epoch Times told of a Colorado rancher who in the 1800’s broke open a lump of coal, dug from a vein some 300 feet below the surface, and discovered a “strange-looking iron thimble.”
The Salzburg Cube is yet another ancient puzzle found by a worker named Reidl, in an Austrian foundry in 1885. Like the others, this man broke open a block of coal and found a metal cube embedded inside. Recent analysis established the object was of forged iron and obviously hand crafted. The coal it was found in was millions of years old.
The list of such items goes on and on and on.
These extraordinary discoveries although bizarre, are not unique or even uncommon. There are literally thousands of them collecting dust, locked away from public scrutiny in the vaults of museums throughout the world.
 Copper plate found in Phillipines before spanish,christian barbarism conversion-

CLICK HERE
Majority of Historians and Archeologists are just like all of us-BELIEVE IN WHAT THEY WERE TAUGHT AT SCHOOL WITHOUT QUESTION-ANIMLAS EXTINCT.That is how our educational system is designed -LIKE COLUMBUS DISCOVERED AMERICA, NEWTON DISCOVERED GRAVITY,COPPERNICUS DISCOVERED EARTH ROUNDS AROUND SUN IN 1850'S(ALL MYTH) CLICK HERE, and HERE, HERE. It does not encourage individuality and originality. It purely indoctrinates one with established beliefs and dogma.
On the other side we have the creationists with the belief that some omnipotent invisible being who lives in the clouds, waved his magic wand about 7,000 years ago and created the earth and everything on it. Again the adherents of this equally flawed theory rely on nothing more than a book called the Bible for their “proof” of this concept. The fact that this book has been bastardised during translation numerous times during its existence, has been re-written to certain individuals personal preference on a number of occasions, and has had many complete chapters omitted, is irrelevant to its followers. All they require is “faith”. Proof and evidence is not a prerequisite!
The reality is that the origin of the human race is a total enigma. No one, anywhere, actually knows how old humanity is or how and where it originated. It is a complete mystery. Yet from birth one is indoctrinated into one or the other of the above factions, with no questions asked or alternative opinions allowed.
If you are one of people who believe that World came from air 7000 years ago, per Bible or some islamic quran- You would probably do not like truth and I suggest to stay out from here because I am not one of those who will follow untruth. Also look at these findings -Science used to say only this sun is world until now they think there are many suns- which is already described in Aryabhatt's Aryabhattia and suryasiddhanta-Please read here or go to gooGle and download free books-
Please read about ORIGINS IF HORSE- THEY ARE HERE MILLIONS OF  YEARS-
prehistoric horse millions year old per huffingtonpost .

Continue reading: maltanow.com.mt

Saturday, May 3, 2014

DEFALCIFICATION OF INDIAN HISTORY



'Defalsification of Indian history is the first step for our renaissance.' - Dr. Subramanian Swamy
In this falsified history, it is made out that Hindus capitulated to Islamic invaders. But on the contrary,unlike Iran, Iraq and Egypt where within decades the country capitulated to become 100 per cent Muslims. India despite 800 years of brutal Islamic rule, remained 80 per cent Hindu.
The fabrication of our History begins with the falsification of our chronology.
The accepted history of no country can be structured on foreign accounts of it. But Nehru and his Leftist cronies did just that, and thus generations of Indians have been brainwashed by this falsified history of India.
The UPA has succeeded in persuading more state governments to accept the NCERT texts. A report on Monday (January 5, 2009) said 12 more state governments have accepted to teach NCERT texts in their schools.
For the last two weeks the Organiser is carrying a series of articles on the NCERT textbooks prescribed for students at the primary, secondary and higher secondary schools. We have found these books written with a peculiar mindset, to denationalise and deculturise the young Indian. These books fail to make the children aware of their true heritage. These books seem to distort even India's freedom struggle, Mahatma Gandhi's role and try to divide the society into different caste and class segments. Their idea is to convince the children that India as a nation came to exist only after August 15, 1947.
We request the parents, teachers, students and scholars to join this academic exercise to expose the shenanigans behind promotion of these books in Indian schools. ?Editor
The identity of India is Hindustan, i.e., a nation of Hindus and those others who acknowledge with pride that their ancestors were Hindus. Hindustan represents the continuing history of culture of Hindus. One?s religion may change, but culture does not. Thus, on the agenda for a national renaissance should be the dissemination of the correct perception of what we are. This perception has to be derived from a defalsified history. However, the present history taught in our schools and colleges is the British imperialist-sponsored one, with the intent to destroy our identity. India as a State is treated as a British-created entity and of only recent origin. The Indian people are portrayed as a heterogeneous lot who are hopelessly divided against themselves. Such a ?history? has been deliberately created by the British as a policy. Sir George Hamilton, Secretary of State for India, wrote to the Home Office on March 26, 1888 that ?I think the real danger to our rule is not now but say 50 years hence?.. We shall (therefore) break Indians into two sections holding widely different views?.. We should so plan the educational text books that the differences between community and community are further strengthened?.
After achieving Independence, under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru and the implementing authority of the anglicized ICS, revision of our history was never done, in fact the very idea was condemned as ?obscurantist? and Hindu chauvinist by Nehru and his ilk.
The Imperialist History of India
What is the gist of this British imperialist-tailored Indian history? In this history, India is portrayed as the land ?conquered? first by the ?Dravidians?, then by the ?Aryans?, later by Muslims, and finally by the British. Otherwise, everything else is mythical. Our history books today exhibit this obsession with foreign rule. For example, even though the Mughal rule from Akbar to Aurangzeb is about 150 years, which is much shorter than the 350 year rule of the Vijayanagaram empire, the history books of today hardly take notice of the latter. In fact the territory under Krishna Devaraya?s rule was much larger than Akbar?s, and yet it is the latter who is called ?the Great?. Such a version suited the British rules who had sought to create a legitimacy for their presence in India. Furthermore, we were also made to see advantages accruing from British rule, the primary one being that India was united by this colonialism, and that but for the British, India would never have been one country. Thus, the concept of India itself is owed to the plunder of colonialists.
In this falsified history, it is made out that Hindus capitulated to Islamic invaders. But on the contrary, unlike Iran, Iraq and Egypt where within decades the country capitulated to become 100 per cent Muslims. India despite 800 years of brutal Islamic rule, remained 80 per cent Hindu.
These totally false and pernicious ideas have however permeated deep into our educational system. They have poisoned the minds of our younger generations who have not had the benefit of the Freedom Struggle to awaken their pride and nationalism. It has thus to be an essential part of the renaissance agenda that these ideas of British-sponsored history of India, namely, (1) that India as a State was a gift of the British and (2) that there is no such thing as a native Indian, and what we are today is a by-product of the rape of the land by visiting conquerors and their hordes and (3) that India is a land that submitted meekly to invading hordes from Aryan to the English, are discarded.
Falsification of Chronology in India?s History
The fabrication of our History begins with the falsification of our chronology.
The customary dates quoted for composition of the Rig Veda (circa 1300 B.C.), Mahabharat (600 B.C.), Buddha?s Nirvana (483 B.C.), Maurya Chandragupta?s coronation (324 B.C.), and Asoka (c.268 B.C.) are entirely wrong. Those dates are directly or indirectly based on a selected reading of Megasthenes? account of India. In fact, so much so that eminent historians have called if the ?sheet anchor of Indian chronology?. The account of Megasthenes and the derived chronology of Indian history have also an important bearing on related derivations such as the two-race (Aryan-Dravidian) theory, and on the pre-Vedic character of the so called Indus Valley Civilization.
Megasthenes was the Greek ambassador sent by Seleucus Nicator in c. 302 B.C. to the court of the Indian king whom he and the Greek called ?Sandrocottus?. He was stationed in ?Palimbothra?, the capital city of the kingdom. It is not clear how many years Megasthenes stayed in India, but he did write an account of his stay, titled Indika. The manuscript Indika is lost, and there is no copy of it available. However, during the time it was available, many other Greek writers quoted passages from it in their own works. These quotations were meticulously collected by Dr. Schwanbeck in the nineteenth century, and this compilation is also available to us in English (J.M. McCrindle: Ancient India as Described by Megasthenes and Arrian).
The founder of the Mauryas, however, is not the only Chandragupta in Indian history, who was a king of Magadh and founder of a dynasty. In particular, there is Gupta Chandragupta, a Magadh king and founder of the Gupta dynasty at Patliputra. Chandragupta Gupta was also not of ?noble? birth and, in fact, came to power by deposing the Andhra king Chandrasri. That is, Megasthenes? Sandrocottus may well be Gupta Chandragupta instead of Maurya Chandgragupta (and Xandremes the same as Chandrasri, and Sandrocryptus as Samudragupta).
In order to determine which Chandragupta it is, we need to look further. It is, of course, a trifle silly to build one?s history on this kind of tongue-gymnastics, but I am afraid we have no choice but to pursue the Megasthenes evidence to its end, since the currently acceptable history is based on it.
In order to determine at which Chandragupta?s court Megasthenes was ambassador, we have to look further into his account of India. We find he was at Pataliputra (i.e. Palimbothra in Megasthenes? account). We know from the Puranas (which are unanimous on this point) that all the Chandravamsa king of Magadh (including the Mauryas) prior to the Guptas, had their capital at Girivraja (or equivalently Rajgrha) and not at Pataliputra. Gupta Chandragupta was the first king to have his capital in Patliputra. This alone should identify Sandrocottos with Gupta Chandragupta. However some 6-11th century A.D. sources call Pataliputra the Maurya capital, e.g., Vishakdatta in Mudrarakshasa, but these are based on secondary sources and not on the Puranas.
Pursuing Megasthenes? account further, we find most of it impossible to believe. He appears to be quite vague about details and is obviously given to the Greek writers? weakness in letting his imagination get out of control. For example, ?Near a mountain which is called Nulo there live men whose fee are turned back-wards and have eight toes on each foot.? (Solinus 52.36-30 XXX.B.) ?Megasthenes says a race of men (exist in India) who neither eat or drink, and in fact have not even mouths, set on fire and burn like incense in order to sustain their existence with odorous fumes?..? (Plutarch, Frag. XXXI). However, Megasthenes appears to have made one precise statement of possible application which was picked up later by Pliny, Solinus, and Arrian. As summarized by Professor K.D. Sethna of Pondicherry, it reads:
?Dionysus was the first who invaded India and was the first of all who triumphed over the vanished Indians. From the days of Dionysus to Alexander the Great, 6451 years reckoned with 3 months additional. From the time of Dionysus to Sandrocottus the Indians reckoned 6452 years, the calculation being made by counting the kings who reigned in the intermediate period to number 153 or 154 years. But among these a republic was thrice established, one extending?..years, another to 300 and another to 120. The Indians also tell us that Dionysus was earlier than Heracles by fifteen generations, and that except for him no one made a hostile invasion of India but that Alexander indeed came and overthrew in war all whom he attacked.?
While there a number of issues raised by this statement including the concoction that Alexander was victorious in battle across the Indus, the exactness with which he states his numbers should lead us to believe that Megasthenes could have received his chronological matters from none else than the Puranic pundits of his time. To be conclusive, we need to determine who are the ?Dionysus? and ?Heracles? of Megasthenes? account.
Traditionally, Dionysus (or Father Bachhus) was a Greek God of wine who was created from Zeus?s thigh. Dionysus was also a great king, and was recognised as the first among all kings, a conqueror and constructive leader. Could there be an Indian equivalent of Dionysus whom Megasthenes quickly equated with his God of wine? Looking through the Puranas, one does indeed find such a person. His name is Prithu.
Prithu was the son of King Vena. The latter was considered a wicked man whom the great sages could not tolerate, especially after he told them that the elixir soma should be offered to him in prayer and not to the gods (Bhagavata Purana IV.14.28). The great sages thereafter performed certain rites and killed Vena. But since this could lead immediately to lawlessness and chaos, the rshis decided to rectify it by coronating a strong and honest person. The rshis therefore churned the right arm (or thigh; descriptions vary) of the dead body (of Vena) to give birth to a fully grown Prithu. It was Prithu, under counsel from rshi Atri (father of Soma), who reconstructed society and brought about economic prosperity. Since he became such a great ruler, the Puranas have called him adi-raja (first king) of the world. So did the Satpatha Brahmana (v.3.5 4.).
In the absence of a cult of soma in India, it is perhaps inevitable that Megasthenes and the other Greeks, in translating Indian experiences for Greek audiences, should pick on adi-raja Prithu who is ?tinged with Soma? in a number of ways and bears such a close resemblance to Dionysus in the circumstances of his birth, and identify him as Dionysus. If we accept identifying Dionysus with Prithu, then indeed by a calculation based on the Puranas (done by DR Mankad, Koti Venkatachelam, KD Sethna, and others), it can be conclusively shown that indeed 6,451 years had elapsed between Prithu and a famous Chandragupta. This calculation exactly identifies Sandrocottus with Gupta Chandragupta and not with Maurya Chandragupta. The calculation also identifies Heracles with Hari Krishna (Srikrishna) of Dwarka.
This calculation must be necessarily long and tedious to counter the uninformed general feeling first sponsored by Western scholars, that the Puranas spin only fair tales and are therefore quite unreliable. However, most of these people do not realise that most Puranas have six parts, and the Vamsanucharita sections (especially of Vishnu, Matsya, and Vagu) are a systematic presentation of Indian history especially of the Chandravansa kings of Magadha.
In order to establish these dates, I would have to discuss in detail the cycle of lunar asterisms, the concept of time according to Aryabhatta, and various other systems, and also the reconciliation of various minor discrepancies that occur in the Puranas. Constraints of space and time however, prevent me from presenting these calculations here.
However, on the basis of these calculations we can say that Gupta Chandragupta was ?Sandrocottus? c.327 B.C. His son, Samudragupta, was the great king who established a unified kingdom all over India, and obtained from the Cholas, Pandyas, and Cheras their recognition of him. He also had defeated Seleucus Nicator, while his father Chandragupta was king. On this calculation we can also place Prithu at 6777 B.C. and Lord Rama before that. Derivation of other dates without discussion may also be briefly mentioned here: Buddha?s Nirvana 1807 BC, Maurya Chandragupta c. 1534 BC, Harsha Vikramaditya (Parmar) c. 82 BC.
The European scholars have thus constructed an enormous edifice of contemporary foreign dates to suit their dating. A number of them are based on misidentification. For instance, the Rock Edict XIII, the famous Kalinga edict, is identified as Asoka?s. It was, however, Samudragupta?s (Samudragupta was a great conqueror and a devout admirer of Asoka. He imitated Asoka in many ways and also took the name Asokaditya. In his later life, he became a sanyasi). Some other facts, which directly contradict their theories, they have rather flippantly cast aside. We state here only a few examples ? such facts as (1) Fa-hsien was in India and at Patliputra c. 410 AD. He mentions a number of kings, but makes not even a fleeting reference to the Gupta, even though according to European scholars he came during the height of their reign. He also dates Buddha at 1100 BC. (2) A number of Tibetan documents place Buddha at 2100 BC. (3) The Ceylonese Pali traditions leave out the Cholas, Pandyas, and Cheras from the list of Asoka?s kingdoms, whereas Rock Edict XIII includes them. In fact, as many scholars have noted, the character of Asoka from Ceylonese and other traditions is precisely (as RK Mukherjee has said) what does not appear in the principal edicts.
The accepted history of no country can be structured on foreign accounts of it. But Nehru and his Leftist cronies did just that, and thus generations of Indians have been brainwashed by this falsified history of India.
The time has come for us to take seriously our Puranic sources and to re-construct a realistic well-founded history of ancient India, a history written by Indians about Indians. Such a history should bring out the amazing continuity of a Hindu nation which asserts its identity again and again. It should focus on the fact that at the centre of our political thought is the concept of the Chakravartian ideal ? to defend the nation from external aggression while giving maximum internal autonomy to the janapadas.
A correct, defalsified history would record that Hindustan was one nation in the art of governance, in the style of royal courts, in the methods of warfare, in the maintenance of its agrarian base, and in the dissemination of information. Sanskrit was the language of national communication and discourse.
An accurate history should not only record the periods of glory but the moments of degeneration, of the missed opportunities, and of the failure to forge national unity at crucial junctures in time. It should draw lessons for the future generations from costly errors in the past.
In particular, it was not Hindu submission as alleged by JNU historians that was responsible for our subjugation but lack of unity and effective military strategy.
Without an accurate history, Hindustan cannot develop on its correct identity. And without a clearly defined identity, Indians will continue to flounder. Defalsification of Indian history is the first step for our renaissance.

Sunday, January 19, 2014

BHARAT, HINDUSTAN AND INDIA

Bharat, Hindustan and India



India’s official name is Bharat and this is accorded equal primacy as the word India in the Constitution. In fact the First Clause of the Constitution begins with the words: India, that is Bharat,….

In Sanskrit, ‘Bha’ means Light and Knowledge while ‘rata’ means “Devoted”. Bharat means "devoted to light/knowledge". The name "Bharat" is symbolic in nature revealing the quest of knowledge and the spiritual/scientific prosperity of this country.

Through the ages our ancestors referred this land as Bharat. Though the name ‘Bharat’ should be used, we seldom use it today! Why not refer India asIn + Dia = India ==> The Land of Inner Light analogous to its original name Bha + rata = Bharat ==> meaning devoted to light and knowledge ?

If you are using India, refer or think of it as In + Dia (The Land of Inner Diya)retaining the glory of its name in the modern name ‘India’ rather than just ‘India’ as ascribed by others.

DIVING THROUGH THE PAST

Bharat

According to the Puranas, this country is known as Bharatavasha after the king Bharata Chakravarti. It is clearly stated that this country is known as Bharata Varsha.
ऋषभो मरुदेव्याश्च ऋषभात भरतो भवेत्
भरताद भारतं वर्षं, भरतात सुमतिस्त्वभूत्
Rishabha was born to Marudevi, Bharata was born to Rishabh,
Bharatvarsha (India) arose from Bharata, and Sumati arose from Bharata
  Vishnu Purana 


ततश्च भारतं वर्षमेतल्लोकेषुगीयते
भरताय यत: पित्रा दत्तं प्रतिष्ठिता वनम
This country is known as Bharatavarsha since the times the father entrusted the kingdom to the son Bharata and he himself went to the forest for ascetic practices
—Vishnu Purana
 
उत्तरं यत्समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् ।
वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र संततिः ।।
uttaraṃ yatsamudrasya himādreścaiva dakṣiṇam
varṣaṃ tadbhārataṃ nāma bhāratī yatra santatiḥ
"The country (varṣam) that lies north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountains is called Bhāratam; there dwell the descendants of Bharata."
Vishnu Purana


The realm of Bharata is known as Bharātavarṣa in the Mahabhārata (the core portion of which is itself known as Bhārata) and later texts. The term varsa means a division of the earth, or a continent.

According to Mahabharata as well as the numerous puranas and diverse Indian history, Bharat Empire included the whole territory of the Indian subcontinent, including parts of present day Pakistan, Afghanistan,China, Iran, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Turkmenistan, North-west Tibet,Nepal and Bangladesh.

This represented as the ideal sample of great empires, which was dominated by harmony, wealth and prosperity.


Hindustan

Hindustan, as is the term Hindu itself, entered the English language in the 17th century. In the 19th century, the term as used in English referred to the northern region of India between the Indus and Brahmaputra rivers and between the Himalayas and the Vindhyas in particular, hence the term Hindustani for the Hindi-Urdu language.Hindustan was in use synonymously with India during the British Raj.

Origin of the name Hindu

In the words of Dr Frank Morales, the term “Hindu” is not a term that is inherent to the religion itself. Rather, the term is known to have been first coined by the ancient Persians, who were culturally, religiously, and perspectively extrinsic to the culture. The term was first used by these ancient Persians in order to conveniently designate the ancient Vedic spiritual culture, and was mistakenly used to refer to the Vedic religion as primarily a geographic and ethnic phenomenon, more than as a religio-philosophical world-view.To the ancient Persians, the word Hindu simply referred to the culture, people, religion and practices of the peoples who lived on the other side of the Sindhu River. In the ancient Avestan Persian language ‘s’ grammatically became ‘h’. Thus, the Persians pronounced the name of this river Hindhu, rather than Sindhu. Thus, ironically, the currently used word Hindu is itself a corruption of the Persian word Hindhu, which is in turn a corruption of the term Sindhu, which is itself only referring to a river, and not a religion! Thus when the word Hindu is used today to refer to the ancient religion of India, the term is in actuality a corruption of a corruption of a word whose meaning is irrelevant to begin with.

An alternate and infrequently cited theory on the origin of the word Hindustan is based on the Sanskrit shloka from the Barhaspatya Samhita of the Rigveda (ca. 1700-1100 BCE):

हिमालयं समारभ्य यावदिंदुसरोवरम् ।
तं देवनिर्मितं देशं हिंदुस्थानं प्रचक्ष्यते ।।
Himalyam Samarabhya Yavadindusarovaram Tam Deonirmitam Desham Hindusthanam Prachakshate
"The land created by the gods which stretched from the Himalayas to the Indu (i.e. Southern) ocean is called Hindusthan, with the हिंदु (Hindu) mentioned in word हिंदुस्थानं (Hindusthan)."


India

Most experts agree today that the name India was derived from the river Indus (in today’s Pakistan).


But where did the name ‘Indus’ come from?

In ancient times, the entire Indus river system (along with its seven tributaries – Chenab, Ravi, Sutlej, Jhelum, Beas and the now extinct River Saraswati) and the area it covered, used to be called Sapta Sindhu i.e. the land of seven rivers (Sindhu means river in Sanskrit).

The word Sindhu not only referred to the river system and adjoining area but also became the label to denote the culture that had developed along its valleys.

The corruption of Sindhu into Hindu can be traced back to journeys made by early Persian explorers from the Northwest who due to the peculiarities of their own language aspirated the ‘S’ sound in ‘Sindhu’ to make the word ‘Hindu’

Thus to world beyond, the area around the Saraswati-Sindhu rivers and its culture became to be known as the area of Hindus(thus the name Hindustan which literally means the land of Hindus).

About 2500 years ago, when the Greeks first reached the river plains of Punjab, they borrowed the name of the region from the Persians and simply modified it to Indos. Indos later morphed into Indus in Latin  by which name the river is still known in the West. The Romans began to call the whole land mass after this river and thus the name India came to stay which has been the form used by Europeans over the ages.

The ancient Greeks referred to the Indians as Indoi (Ινδοί), which translates as "the people of the Indus".
 
References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_India
http://satyameva-jayate.org/2006/05/27/hindu-india-and-bharat-word-origins/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India