Decolonization and the loss of Hindustan - Manan Ahmed Asif - Professor - Columbia -

[@gautamchandran]

The two nation theory was first propagated by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan way before Veer Sarvarkar..J Sai Deepak has done a thorough analysis of the same in his latest book..Anyways it was for the best that the nation was partitioned in 1947..

[@tharwania]

Pakistani liberals just have to make this false equivalence between hindus and muslims. If muslims are bad how can hindu be good. So lets critisize modi, savarkar just because u are critisizing pakistanis and aurangzeb

[@SRsudhanshuranjan]

Agar complete population exchange ho jata to partition best hota. Abhi pakistan muslims ki exclusive property ban gyi h or Bharat joint property.

[@subhodutta6163]

what a piece of sh**. you believe partition was good?

[@bapparawal2457]

How? Population exchange was never done? We lost on both ends of deals

[@siddharthsharma9283]

89% stayed bro, and still propogating, we lost on both ends and now we celebrate all religions live here peacefully, but we fail to realize it's us in the majority that's why the social fabric is intact, otherwise subcontinent Muslims are so desperate to appear muslims that they will immediately switch india to pak once they are in majority, already hindu fertility rate is below replacemsnt fertility rate (1.9 ) ,

[@subhashishbagchi3191]

As Bengali from West Bengal,India. We rarely use the word Hindustan. We generally use the term Bharat. The Hindustan is name given by middle eastern people. Our religion is Sanatan Dharama not Hindu because Hindu name was given by Persian and Arabs.

[@kartikeyatiwari2502]

Hindu is used in many puranas like kalika purana

[@VarunKumar-ro4ll]

@Malayalam Audio book Hindu-stan refers to Indus, the primary river in the region. The area was generally marked by the region east of Indus.

[@Aalokborso]

ওহে ভাই তোমার ধর্মের নাম সনাতন নয়

[@Aalokborso]

এটা একটি ধর্ম গুরু দের নতুন গুলবাজি

[@Aalokborso]

হিন্দুত্ববাদ হোক বা সনাতনী e সব i holo ব্রাহ্মণবাদের চালাকি

[@basantjhawar6632]

I like how pakistani/muslim people make their own story to make themselves happy...

[@71espn]

Well everyone does that to varying degrees

[@MahendraGurjar0123]

Pakistani Muslims very cleverly give Islamic color to everything. Your father is a Hindu, everyone understands the mentality of Muslims.

[@nasirfazal5440]

You make yourself happy by gloating about Hindu math and astronomy 2000 yrs ago, internet troll.

[@InjusticeinIndia]

Most Pakistan hate Hindus that is why they hate india,it's simple.People like shehzad is rare in Pakistan in his age bracket.

[@ZizzyPatriot]

@@md.shaghilsubhani.1639 Mr. Puncture are you aware that Gautam Buddha was born in a hindu family. Your puncture father did not teach you this.

[@bhnuc]

Hindustan is a very North India centric name of region. Thats why we in India officially avoided this name in our constitution. Many languages in southern part of India have no word like "Hindustan". The word to represent Indian subcontinent is Bhaarat in every language. Ex. The magnum opus epic named Maha-Bhaarat.

[@chaivalla]

Same with Bharat and Aryavarta. Both terms only represented parts of modern northern India and parts of northern Pakistan. Dravidians in the south have never referred to their land as Bharat. Also, the same can be said for the word India which used to represent the Indus region thus Pakistan. The only terms that came to be used to represent all of the subcontinent are India and Hindustan.

[@jaiminsangar7531]

@@chaivalla what's Bharatnatyam?

[@chaivalla]

@@jaiminsangar7531 The ancient dance was called Sadir Attam amongst other Dravidian names. It was changed to Bharat Natyam in the 1900s. Pretty much cultural colonization by the north on the south. Like what their doing with imposing Hindi on the south.

[@jaiminsangar7531]

@@chaivalla good luck buddy, if you cry wolf for so called hindi imposition, your future generations will speak Urdu and arabic.

[@chaivalla]

@@jaiminsangar7531 The south has its own languages far older than Hindi/Urdu, and other Indo-Aryan languages. Dravidians are the original inhabitants of the subcontinent. Indo-Aryans and Turk-Muslims are outsiders.

[@saptarshitalukdar3999]

This is where the Indian and Pakistani viewpoints on the history of the subcontinent differ. For us colonial times began with the Islamic invasions and for the Pakistanis it began much later. If a discussion is held on this divergence of views it would be quite interesting.

[@chaivalla]

And for Dravidians when Aryans came? You are part of the problem.

[@saptarshitalukdar3999]

@@chaivalla That is an unproven theory called the Aryan invasion theory.

[@chaivalla]

@@saptarshitalukdar3999 Migration theory is the strongest one. On the other hand, there is no evidence that they were original inhabitants.

[@saptarshitalukdar3999]

@@chaivalla That is not correct. The basis of the theory was the discovery of skeletons at a burial site. But now even the western academia is doubting the bsis of the theory . In India ofcourse the communists, christian missionaries are using it the advance their own agenda.

[@chaivalla]

@@saptarshitalukdar3999 Please share papers where academics have opposed the extremely well researched studies by Shinde, Narasimha, Rohland, Patterson, amongst others. I haven't come across any and there aren't any.

[@shashankjp88]

I'm surprised how even the most secular appearing and learned Pakistanies like this gentleman and even Dr Hoodboy can't see beyond the muslim lense while analyzing India. As per him, around 1910 is when the idea of all accepting hindustan died. So the reigns of all the Islamic rulers starting from Gauri, Gaznavi till Aurangzeb was part of a period of all accepting Hindustan where every religion was given the right to prosper without any discrimination 🤐🫡 Whatt book can you write if your premise is so wrong and full of flaws

[@nazifarahman9198]

Ssssh they have to save their head

[@nacpatil]

Its unimaginable for me to discuss india and not talk about buddha, the spirituality the old Indian empires, the diversity of north and south india. The unique art and languages this region had. If anything this podcast for first time has made me realized what Naipaul used to say. He mentioned that Islam is all about wiping out the history. I feel really sorry to hear about the synthetic culture which is yet to even develop its roots before giving some fruits. It did not come here due to love or the inner desire of human beings. It came because of conquests. Sorry to say this but if India is lost a lot is lost. A rich heritage is lost. If the muslims culture of this subcontinent are lost then nothing much is lost. Better to preserve the Arabs and their culture than this implant. Its a permanent wound on this civilization. Its synonymous to discuss china and only discuss the colonial rule and the opium wars and forget Lao Tzu and Confucius and the history of buddhism. Sorry to say but this was most surreal experience I ever had. I should thank for that certainly!

[@harijayaraman1519]

Jainism also has deep roots down to Tamilnadu and Karnataka as well bro.

[@temp1851]

​@@harijayaraman1519 yes. Along with that Sikhism as well. But, not Islam or Christianity..

[@jatin2866]

Well said

[@wisdomchase]

Yeah, the more I watch this host's videos, the more I'm convinced that he's just peddling Pakistani apologia, and not intellectually honest.

[@offencebestdefence500]

@@wisdomchase When they r not doing well they are victims.. when they are doing well they r GHAZI ... The base line is always Mistrust n subtle propoganda. Even Mr syed mujammil..supposed great mind of pakistan...he starts with the base assumption of present India being a Fascist state...how??? No explanation!!!! Even this dr muktedar khan ( OG ..hyd telengana) Now a professor at Delaware uni.....India is doing great .. but Muslims are in trouble.. how????? No explanation.

[@dakansen5613]

If you come to regions like Tamil Nadu or Kerala, the word 'Hindustan' does not exist even in the dictionary. The most common word used to refer to the South Asian region is 'Bharat.' As for 'Hindustan,' it is a loan word from Persian that came into popular use in parts of India during Mughal occupation. Likewise, 'India' came to be popular during British occupation.

[@monodeep1]

Nice observation. As a Bengali, I do have the same experience. We hardly use the word hindustan, we more often tend to use Bharat or Bharat barsa.

[@monodeep1]

@@surbhisingh5184 bhai mere, kis sastro me hindu likkha hua haiN. Thoda batayeNge... Namaste

[@dakansen5613]

@Hannibal Ad Portas I would partly agree with you. Terms like 'Indoi,' 'India', 'Hind' were used by nations to the West of the Sindhu river. "Dominance" brought these terms into common parlance. As for "dominant" regions within India, at one time the Madhydeshis thought West Punjab and Sindh were backward. At other times the Vijayanagaris thought the Mughals were backward. The picture is not that simple.

[@dakansen5613]

@Hannibal Ad Portas In the social sciences most views are debatable. Scholarship is informed opinion. As for BJP or other political organizations, they do not interest me much. I have worked with senior politicians in various countries and have learned the hard way to focus on facts rather than be swayed by the vicissitudes of public sentiment.

[@AUDI639]

Same here in Odisha

[@offencebestdefence500]

Hindustan is a term used n coined by the same ppl who could not pronounce 'Sindhu' The constitution says INDIA THAT IS BHARAT No one says Hindustan except around UP, Delhi etc where Urdu speakers who dint go to pakistan stay in huge numbers 😊 We all say Bharat, Bharat desh ,Bharat desham...BHARATAM🙏🙏

[@induchopra3014]

Bangla didn't say bangla stan. But desh.

[@himanv]

Listened to first 45:00 minutes. Several major differences with your guest: Before the Islamic conquest of India that is Bharat, everyone living in India was a Hindu-- so this hair-splitting of Hindustan referred to the land and not that the people who lived there were following Hindu religion and is a reference to their religion is just that-- it's hair-splitting. Besides, the differentiation between Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, and later Sikhism, is also an outsider's lens and is imposed view-- and therefore is colonial. Internally, all these and especially Buddhism and Jainism, were simply treated locally by everyone as just new ways of thinking of Dharma-- just as "Hinduism" itself isn't a monolith but had at least six different and variously competing philosophical expositions. Jain, Buddh, Hindu are all "panths" (sects) of Dharma-- Sanatan Dharma. This leads to the second major difference: For Sanatanis, the Islamic conquest of India that is Bharat that is Hindustan is itself a colonial conquest. Islam is a colonizing religion, and this isn't something new or recent, nor is it an idea of division seeded and imposed by the British. The "keeda" of Islamic superiority and separatism was much older than Savarkar also. It's written exposition is made by Shah Wiliullah Dehalwi, in mid-1700s; his father was on the committee organized and sanctioned by Aurangzeb to gather the Arabic jurisprudence and write down what became the Fatwa-i-Alamgiri, the basis of which even to this day many of India's Muslims seek to be ruled under that sort of sharia. I don't have to tell you that Fatwa-i-Alamgiri is basically ummah-driven and Islamist, and therefore foreign to Bharat that is India that is Hindustan. If you're going to talk about colonialism then first understand that Islam and Islamism in Bharat is a colonial enterprise and the Dharma followers have only ever been at the receiving end. Just like you ridicule those who exclaim that at least the British left us the railways-- well, Islam may have built some monuments and maybe written some poetry (not like we didn't have those things aplenty already), but to the extent Islam did anything good to Hindustan, it was to forward Isalmist agenda.

[@anirudhvats8997]

I have noticed that sometimes Pakistani scholars and academicians can have very rudimentary and caricaturish perspectives on the Indian Right, RSS and the BJP. If you want to understand the BJP more, or modi's India more, you can try reaching out to Vinay Sitapati, who's written a book called the 'BJP before Modi', and has traced the history and ideology of the party, without resorting to strawmans or reductionist assertions. He's a left leaning liberal, so am I, so no Bhakt propoganda here. I just feel like people outside India have very little insight into why Narendra Modi is in power and keeps winning elections. It's not just because he's a nationalist who hates Muslims. There's a lot more to it (corruption of the Congress, elitism of the left, failures of Nehruvian secularism). Great podcast though! Love your channel.

[@pillalam]

They just see modi from a prism of NYT and WAPO and in Pakistan it’s pure Hindu phobia

[@tanukabanerjee1731]

Now Pakistani people know . They realize how modi is a blessing for India and curse for Pakistan

[@tharwania]

They know, they won’t do it. Its just intellectual dishonesty. Modi is here they say congress and nehru were better but listen to liberal pakistani argument before modi that nehru helped create pakistan jinnah used it as a barganing chip. Thier argument will always be if muslim bad then hindu bad too

[@cauliflowerhead2735]

As I liberal myself I completely agree. Pakistani scholars can be a bit short-sighted about ghe internal dynamics of The Indian Right.

[@exerjiexerji]

@@cauliflowerhead2735 True. As someone lamented, a Pakistani Liberal can even go to the extent of calling himself/herself an atheist but will still swear by two nation theory as necessary! And, keep citing Jinnah's 11th Aug 1947 address as proof of his vision despite the fact that 10 years of his work prior to that and months after that offer no glimpse of such generosity in his words or deeds.

[@syedshariq8486]

Words like hindustan india hind sindh indus all are foreign names Native name of our country is Bharat

[@AzadParinda2023]

Agree 100%

[@anotherdayonearth2199]

Sindh is not foreign....

[@himanshugurjar9002]

Bharat, jambudweep and aryavart r native

[@DRVIKASJOSHI]

I agree. But the two gentlemen will not understand it. They are using brain of Muhammed bin Kasim and think they knows everything😂.

[@ritikshaw5868]

Sindh/Sindhu is native. The corruption of these 2 gives you the rest.

[@KryptoniteIND]

the author conveniently forgot to explain that the rise of Hindu nationalism was to counter the Islamic consolidation of the Muslim league movement. try to portray history in an unbiased manner.

[@71espn]

They were contemporaries that feed of each other's bigotry.

[@dollartreeshark6786]

Only Hindus were last to consolidate, Muslims were alway consolidating and supporting as one block in general...

[@Suryapoosarla]

@@71espn no muslim league was started by British and it was followed by Rss to counter muslim consolidation..they were not contemporaries...

[@knightf8648]

Would they be called historians anymore if they are not biased? They write books to further their propaganda, like nehruvian historians such as romila thapar and bipan chandra glorifying nehruvian idea of india. In BJP regime, they haven't sanctioned any state funded historiography though but scholars in their private capacity have writing our version of history to counter the narrative. In essence history is full of grey area and no historian paints true pictures, just picking bits and pieces to suit their agenda

[@dollartreeshark6786]

@@Suryapoosarla It is incorrect to say that British started it. The separate electorate for Muslims question prompted creation of Muslim party under different name initially which then metamorphosed as Muslim League. It was the basic intention or aspiration to hold onto the power Muslims had before the British arrived. In today’s Pakistan separate electoral votes for minorities means no one bothers about them or anything of any benefit or justice can be demanded as “main” Muslim leaders just do not have to care. It was a bad idea.

[@hotfun07]

Hindu Nationalists dont paint Muslims as outsiders. They call Islam and other Abrahamic religions as outsider. IMO, they are right as far as the origins of the Abrahamic Faiths are concerned.

[@patmclaughlin107]

To add: They call the invaders like Lodhis, Tughlaqs, Mughals, and Afghans outsiders, which they were. Some of them were born in India (e.g. Mughals from Akbar), but Hindu nationalists consider them outsiders too, since those emperors never really considered themselves Indian. They followed the Turko-Persian traditions, spoke Turkish/Persian, installed mostly Turks & Persians to high posts and viewed the native people (Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists & Jains) are subjugated people.

[@LearnWithVikram7]

@@patmclaughlin107 what outsiders bought is their superiority mindset and believed best of spirituality was outside. Anyone who was inward focused is Indic. It's a miracle how it survived two genocidal cultures. That part adaptation of outsiders was survival mode. But there is nothing without that core, even if it is non homogeneous

[@RavindraSinha]

Indian Constitution Article 1(1) says, “India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.” Our country has been known as Bharat for thousands of years .

[@induchopra3014]

Like Turkey,we can apply to UN for a name change. Japan is nippon Germany is deuteland, Russia is Rus. China is also cheen

[@adeenatahir4156]

You should add a disclaimer to absolutely not open this video until one has a pen and paper. Literally every sentence strikes you, either because you've never heard it before, is opposite to what you thought, or is so good that you just have to remember it for bringing it up next time. Lol, thanks for putting so much effort in to these podcasts. There is so much to unlearn and relearn, but with content like this, there's hope!✨

[@adeenatahir4156]

@@ThePakistanExperience Totally guilty of rewatching! And in that context, I'm already loving how you've divided the video this time. Would help a lot!

[@taymiaali3215]

❤️ agreed

[@mcs106]

WAS THE INDIA ONE UNIT EARLIER OR BEFORE THE PARTITION AND CREATION OF THE PAKISTAN AND RULED BY ONE PARTY,TRIBE,HINDU OR THE MUSLIMS AND THE ENGLISH CAME AND BROKE THE UNITY OF THE INDIA AS POSED THAT THE INDIA LOST THE HINDUSTAN, PERHAPS IT LOOKS A BIASED NARRATIVE WITH HAVING THE DEEP ROOTED INTENTION OF KEEPING THE MUSLIMS AS THE SLAVES AND THE SHUDDERS AS THE OTHER COMMUNITIES THERE IN. THE INDIA WAS NEVER RULED BY ONE AND ALWAYS REMAINED DIVIDED INTO MANY TRIBES.GROUPS,STATES WITH HAVING MANY TERRITORIES RUN AND MANGED BY THE HINDU OR THE MUSLIM RAJAS. I THINK THE DIVIDE BY THE ENGLISH HAS HELPED THE INDIA TO BECOME A UNITED STATE OF MORE THAN 40 STATES AND ALSO AN INDEPENDENT. HOWEVER, THE CREDIT OF BEING THE SECULAR STATE OF INDIA GOES TO THE GREATEST SCHOLAR,POLITICIAN AND A FAR SIGHTED LEADER JALAUDDIN MOHAMMAD AKBAR WHO PRACTICALLY PROVED IN BELIEVING IN SECULARISM THAT MEANT TO HAVE RESPECT AND A SECURED ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL THE BELIEFS. AND LAST IF THE (HINDUS) DID HAVE ANY SORT OF MECHANISM TO LIVE TOGETHER WITH PEACE AND PROSPERITY,HARMONY AND ENSURING THE MAJORITY TO HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR ECONOMIC JUSTICE AS THE EQUAL GENDERS WITH EQUAL RIGHTS THE UNITY OF THE INDIA WOULD NEVER BE BROKEN OR DIVIDED.

[@mum5952]

Muslims of India proved Savarkar right with Khilafat movement. Cannot deny the truth.

[@thefishtruck]

Ironically though Jinnah was vehemently opposed to joining the Khilafat movement and advised Gandhi not to support it either, saying, "this is using religion or appeals of religion to mobilize against the British. One day it will backfire on us. He used that famous phrase: “Mr. Gandhi is spiritualizing Indian nationalist politics.”

[@mum5952]

@@thefishtruck Every one used Islam when it suited them. Did the same Jinnah not use it to get his own power? Gandhi was wrong on a lot of things. That has been swept under the carpet.

[@musfirakhurshid]

Guys, I just noticed that Dr. Ahmed’s been standing this whole time of the podcast. The dedication is really motivational!

[@sharmander9477]

I think we all did. He's a teacher and I believe conversations like this about their subjects energize them

[@Makrania]

@@sharmander9477 جب میں یونیورسٹی میں پڑھتا تھا تب ہمارا ایک پروفیسر ہمیشہ کھڑے ہوکر کلاس کے سامنے بولتے تھے، چونکہ انکی پیٹ میں بہت درد ہوتی تھی جب وہ کرسی مین بیٹھ تے تھے

[@arunsar7893]

And I just noticed his right hand nails. Did you?

[@ArmageddonIsHere]

Maybe the ISI paid him a visit, like all journalists in Pakistan. And he can't sit down anymore now?🤔

[@Rajsinh_solanki]

I'm his doctor he just did piles operation 😅

[@vikasshetty6156]

I found this channel after listening to an interview of ishtiag Ahmed with Arvind Saharan wherein he talked about ayesha jallal comment that he is not a historian . When I searched and found the interview of ayesha jallal, I watched the entire episode . Later I scrolled through all the episodes and found the range of topics discussed in this channel very exciting ! Kudos to the interviewer for bringing wide range of topics .Love from India ❤️

[@vijayclan1]

2:00:00 Can anyone actually actually articulate how RSS is a fascist organization ? And what has Modi done that goes against Indian pluralism ? In any Pakistani discussion, these 2 details are intransigent. They are the bedrock of all further discussion. No one can actually say why it is so but those 2 details are beyond “contestation”.

[@patmclaughlin107]

@29:10 I think there is intellectual dishonesty when he equates Nehru's India with Jinnah's Pakistan. Nehru's India was truly a liberal & secular country that did not differentiate people by their faith. It gave anyone the right to hold any office, regardless of their faith. Jinnah's Pakistan, on the other hand, was an Islamic republic, where the state religion was Islam. Jinnah may have said Hindus can be Hindus and Muslims can be Muslims in Pakistan, but their status was very clearly not the same in his Pakistan.

[@MrIndia-ly8mh]

Even Hindus could not leave as Hindu in Pakistan. Because Islam is worst cult

[@atanumandal3586]

“Hindu” is an inhabitant of *Hindustan* irrespective of his religion, caste or creed… “Hindustan” originally had a geographical connotation - from the Persian perspective - to denote "the land beyond the Sindhu"; the term wasn't coined to denote any religious meaning. The suffix "stan" - indicative of a geographical place - was added to form "Hindustan". That's why the word "Hindu" doesn't appear in the four Vedas, the Upanishads and the Buddhist scriptures. Even Adi Shankaracharya - who is known to have revived "Hinduism" in the 8th century after centuries of Buddhism - didn't have the word "Hindu" in his vocabulary.

[@viswanathanseshadri1047]

this is not entirely correct. in fact quite misleading no doubt the therm "Hindu" arose as a geographical reference, but that also happened to be the time when the geographical and the cultural coincided. all the multi-hued strands in the geographical area identified themselves as part of one over-arching cultural mileu. this wasn't the case with the arrival of Islam in India. the native cultural mileu provided for every kind of religious experience. it could even have provided for the Islamic religious experience. but obviously such a situation would not square up with Islam's won grand vision and image of itself. the people who were converted to Islam shared the geographical space, but no longer shared the culture. in the early centuries, Islam was the rising power, and Hindustan the declining or stagnating power. power meant that Islam 's self image and it's description of Hindustan was at once validated. but that history was just the victor's history writing. you could write whatever you wanted about the vanquished. but now Islam doesn't have that much power and Hindustan is also no longer a declining or a stagnant power. but while power equations have changed, the self image has not vit continues to describe the Hindu mileu as one of darkness. which is not actually correct. hence the contradictions in the hindu- Muslim relations

[@dipakbose2677]

Muslims do not know the name of our religion Sanatana Dharma

[@vik8860]

your name was given to you by your parents...you dont ACTUALLY exist, as per your rubbish logic.

[@atanumandal3586]

@@vik8860 - you have no idea how shitty your argument is...

[@apratimchatterjee4051]

Is there a possibility of hindustan today ? is the idea of hindustan still relevant?

[@nimishavora807]

This a very abrahamic idea that we the Bharatiya did not have science before mughals and British. Let's not limit ourselves to 1000 years of history but go beyond. This part of the world is as older as 50000 years

[@AnirimaGhosh]

There was ice age even before 20000 years.

[@nehakhanapurkar2231]

In Bharat, bengal, gujarat, odisha, maharashtra, karnataka, kerala, tamilnadu, andhra pradesh are states with their individual language. Our shared history of 10000 years is basis of Nationalism.We all are proud of our ancient rich history.🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳

[@IndiaHereNow]

The author very conveniently starts in the 11th century when the first islamic state started in India. Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka lived in 4th and 3rd century BC. The author References Farishta throughout The lens is again islamic. (3:15)

[@Vladimirprotein09]

And he starts with reference to Iqbal.very islamic colored view

[@abhinav5534]

His expertise is in the '1000-1800 CE' era. He is much better than other tbh.

[@IndiaHereNow]

@@abhinav5534 agreed. Much better.

[@knightf8648]

Every one tries to write history to suit their agenda. For subcontinent muslims India started after invasion of ghazni. Good thing being in age of information propagandas can be busted. We are living in post truth world and biggest casualties of it is death of expertise. Almost no one takes any writer across the ideological spectrum seriously.

[@niveditam6444]

His book does not deal with the subject of Ancient India or the Mauryan Empire. The book deals with how indigenous histories were forgotten and replaced by a colonial interpretation of history, which robbed the people of the subcontinent of their agency. I think you need to revaluate how you have understood the talk.

[@maharshikautilya4781]

Excellent discussion. Loved the openness of both the anchor and the guest. Historically, we all are one.

[@rajat.k.sharma8165]

Interesting conversation, but I would like to talk about few points. 1. Hinduism as a word was coined much later, as original name of Religion is 'Sanatan Dharma'. Therefore Hindustan has nothing to do with Hindus. 2. Sarvarkar didn't trust Muslims due to the fact that 'he believed' that Muslims will always choose Religion over Nation, which was solidified during Khilafat Movement, which had nothing to do with Indian Muslims. And Turkish themselves wanted a liberal system. 3. On question of 'Hindutva' it's more of a reactionary movement. During 1920's with the rise of Muslim League, reactionary organization like Hindu Mahasabha were formed. In 21st century, revival of Hindutva is due to appeasement politics of Congress System, which has it's genesis in Mandal- Kamandal era. Even Muslims rejected the Congress appeasement policy, as it didn't have any material upliftment.

[@shamshersingh-gx3gs]

Sikh from India. Love this real and true talk.

[@bharatchoudhary540]

Hindustan is a land of agnostics not believers .. constant enquiry is our strength & our identity .. We the youth having this quest of truth is what makes us 'HINDUSTAN' .. no religion has power to bind us to dogmas for too long .. we will rise and make truth & seeking our ultimate attainment

[@dollartreeshark6786]

We are mostly seekers and skeptics. Not really agnostics. We already realized that God cannot be defined by men as he is infinite beyond our grasp. But we will continue to seek to understand him. This is in contrast to Abrahamic faith system, and is going to be constant fault line. The accommodation is mostly Hindu accommodation. Only in recent times western world is accommodating dharmic philosophies.

[@Atul-Kr-117]

That's Hinduism, only Hinduism gives you that freedom to question gods (see Gita)... Idk why you guys want to use ideas of Hinduism and superimpose it on the subcontinent removing Hinduism? The story this author tells at around 1.12, that king was a Hindu king, and I think its time people give credit for the tolerance and respect that Hindu king showed without removing his Hindu-ness.

[@mcs106]

WAS THE INDIA ONE UNIT EARLIER OR BEFORE THE PARTITION AND CREATION OF THE PAKISTAN AND RULED BY ONE PARTY,TRIBE,HINDU OR THE MUSLIMS AND THE ENGLISH CAME AND BROKE THE UNITY OF THE INDIA AS POSED THAT THE INDIA LOST THE HINDUSTAN, PERHAPS IT LOOKS A BIASED NARRATIVE WITH HAVING THE DEEP ROOTED INTENTION OF KEEPING THE MUSLIMS AS THE SLAVES AND THE SHUDDERS AS THE OTHER COMMUNITIES THERE IN. THE INDIA WAS NEVER RULED BY ONE AND ALWAYS REMAINED DIVIDED INTO MANY TRIBES.GROUPS,STATES WITH HAVING MANY TERRITORIES RUN AND MANGED BY THE HINDU OR THE MUSLIM RAJAS. I THINK THE DIVIDE BY THE ENGLISH HAS HELPED THE INDIA TO BECOME A UNITED STATE OF MORE THAN 40 STATES AND ALSO AN INDEPENDENT. HOWEVER, THE CREDIT OF BEING THE SECULAR STATE OF INDIA GOES TO THE GREATEST SCHOLAR,POLITICIAN AND A FAR SIGHTED LEADER JALAUDDIN MOHAMMAD AKBAR WHO PRACTICALLY PROVED IN BELIEVING IN SECULARISM THAT MEANT TO HAVE RESPECT AND A SECURED ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL THE BELIEFS. AND LAST IF THE (HINDUS) DID HAVE ANY SORT OF MECHANISM TO LIVE TOGETHER WITH PEACE AND PROSPERITY,HARMONY AND ENSURING THE MAJORITY TO HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR ECONOMIC JUSTICE AS THE EQUAL GENDERS WITH EQUAL RIGHTS THE UNITY OF THE INDIA WOULD NEVER BE BROKEN OR DIVIDED.

[@jashoke5790]

This is probably a Pakistani point of view Hindustan had a flourishing secular culture and in today India through dominant Hindus all religion are living peacefully. The so called religious minorities are rich and powerful and many have integrated well. There can be no comparison between India and Pakistan

[@MrIndia-ly8mh]

Both culturally different.

[@induchopra3014]

Pakistan tried to copy saudia. Saudia copies west,india. Pakistan lost what it had to , gain what it didn't have . Lost both. Now cultureless. Now directionless Now friendless

[@dnranjit]

Hindustan refers to the land beyond the Indus.The Persians' pronounciation of Sindhu was Hindu and hence Hindustan. There was no religion called Hinduism or Hindu.It was called Sananta Dharma.

[@abdulaleem9207]

yes.

[@mcs106]

WAS THE INDIA ONE UNIT EARLIER OR BEFORE THE PARTITION AND CREATION OF THE PAKISTAN AND RULED BY ONE PARTY,TRIBE,HINDU OR THE MUSLIMS AND THE ENGLISH CAME AND BROKE THE UNITY OF THE INDIA AS POSED THAT THE INDIA LOST THE HINDUSTAN, PERHAPS IT LOOKS A BIASED NARRATIVE WITH HAVING THE DEEP ROOTED INTENTION OF KEEPING THE MUSLIMS AS THE SLAVES AND THE SHUDDERS AS THE OTHER COMMUNITIES THERE IN. THE INDIA WAS NEVER RULED BY ONE AND ALWAYS REMAINED DIVIDED INTO MANY TRIBES.GROUPS,STATES WITH HAVING MANY TERRITORIES RUN AND MANGED BY THE HINDU OR THE MUSLIM RAJAS. I THINK THE DIVIDE BY THE ENGLISH HAS HELPED THE INDIA TO BECOME A UNITED STATE OF MORE THAN 40 STATES AND ALSO AN INDEPENDENT. HOWEVER, THE CREDIT OF BEING THE SECULAR STATE OF INDIA GOES TO THE GREATEST SCHOLAR,POLITICIAN AND A FAR SIGHTED LEADER JALAUDDIN MOHAMMAD AKBAR WHO PRACTICALLY PROVED IN BELIEVING IN SECULARISM THAT MEANT TO HAVE RESPECT AND A SECURED ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL THE BELIEFS. AND LAST IF THE (HINDUS) DID HAVE ANY SORT OF MECHANISM TO LIVE TOGETHER WITH PEACE AND PROSPERITY,HARMONY AND ENSURING THE MAJORITY TO HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR ECONOMIC JUSTICE AS THE EQUAL GENDERS WITH EQUAL RIGHTS THE UNITY OF THE INDIA WOULD NEVER BE BROKEN OR DIVIDED. AND IF THE ENGLISH DID IT WRONG WHY NOT THE INDIANS GET IT UNITED AND WIND UP DECADES OLD STRUGGLES OF INDEPENDENCE IN MORE THAN 8 STATES WITH HAVING KILLING OF MORE THAN A MILLION AND OTHER FINANCIAL LOSS. THE STATES ARE BUILT OR ESTABLISHED ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF HAVING ACCESS TO JUSTICE TO EACH AND HAVE BEEN HEARD AND COUNTED FOR THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND IF NOT, THE GEOGRAPHIC BINDINGS CAN NOT KEEP THE PEOPLE UNITED AND IT IS THE MAIN ISSUE OF THE SOCIAL CONTRACT.

[@7xr1e20ln8]

@@mcs106 why did German unification and Italian unification make sense to you. But, Indian rather Hindustan was never a unified kingdom in your eyes?. Mugals were a net negative for India. We are still suffering because of their acts today.

[@shasha0076]

It is called sanatan dharma. We just want to be recognised easily by the world so just accept their term for us as hindu And it is "Bharat" , i'll accept it as hindustan n india for the understanding of others but bharat is the name of this country nothing else🙌

[@thepakilad]

Thank you for the timestamps

[@Wesyhe]

I Appreciate you for doing something unusual in Pakistan. So, I request you to do a podcast with Sindhi intellectuals; (Jami Chandio, Shafqat Kadri, Masroor Shah and others) on any topic, you think suitable.❤️🙏

[@himmatsinghhada9146]

The 'Mazhab' is 'Sanatan'. The word 'Hindu' is a civilisational term denoting the people who belong to the region presently including Pakistan, Bharat, Nepal, Bhutan and Srilanka

[@vinoddoddamani6258]

A very brilliant analysis from two extremely brilliant philosophers. I am sad how many commenters from India cannot see beyond a Hindutva revisionist lens. Nobody wants to find commonality and only difference. This is a discussion on colonialism and the colonial footprint on a common culture!

[@ThePakistanExperience]

❤

[@blackdoesntmeanbad6058]

Lol if british were colonials...so is Islamic empire

[@ritesharora4207]

So sad you guys are not taught about Ashoka, Buddha, Chaulas,Cheras and so on

[@krishnamurthyaiyer3022]

All pakistanis consider RSS as fascist, but do not consider the muslim league as fascist. Are they really different. each one stands for its principles. the sooner you guys realize that Pakistan itself is fascist, with its non muslim agenda, and then decide to reverse itself, the better it is for pakistan. can you be islamic without being fascist?

[@nacpatil]

My friend I have understood one thing from this talk that is: to these people idia of india is the one that needed to be wiped from the psyche of this who converted out. The whole discussion of what Hindustan was doesn't include what it was actually. You have barely a history of 400 to 500 years. What about previous 3000 years? What about myriad of religions and languages this region had? I feel really sad that someone would hate everything of this land that gave buddha, mohavir or for that matter Gandhi (I dont count him in same league but he was a good person). No wonder they are suffering now. This was the only obvious culmination that could have happened when you reject what is natural and the beauty that man gas accumulated inside over thousands of years. A man who is not Arab nor of this subcontinent. You can't hate the air that you breathe.

[@nacpatil]

@@PS-ej2xn non Muslim extremist! What is that. Please explain that! Details matter! Who? How? What? is required. Similarly I have friend who went to mars and he met aliens there.

[@induchopra3014]

Islam has wiped out Egypt history Islam has wiped out central ssian history. Afghanistan history. They have wiped all preoslamic history of arabia, Iran, Iraq. They try in India, and fail. They try in China,and fail. They try in Indonesia,and fail. They try in Pakistan, and fail How will Pakistani children understand why they are Muslims but live in India,not arabia? How their grandparents speak punjabi, not arabic?

[@pikachu5647]

This was a gem, as most of the podcasts on your channel. Please continue this kind of conversations so that people in your region get some thoughtful insights about our past, present and future.

[@sp_liberated]

Great conversation. Very insightful. I am an American of Indian origin. Please ignore hindutva comments. They like to hear everything from their narrow lens. We should encourage diversity of thought as well because the perspectives are influenced by the environment. This is one way to learn different POV, respect cultural diversity and build stronger relationships.

[@ThePakistanExperience]

🙌

[@pikachu5647]

Just to add to the conversation, Hindustan isn't an official name for India, when the name was decided "Hindustan" was avioded because it was believed to refer to north India or the hindi heartland. The official names of India is, "India" and "Bharat" (named after a king who ruled almost all of India, this term is used to refer India in most indian languages). And constitution describes India as a union of states. Just like India is an anglo name, Hindustan is also persian, same stands for hindus, which is persian, hindus never defined themselves as a religion, which was again a colonial construct.

[@fatimariaz5432]

So what then is the name Hindus give to their religion in Hindi itself?

[@abhaypatel4292]

@@fatimariaz5432 that's the core hinduism is not a religion... it's way of life ...the core ideals are of sanatan dharma.. through which one can go in any direction of his spiritual journey... that's how mahavir went .. that's how buddha went.. that's how sikh gurus went..

[@virenpsingh]

What a fabulous dialogue! Hi quality exploration of status quo, insecurity and intolerance define this deliberation. Astoundingly articulate this dialogue seeks to understand many maladies of colonial mindset.

[@wisalabdullahrana416]

Replying to the "Nationalism" portion, In Pakistan we can and have been finding solace in our culture of the Sufi saints like Bulleh Shah and Bhittai for values of pluralism, coexistence and secular critique within a religious framework until we develop an environment where we could directly fight without relying on religion. Then again this can only come by decolonization of Urdu and reconnection with Punjabi, Pashto, Balcho, Sindhi, Saraiki etc,.

[@srinathmitta661]

You can have many sources of solace if you unlearn the history you were taught in Pakistan Studies, for example the likes of Porus who stood up to Alexander, Guru Nanak, Maharaja Ranjit Singh, Sir Ganga Ram , Vhagat Singh, etc.

[@criticscorner]

People keep mocking you about your comedy on Twitter. But one thing is for sure, conversation comes natural to you. I listen to almost every podcast, I would say you and Muzamil both are winning this Podcast game in Pakistan. You are the on the right track, keep doing the good work.

[@VibhavOswal]

Have been watching all your sociopolitical podcasts. Absolutely loving them!

[@mcs106]

WAS THE INDIA ONE UNIT EARLIER OR BEFORE THE PARTITION AND CREATION OF THE PAKISTAN AND RULED BY ONE PARTY,TRIBE,HINDU OR THE MUSLIMS AND THE ENGLISH CAME AND BROKE THE UNITY OF THE INDIA AS POSED THAT THE INDIA LOST THE HINDUSTAN, PERHAPS IT LOOKS A BIASED NARRATIVE WITH HAVING THE DEEP ROOTED INTENTION OF KEEPING THE MUSLIMS AS THE SLAVES AND THE SHUDDERS AS THE OTHER COMMUNITIES THERE IN. THE INDIA WAS NEVER RULED BY ONE AND ALWAYS REMAINED DIVIDED INTO MANY TRIBES.GROUPS,STATES WITH HAVING MANY TERRITORIES RUN AND MANGED BY THE HINDU OR THE MUSLIM RAJAS. I THINK THE DIVIDE BY THE ENGLISH HAS HELPED THE INDIA TO BECOME A UNITED STATE OF MORE THAN 40 STATES AND ALSO AN INDEPENDENT. HOWEVER, THE CREDIT OF BEING THE SECULAR STATE OF INDIA GOES TO THE GREATEST SCHOLAR,POLITICIAN AND A FAR SIGHTED LEADER JALAUDDIN MOHAMMAD AKBAR WHO PRACTICALLY PROVED IN BELIEVING IN SECULARISM THAT MEANT TO HAVE RESPECT AND A SECURED ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL THE BELIEFS. AND LAST IF THE (HINDUS) DID HAVE ANY SORT OF MECHANISM TO LIVE TOGETHER WITH PEACE AND PROSPERITY,HARMONY AND ENSURING THE MAJORITY TO HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR ECONOMIC JUSTICE AS THE EQUAL GENDERS WITH EQUAL RIGHTS THE UNITY OF THE INDIA WOULD NEVER BE BROKEN OR DIVIDED.

[@rnk6590]

@@mcs106 In Abrahimic view unity or being one is destroying all ideas which are different or diverse. like in Arab there were more than one person who claimed to be prophet one of them was able to finish others because in their culture only one idea or ideology has to prevail by destroying others. On the other hand Indic religions can be diverse their idea of God, beliefs,way of worship or even idea of no god (Nastik) could live, survive or flourish togather. That's the reasons all parts of India appears to be different still today they are not centrally ruled and can never be until its whole population converts to Abrahimic religions.

[@ongoingness]

@@rnk6590 that's so wrong. Tawhid (unity of being) does not need to 'destroy' anything because unity is inherent to everything. Hindu advaita vedantic teachings formulated this long before the Abrahamic religions appeared on the scene. Unity in multiplicity is the whole point of tawhid and then inevitably, because man's lower nature craves to see itself reflected in creation as 'god' or anthropomorphises the ineffable, that the worship of many deities comes into play. Then the whole cycle begins again. Man's consciousness is inherently evolving to unity consciousness.

[@salimalvi5178]

For Dharmic civilizations like Indian, Chinese, Persian and even African & Pacific God esp One God is alien construct. This God is not same as native Devta, Principle or Deity. Human need multiple principles like earth, water, Vayu, Akash/space for existence. Pooja is being One with these principles and giving birth/Ja to them within oneself and making them grow to Poornatva/Universal. One God, One Last prophet, his one slave manual book is all for creating enslaving and colonial evil empires for one khalifa, one vaticunning Pope, BriShit Queen and now One Fiat Currency 💲.

[@rishisingh3408]

@@rnk6590 ur correct.

[@ArnavSinha2681]

This comment comes about two years late, but this has to be one of my favorite videos on KZbin. I particularly loved the point where the guest said that we don't need a lingua franca. India's had these long-running debates about the imposition of Hindi. Thankfully, unlike Pakistan's experience with Urdu, India has not officially stuck with Hindi or any other one language. I am a North-Indian Hindi-speaker, but I have always argued against many of my brethren from the North. We don't need ONE common language. Different languages can serve different purposes in different cases. Numerical strength or political imposition can't decide in favor of or against a language (or culinary customs and other cultural elements). Okay, my momentary rant is over. What a wonderful discussion, which everyone from the subcontinent, and not just Pakistan or India, should watch.

[@bapparawal2457]

Are you crazy ? Which country of soo many languages don't have a common language? How will you understand a person from other states otherwise? If your answer is English then please that's enough to show your colonial mentality. Go and listen to Jai Sai Deepak for clarity. These people are morphing the history by cherry picking facts.

[@tejasvi18joshi]

Angrezi ka gulami chal rahi hai . padhe likhe anglicised murkho me english ko lingua Franca banaya hua Hai

[@taymiaali3215]

This was simply brilliant and last 10 mins shook me. Another priceless history course - can’t be thankful enough to the Pakistan experience team. May all of you always be protected.

[@dhanjivelani1268]

I am from India but I greatly appreciate what you are doing for its quality and factuality without regional bias.

[@yog-sadhna3415]

just for your information shehzad, in india we have never been disconnected from past, our history, religion is 5000 years old. how can we disconnect. every temple, cave drawing has a history

[@arunsar7893]

23:10 Except Pan-Islamism and the concept of Ummah, which is absent in Christianity, isn't a Colonially created concept. Unlike Christians who read the Bible in their native language, Muslims have to do it in Arabic. So, I don't think this comment by the Prof. is very accurate. I find Islam to be inherently political. I am open to any comments which want to tell me if I am wrong and help me understand this better. Edit: The host brings this up in the next section.

[@induchopra3014]

Christians don't call British as their hero or ancestors. Its not seen as christian rule but as British rule. Indian Christians are hundred percent bhartiya. Food, dress, language, politics, names, they have no confusion. They are Indians. Muslims have deliberately confused themselves. Uzbek rulers are seen as Muslim rulers. Why not Uzbek rulers? Will Pakistan welcome Uzbek rulers as brothers because they are Muslims? Then accept Afghans as your rulers. Why fighting TTP? Put sharia. Make sharia as constitution.

[@AdityaKumar-rj2uf]

Honestly after a couple of years of reading diverse books and watching videos from all parts of the spectrum of opinion, i am so confused about what Pakistan stands for.

[@mylord3003]

Pakistan in its current form stands for seeking parity with anything India. Identity complex. A nation which wants to disown its original past and claim a fake story believing in the idiom, telling lies repeatedly make false, the Truth.

[@AdityaKumar-rj2uf]

@@mylord3003 beautiful

[@randmht9976]

@@AdityaKumar-rj2uf they stand for the worst of Humanity and Indian Constitution

[@ankitparihar3675]

​@@AdityaKumar-rj2uf same bro.

[@KanishQQuotes]

They stand for freeloaders and by freeloaders. They exist to serve the feudal system

[@nil0355]

Your podcast has become a virtual hangout for people across the subcontinent, you are helping in reclaiming the idea of Hindustan once again and in a new way!

[@kailash4799]

Reclaiming for whom exactly? Please keep this shit ideas back in pakistan only. We are happy with idea of Bharat and India.

[@raghuvirkhanna7636]

I started the podcast with hope of a enlightened discussion from across the border on a shared past. The mention of Savarkar and sort of pinning the 1947 events to him sort of fizzled my expectations.Savarkar was at periphery in the mindsets of his contemporary Indians/Hindus.one can argue he continous to be so even today as people who use his ideas don't eulogise him too much as there isn't much there to be gained even from them.the box office state of the movie made on his life stands testament to this fact. It is really the social media warriors who keep him afloat.the loss of Hindustan can be attributed to the sole fighter with a typewriter-Mr Jinnah.

[@Suryapoosarla]

He on one side saying what British did on morning and night should be taken into account but he didn't want to question what Aurangazeb did on morning and night..Aurangazeb is a turk, definetely a outsider, why different standard for him...

[@niveditam6444]

I think you should listen to the podcast again brother.

[@Suryapoosarla]

@@niveditam6444 may be you should.. you may be Aurangazeb sympathizer iam not..

[@induchopra3014]

Indians will decide for themselves what we want. We are not slave to any outside idea. We Indians of today will write the future. Because we have the power. We have the money,vision. Saudia ,india,China are going to write Asian history.

[@estarat]

Sapta Sindhu is called hapta hindu in Farsi. India calls itself Bharat now. Mostly Muslims call it hindustan because this word stan whose root is Sanskrit sthan (place) is how many modern day Central Asian countries are named. Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan.

[@induchopra3014]

Islam changed these vedic countries into Islamic. Their old sanskrit culture lost in time. Sanskrit is their root too. They should research their roots. No people ,culture called pakki.. rest are a people. Pakki is a people? They are bhartiya too. Speaking, eating our food

[@Hinduhumanrightswatch]

Bharat /India is an old name from long 2500 years bank on wards and Bharat name came from Mahabharat and son of Shakuntala a King of Vedic period and he ruled and based on his name this entire regain named on him as Bharat varsha.

[@firna1864]

Subtitles English may honi chahiye, because most of the prople in sub continent Speaks different languages aur English will connect you with those people, some may agree or disagree that's another matter, your discussions or discourse is very critical in these times.

[@AsitKumarGupta]

This guy will not last one hour before Dr. Anand Raghanathan, J Sai Deepak or Vikram Sampath

[@ashrayrs]

boy i am sold, keep up this good work grow the podcast and the conversations.

[@asmasiddiqi1]

A lingua franca is a language systematically used to make communication possible between people not sharing a first language, in particular when it is a third language, distinct from both speakers' first languages. Examples of lingua francas are numerous, and exist on every continent.

[@suhridguha2560]

sure but treating your own language as foul language is just weird

[@asmasiddiqi1]

@@suhridguha2560 Communicating through a lingua franca is not the same as treating one's mother tongue as inferior/"foul". One can speak the lingua franca or the mother tongue depending upon the context in which one is located; however, labelling a lingua franca such as Urdu as a "colonizer's language" is factually wrong because it developed in the Indian subcontinent. The label also smacks of hatred for the Urdu-speaking community which migrated from India to Pakistan at the time of partition.

[@suhridguha2560]

@@asmasiddiqi1 I am from India and my mother tongue is bangla. But I am fluent in Hindi and English as well. I just feel it's a shame that they don't teach Punjabi in Pakistan where most of them are Punjabis. Which stems from the process of otherizing their own language and culture as it is seen as something non islamic. I have a lot of friends from lukhnow who are Hindus but they speak Urdu. Just saying identity is more than just religion.

[@salimalvi5178]

@A SIDDIQUI Urdu literally means Turkish Army Tent or Camp. It is a language which was imposed. Last time it was imposed on Bangalese which ended in genocide if 3 Million Bangalis (mostly Hindu), gang rapes and sexual slavery of 450,000 Bangali females and uprooting of of 11 Million Bangalis who had to flee to India for saving their own lives. Lingua franca etc sounds very cool and erudite - 10/10 marks for your Angrezi test!

[@musfirakhurshid]

How am I getting this for free?? Thank youu

[@mohdbilalabbasi]

His prediction at the end of podcast about Climate Change is really thought provoking. Don't know what the future holds for our region. Hopefully we can bury the bitterness of past and look forward to a better future.

[@mohdbilalabbasi]

@Labhesh Haria Not reuniting as a common country but accepting the differences and moving forward to eradicate existential problems.

[@aryavart296]

@@mohdbilalabbasi We can't, too much bloodshed. Just think how many wars our countries has fought and soliders died from that. Those soliders had kids, parents, wives and when somebody lose their loved ones the sadness always remain in their minds thought their lives, and when they have a whole country to blame for it they can't help but hate that country. People like you and me (who haven't lost their loved ones through war) have no dog in the fight we will preach about peace and harmony, but peace and harmony isn't about us it's about those people who have lost their loved ones and forgiving the other country is near impossible for them because these are deep psychological wounds which can't be healed quite easily.

[@abhinav5534]

Hi PX, Absolutely amazing! One of the best episodes. :) Your questions were so to-the-point! Worth spending every second. I don't know if you read my questions on the post you put up day before yesterday on your YT Community, but thank you for covering all of them. :D Untill next time! Thanks! Keep up the good work, bhai! :)

[@Mayasram]

I am watching it six months after the recording and nothing gave me more hope than the assertion that the plurality here ( India) still exists and will. It is now six months after but I am going to believe it’s still true. If it’s not, don’t tell me! 😁

[@geetaliification]

I don't understand how a conversation on decoloniality can honestly take place without talking about Islamic coloniality. And if you are cognizant of Islamic coloniality, what makes you cling to such an identity?

[@kanchhediachamaar9289]

"Savarkar" is mispronounced. Native Maharashtrians pronounce it Saavarkar and not Savaarkar, as Professor Ahmed does. I wonder whether Professor Ahmed mispronounces names of say French or German people.

[@shishirtamotia3992]

I think, Manan Asif and many Pakistanis such as Hussain Haqqani, Late Tareq Fatah, Ishtiaque Ahmed Sahib are enlightened Pakistanis. There is a need to develop a discussion on how do we achieve the Hindustan or Bharat Varsh ( United States of India) wherein we have multiple states with a common thread that leads to one nation.

[@Suryapoosarla]

i disagree with his intrepretation of hindutva, hindutva sarvakar proposed is consciously inclusive because he has to include people like annie besant in freedom struggle..hindutva is cultural identity rather than religious atleast upuntil savarkar is alive later it may be morped according to situations, which we can't attribute to savarkar...

[@srinathmitta661]

This conversation coming as it did from two Pakistanis is extra-ordinary. It is generally acknowledged among the thinking public that there is no such thing as THE perspective but several perspectives, often contesting. It is heartening that this podcast has attempted to go beyond the ideologically driven narratives. The first step towards understanding Indian history is to perish the thought that this subcontinent was cultural, linguistic, social and political vacuum before the invasion of Mohammed Bin Qasim . An interesting exercise to understand the kind of all-round efflorescence seen in the Gupta Age is to study the commentaries of scholars, including scientists like Carl Sagar on the intellectual pursuits and other aspects of the people of the Vedic Age.

[@Wesyhe]

You would happy to know that a book is written in English on DaraShiku is translated into Sindhi by Shafqat Kadri.

[@asangha182]

Around 35.00, the learned guest mentions Shah Alam 2, one of the last Mughals. It brings back memories of school... 'The Great Shah Alam, whose realm extended from Delhi to Palam' ... Every time i'm around Delhi's domestic airport (Palam), it brings a smile..Great episode, listening for the second time, and learning more than the first time. Shehzad is officially my favourite Pakistani now. It was Sheikh Rasheed 'Sheeda Talli' earlier 😝

[@SanJay-tb5zr]

Greetings from Mumbai. Excellent discussion on the new book by Dr Manan and his views of the current political situation in India. Very well moderated with thought-provoking Qs.May like to offer a few personal comments : 1.Why do Pakistani Historians and intellectuals always go around talking about its past and present through the prism of Religion? One can imagine the State using Islam as a tool to drive the narrative for all its socio-, economic, political, cultural policies. But others can always use other issues which are equally important for the welfare and growth of Pakistani society and also to present a more realistic, well-rounded picture to the Masses. This is one major difference I notice between India and Pakistan. In Indian public discourses, we hardly hear Hinduism being the main driver for all the intellectual discussions … either its Colonial rule or Mughal or Cultural or economic or social issues. By ignoring these issues, Pakistani intellectuals are doing a disservice to the future generation of Pakistan. 2.India ( present-day ) was and remains plural society - diverse population in terms of Language, Race, Food, Music, Literature, faith, Attire, geography etc . India recognises 22 regional languages which have a well-developed script, grammar and spoken by large sections across India from Kashmir in North to Kanya Kumari in South ..Gujarat in West to North East. Indians have a strong affiliation for their mother tongue, we have seen Protests, movements to safeguard and protect local regional languages. Indian school student has the option to learn either in English or Hindi or local Language, and the student has to learn a minimum of 2 languages before he passes the school. Language identity overrides other identities in India, hence you will find people in Kerala - be that Hindu or Muslim or Christian will use local Malayalam language rather than Hindi or Urdu or English ..same is true with other states which non-Hindi speaking like Karnataka, Maharastra, Andhra Telangana, Orissa, West Bengal, Assam, Gujarat, Punjab etc. 3.For we Indians and particularly Hindus, our culture includes Taj Mahal, Akbar, Amir Khusro, Ghalib, Kabir, Ustad Allah Rakha, Nizamuddin Aulliya, Jama Masjid, Harappa/ Mohen Jo Daro, Takshila, Kartarpur, Golden temple. We Hindus are proud of this Ganga-Jamuna tahzib/ confluence which gave Bismillah Khan, Amjad Ali, Naushad Ali, Mohammed Rafi etc. We need to appreciate and respect diversity for humans to progress and move ahead. 4.Modi sarkar is driven by RW agenda of RSS, which founded in the 1920s by hedgewar and golwalkar . RSS refused to participate in Freedom Struggle, as it considered itself “cultural” org inline with Fascist ideology. Just like Nazis, RSS promoted fatherland, hatred for “others” ( Muslims / Christians and other faiths which are no homegrown), Monochromatic views of the imposition of one language, one rule for all Indians. “Others” will have to be treated as second class citizens with rights withdrawn slowly. RSS supported Holocaust and also refused to accept the Indian constitution and National -Tri-Colour Flag adopted after 1947. Hence, in a way, RSS says everything that's opposite of Indianess as envisioned by Congress Party lead by Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Nehru, Patel, Maulana Azad, Ambedkar etc. 5. But Modi's BJP managed to get support during last Lok Sabha or Federal elections from just 37% Indian voters. BJP has lost many State or Provincial Elections since Lok Sabha elections. Hence, modi and RSS ideology will never have a cakewalk even among the majority of Hindus, that is redeeming outcome of these elections. BJP/ modi managed to win many seats, mainly because of election coalition formation, split of votes by dividing Opposition for eg. Dalit leader Mayawati lead BSP in UP and Owaisi lead political party split opposition votes, giving modi / bjp victories. But such tactical alignment doesn't show that the Hindu majority is favouring modi or RSS. Tide can change anytime against RSS when re-alignment of forces happen. 6.Liked the idea of Federation structure in future..involving India, Pakistan BD, SL, AF, Nepal, Bhutan, Burma, the Maldives …which will win-win for all the societies in this region. Let us hope sanity prevails in leaders, thinkers

[@SanJay-tb5zr]

@Bhago bhago Sher aaya BJP IT cell trolls parroting lines from Sangh masters @rss

[@SanJay-tb5zr]

@Bhago bhago Sher aaya BJP IT cell paid troll can never rise above these lines given by Amit Malviya

[@SanJay-tb5zr]

@Bhago bhago Sher aaya BJP IT cell cant go beyond such cheap rhetorics, exhibiting typical BJP IT cell Culture . Such copy paste emojis cannot mask the Bigotry and Fascist ideology of RSS/ BJP

[@SanJay-tb5zr]

@Hannibal Ad Portas Such contrived comments doesnt say anything except some bad & bombastic words. Pakistan which was formed on idea of Muslim state , failed miserably in 1971. Hence al alternate, confederation of India, Pakistan, BD, Af, SL, Nepal, Maldives etc may appear laughable at this stage of history , but future can never be determined by past or present . Hence, Confederation isnt a bad idea, it is very plausible.

[@SanJay-tb5zr]

@Bhago bhago Sher aaya Islamist and Sanghis are two sides of same coin.. Jamaat and RSS/ Hindu Maha Sabha are brothers who got separated in Mela

[@creative-sach]

Where is this guy now? He has the clearest idea of the people of Hindustan (India and Pakistan) and especially when he hails from Pakistan makes it amazing for a listener from India. I listened to a lot of people from Pakistan but Mr Manan seems ot be the closest to what the reality is and looks unbiased,. Speaking from history make things understand better like Mir or Ghalib and other historical facts and what the subcontinent was rather than what we have made it now!! Bravo!!

[@SANDEEPSHARMA-no7du]

Appreciating the quest of digging deeper..

[@provectusenvironmentalenga9166]

I'm getting addicted to watching your vblog because of your pure balanced analysis.

[@ThePakistanExperience]

🙌

[@71espn]

Our constitution Calls us India or bharat not hindustan.

[@shubhraUtube]

What a literary conversation...worth watching lots of respect from India.🙏🙏

[@vip129870]

Two Muslims (converted) saying WE WUZ KINGZ for over an hour 😂😂

[@LawsOfNature108]

We Kaafirs of Hindustan now understand totalitrian ideologies like Isl@m very well. The mistake that Dharmic civilization did for last 1000 years is we assumed every religion leads to GOD equally....but we were spectacularly wrong in our assessment... Now name of the new correct assessment is Hindutwa....basically to some extent we are Abrahamising ourselves as survival instinct which is good and needed.

[@mum5952]

India will always be Bharat and Hindusthan.

[@inar684]

India that is Bharat(not hindustan) is a wounded civilization, and the wound has now become a festering sore. India needs a good surgeon now.

[@boldmonk780]

I am an UPSC aspirant and i think now i am never gonna pass my exams .

[@amitjgd52]

23:08: The argument that conflating the muslim identity in India with the Arabic roots of Islam is only a colonial construct is questionable. In theory, as I understand, India of today is only Dar-ul-Harb and the faithful cannot identify themselves with it. Hence all the talk about Ghazva-e-Hind as a means of establishing Dar-ul-Islam in this region. This concept is non-existent in other Abrahmic religions.

[@motherwar_87]

The term "Hindustan" seldom had an ontological register. It mostly acquired popular meaning through latent or passive association. For instance, for people of Bengal, Hindustani referred to someone hailing from the central/northern areas. Conversely, people from these regions never really identified themselves as "Hindustanis" other than in reference to what they are called or known as, in those other areas like the East and the South. The stereotypical/blanket term to call a person from the South, for the longest time, would be "Madrasi/Madraji."

[@abhi3710]

DUDE WE ARE BHARATIYAS!! BHARAT IS OUR ANCIENT NAME.

[@apratimchatterjee4051]

Is there a possibility of hindustan today ? is the idea of hindustan still relevant?

[@inar684]

Well said bro. Bharatiya on the other hand, we immediately identify with. Indeed we are a wounded civilization as Naipaul put it.

[@sumanpaulchowdhury8333]

You are right. The geography of today's India is not hindustan, Hindustan is just a North Indian location but Bharat is the actual representation. From earlier times it's Bharat. History of this region is lot older than 1100 AD. Why he took it from 1100 AD that's out of my comprehension.

[@rakeshrathore1711]

I would request Manan ji to write on middle Eastern coloniality and its effect on Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bharat.

[@vineetsinghgusain701]

Believe me I am still not convinced with his theory. He needs to argue his research with Indian historian. I still have the same thoughts about his work.

[@vineetsinghgusain701]

@Babar Shah don't do propaganda.... be rational. I am not here to listen and watch some political hateredness

[@salimalvi5178]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jIC7nGalaJWIg9U

[@bangaliyogi]

Excellent discussion, but it has to be listened with an open mind. Open mind where all the possibilities are available. Ultra nationalist, religious extremists cannot have an open mind. I was born in India. ❤🙏Excellent history scholar with an open and honest mind.

[@harish5242]

Mughals were themselves colonizers..this guy is sofisticated version of Zaid Hamid.. with Garwa e hind fantasy

[@induchopra3014]

Pakistan is under gazwa by Afghanistan

[@bangaliyogi]

Excellent unbiased history scholar. 🙏🏻💚 Only one thing I would like to mention that the name of 'Bharat' is in India 's oral history and mythology. Unfortunately all the ancient books from the ancient Universities, especially Nalanda was destroyed by the invaders.😥😥😥😥

[@niveditam6444]

Really appreciate the work you are doing. This was very informative.

[@adonis3175]

Problem in this narrative is, the historian has not gone back to BC. The vedas and Upanishads. There was no word like Hindustan in these vedas. It was always Bharat. Hindu as religion was coined by colonial masters. Hindustan includes all religious groups living within Akhand Bharat

[@shivanksingh6468]

Those things suits their narrative they talk about that only and become happy

[@ahsanatique5607]

Thank you so much for this episode. This is such a good interview, I learnt so much from it. Its just a treasure trove of knowledge. You guys could have talked for 2 more hours and I would have listened. Only request (if possible of course): Is it possible to have English subs with it? some of my non-urdu speaking friends would love to listen too. After all it is a rare Pakistani perspective on South Asian history and decolonization.

[@ahsanatique5607]

@@ThePakistanExperience No promises but I will look in to it

[@himanshusrivastava2025]

I have read his book and found it utterly unconvincing. Just the very fact that Muslims found it preferable to break up Hindustan rather than live as equal citizens shows that Islamism was a more powerful influence for them than love for this land. A Hindu views (undivided) India as a sacred landmass worthy of reverence as mother; a Muslim is attached to the land only as long as he can dominate. This difference cannot be bridged.

[@induchopra3014]

Islam itself will vanish ,can't survive modern science. AI revolution

[@geetaarth7142]

The 'mores' of Hindutava in certain portions of society is just a reaction against never ending propaganda by the Pakistani Establishment in favour of political and discriminatory versions of Islam in the context to Indian subcontinent. Hindutava just stands for love or attachment to a geographical area between Himalayas and Indian Ocean. And love for the land, cultural heritage, human values of this area. Which is called Indian or Hindu civilization, which covers all its faiths and peoples.

[@pikachu5647]

nothing justifies hindutva, because it then moves the debate about questioning the actions of lynch mobs and saffronisation to the past, things were bad for centuries, yet we handled them gracefully, and when we finally are a decent soverign state, sudddenly the hindu faith is in "danger" and we have to protect it by enforcing our beliefs on everyone. Doesnt make sense to me.

[@anuradharamanan4187]

Stumbled upon this channel and I am so happy that I did. I love the topics being discussed and the panel of erudite scholars we get to hear. Kudos to you how well researched the interviewer is so as to bring out the best out of his scholars. At the very end I do want to reinforce that yes there are voices still loud and strong who speak for an India that should and I pray will always remain secular in the truest sense. Wishing you the very best from India.

[@tmk5]

Some day Please interview Dr. Shashi Tharor, Prof Romila Thapar, or Dr. Sohail Hadhmi. And especially Prof Romila Thapar on the real history of Destruction of Somnath temple

[@shiningshadow9335]

Really dude!! Romila Thapar is a pseudo historian man 🤦

[@deveshsonam]

Dude ....i remember she blamed hindu for destruction of Somnath

[@RavindraKamath55]

She is masquerading as authentic Indology expert without knowing Sanskrit.. She and her gang of pseudo historians none of them knew a word of Sanskrit..thus they licked boots of British..

[@ketandand]

There is one problematic aspect of this particular episode. In the part about Indian secularism, when Manan refers to a King of the Malabar who does not kill a Muslim who desecrated a Hindu idol, he fails to contrast it with Islamic ideas about the reverse. If he had gone there he would have been able to explore the roots of the aspect of Pakistani behaviour which he and Shehzad want to diss. A little later, they speak of how it is no longer [perhaps] acceptable to socially mingle with Shias, and just like how Ahmadis were othered earlier, Shias have now been othered. Here too, the otherisation or animalisation of the Hindu is not touched upon. It’s as if there is no need to discuss the way Hindus are being treated in Pakistan. This is a common theme running across liberal discourses in Pakistan, except for very very few - what is being done to the Hindus is never discussed. All talks of human rights, secularism, liberalism, modernity etc restricts itself to talks around the Islamic population. There is no need apparently to discuss the Hindu or the Christian. But there is a need to rue Hindutva in India though 😅. It’s befuddling. The secularism, liberalism etc that they are calling for [if they are] is something enshrined in the culture of the Indian subcontinent before Islam. One cannot be honest till one acknowledges that Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam is a dharmic concept, not even remotely Islamic. They rightly point out to Qasim being called the first Pakistani as incorrect. What they are unable to articulate is the alternative or the correct narrative for Pakistani identity. Primarily because if they explored it enough they’d have to touch their roots - something that they’ve been colonised enough to hate. How can Pakistan de-colonise itself if it remains wedded to the imperialist, violently evangelist version of Islam [which perhaps is the original version in any case]? Again, ahead in the podcast, Manan refers to a West Pakistani narrative of 1971 which apparently justified what was happening in EastPakistan by calling them Hindus. He didn’t point out the main problem with the narrative. He merely criticised how, oppressing fellow Muslims in East Pakistan went against what could have been a better concept of Pakistan - ostensibly that of Muslims treating each other fairly. There’s obviously some deeply problematic, religiously discriminative ideas even in the liberal Pakistani discourse which either they have not noticed, or exist deliberately as an article of faith. And this brings us to the hypocritical “calling out” of Modi as a fascist. Interesting that Modi has actually increased the budgetary allocation for education of minorities during his tenure on the one hand, and removed Hindi as a mandatory language for school education in the New Education Policy of 2020 - both flying in the face of the Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan concept that he is claimed to espouse. Data about how many Indian Muslims applied to Pakistan for citizenship and vice versa since May 2014 would be very enlightening to understand how fascist Modi really has been. No liberal discourse in India about decolonisation can be of any credence until we call out the elephant in the room - Islam in South Asia, rather the imperialist strain that is perhaps part of its genesis, and not the version that people like A. P. J. Abdul Kalam followed. That is because no discussion on decolonisation can be of import till we talk about continuing colonisation.

[@himanshusrivastava2025]

Manan is right *though he didn't say it in so many words) that India in it's worst phase is better than the most liberal end of Pakistani political spectrum. Pak national project was built on a big lie, exclusionary thought and violence, and what hope we may have had from the 11 Aug speech evaporated fast once the Objectives Resolution was passed.

[@SirKasim666]

Satyajit Ray ki Shatranj ke Khiladi is based on Prem Chand's book 'Satgati'

[@manishjoshi2064]

Sometime Please invite indian intellectual like pratap bhanu mehta, Nivedita Menon, Ayesha kidwai, Jayati Ghosh, Irfan Habib.

[@viswanathanseshadri1047]

if you wanted a genuinely Indian perspective, you wouldn't call any of these.

[@vasudevrao4390]

Make sure to add intellectual from other side also.There are many information which are missing in this podcast