I am a sikh myself living in Kashmir from the last 28 years. Give me 1 reason why as a sikh i would want to live in 1947 made Pakistan?? Historically, we have been persecuted by Mughuls. Majority of of our gurudwaras were in India.. The only people you are saying who had their opinion on staying in Pakistan probably would have been living there and would not wanted to leave their lands and move the other side. Ideologically we have always connected more with hindus than we can ever with muslims.
Hindus and Sikhs are one. Leave violence in the past. We are one. Even in a Hindu Rashtra, never fear, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and all Sanatanis will always be prosperous.
Being a Sikh.. it had to be either our own nation or India. I think Sikhs and Hindus have more cultural and religious similarities than with muslims. It is amazing how Pakistani side always thinks we could have, should have chosen Pakistan. Two hyper sensitive religions would have been each other’s throats all the time. With India at least we have (sort of) our own state and language. So, 100% if not our own nation, then India. Sikh leaders negotiating were not sharpest of tools but at least they knew where did they have better chances to survive and thrive. Biggest downside was, we lost our historical and religious places for the Muslim dream. I think we are better off, being part of a secular nation with troubles rather than being part of Pakistan and slowly getting killed, chases away, converted or leaving to india eventually as refugees..
It is mandatory in Indian punjab to have high school certificate of punjabi language as subject to be eligible to apply for any government job (even janitor). In Pakistan punjab, an elected member of parliament cannot address the parliament of punjab in punjabi. Then 4 sikhs in Canada claim that their punjabi identity is under threat in India
Moreover how cn we Sikhs forget the atrocities done by Muslim rulers on our Gurus and our community…siding with Pakistan was nvr an option…the only commonality is Punjabi language rest I feel since partition Indians n Pakistanis are poles apart.
Totally agree with you 💯 as i sikh.......my grandfather moved to Delhi just after Partition, my dad was 7 year old when the Partition happened...I am so happy they came to Delhi. I despise Pakistan and what it stands for.
@@MrKnight-T this isn't the right way to approach this, even if sikhs were majority, I'm sure we hindus would have stayed safe. All darmic faiths Hinduism, Buddhism, sikh and Jainism, all are very inclusive and tolerant to different ideas and religions.
Leave the normal citizens who are not muslims in Pakistan. Your hindu member of Senate, from balochistan awami party, Mr danesh Kumar, is regularly faced with pleas and comments from his fellow members of Senate, to read the Kalma and convert to Islam. Can you think what will happen if a hindu lawmaker in maker in India, says to a fellow MP, who is not hindu (maybe muslim Christian jew jain Buddhist etc), to convert to Hinduism?? I'll tell you, that person would be running around the courts, asked to publicly apologize, and "sar tan se juda" waali naarebaaji hogi. Plz don't assume that I am an Islamophobe. I was at jama masjid, delhi yesterday and accompanied my friend while he broke his fast. Pakistan is an experiment, which has failed miserably.
The religious fanaticism has crippled your country, your people's minds, and rationale. The few ppl who have intellect, are just trying to leave the country.
@Iqbal Bakht I didn't say anything about the religion. I said about the so-called country... Learn to differentiate. And this, in essence, is your country's and your citizens' true problem. you idiots dont know how to differentiate between the 2
My grandfather was from multan ,though we lost our land and business ,but we are thankful to god we have taken good step to be in india ,waheguru ne mehar krti 🙏🏻
Using the term Non - Muslims for other faiths by liberal muslims is same as the 'Kafir' term used by Radicals. No Hindu, Sikh & Christian will use Non - Hindu, Non - Sikh or Non - Christian for other faiths. Using The term "There is no god Except Allah" itself is discriminatory and kind of showing disgusting superiority syndrome.
Calling an individual that is demeaning but that's not the same is showing charts showing the numbers of Muslims and Non-Muslims in Pakistan to show a statistic.
@@musabishtiaq03 the tag non Muslim comes with its own religious baggage. The term kaffir is used for them, which means one who intentionally denies the truth. The one who conceals and rejects the truth while knowing it in their heart to be true. This is a very problematic concept cause this paints all non Muslims who have known and heard about Islam to be liars and cheats. Mainstream Islam makes no two ways about it. However here it was used just for the convenience, as there are multiple minorities with same issue. Here it isn't an issue at all, though many here unjustly perceive though. This can't be generalised though and the term non Muslim can be said with intention of disrespecting someone.
Funniest thing is "assuming" that Sikhs would have preferred to stay with "Pakistan" or wouldn't have envisioned their "future" in your "Secular country". Sikhs were not stupid. They ruled over Afganistan.
The fact that you were thinking about adding sikhs for ur separate homeland rather than asking secularism in United India says a lot about Pakistani mindset, even if it is hypothetical, its always pakistan and never United India typical divisive mindset of a fellow pakistani
@@subhasisghosh66 thats the point, these so called divisive people are the ones who wish India to be divided with 1000 cuts do not trust a word pakistani says, whatever his/her political ideology is
The point that Pakistan did not get resources during partition is flawed. It got best aerated lands in undivided India. The food security was guaranteed.
they multiplied like rats, they quadrupled their population over 70yrs, 50 to 200 million, their fertility rate even today is 3.5+ so you can understand how well the resources are managed.
Don't talk about resources that was not already part of the area. Talk about the resources that were collective and were under Dehli govt like money, arms and other stuff. Even Gandhi g has to intervene to compelled Indian govt to release
Best of luck for your vision for your country .👍 Due to partition we(sikhs) lost the most especially our holy and historical places... But as a Sikh I am grateful that I am the part of India 🇮🇳 (the great ancient civilization).Hope things get better in the future for both countries .🙏
I feel so so angry that the great Mohandas who was so keen for justice to Muslims couldn't argue that Kartarpur Sahib should come to 🇮🇳. Even after 1971, indira gaandhi could/should have exchanged 95000 prisoner of war for Kartarpur Sahib. Bhutto was, at the time, the weakest he could have been. Feel very very very angry with Congress 🤬🤬🤬
Mere thought of Sikhs included in Pakistan sends chilling thoughts. India without Sikhs is like person without soul. It is a matter of great sorrow for Indians that major Sikh holy sites are not with India. Jinnah not just wanted entire Punjab and Bengal but dismember India by creating multiple parts….
I am glad my ancestors choosed India 🇮🇳 over pakistan 🇵🇰. Otherwise Instead of an well educated astrophysicist I would have been a close minded muslim kid believing Allah blindly without questioning
@@jetbllackwingspakistan? English? I cannot imagine both words in the same sentence And your obsession with language is what broke pakistan in two parts in 1971 But pakistanis are not the ones who learn from the past So your comment here is understandable
Read about Joseph colony incident. Entire Christian colony was burnt to the ground, and Pakistan foreign minister was releasing statement against Canada because a hijabi girl was reportedly harassed by drunk men at a train station
I feel Pakistan has institutionalized discrimination in the constitution while India has ensured that our constitution stays secular and does not discriminate based on religion. Everything else is just a effect.
India is not secular just because of the constitution but because its majority Hindu. Give credit where its due. Even Pakistan and Bangladesh's constitution has minority rights but look where they are now. Our police, civil servants, courts were never strong enough to control a mob in riots or execute rule of law.
@@ThePakistanExperience binary of muslims and non muslims is discrimination ..should I call you non Indian?? No because you have distinct identity - pakistani. Labelling someone from your POV is itself a discrimination ..they have their distinct identity of pakistani hindu or pakistani sikh ..have you ever seen someone in India referring Indian muslims as Non Hindus ??
@@ThePakistanExperience It is not woke ness, but you have to come out of this muslim in oneside and ghair muslim on another side. The black and white way of seeing things.
The thing is, back then, Hindus and Sikhs came from one family tree, and even now, there have always been Hindu-Sikh marriages, which are common in India. Both are Indian-based cultures and religions. There is no reason why Sikhs would have remained in their current form in Pakistan. Those who became Sikhs were the only sons of Hindus back then, and they protected Hindus largely in the Punjab region.
Those who became Muslims (pre-independent India) were also Hindus…living in denial leads to wt Pakistan is facing today…n acceptance of it has led to flourishing Sikh community in India..🇮🇳
Yes we are Hindu brahmins and before the was a tradition to to give your eldest son to Sikhism. It was after Guru Govind singh ji maharaj said to give your sons to Sikhism. Even now there are Sikhs in our family tree.
@@bluebird1227 if I was not a Brahmin, I wanted to be a Sikh, it is the same like Sikhism believes in karma, birth and rebirth and that we all are part of Brahman and we all are part of it
3:11 That's how some people understood it?? Really?? Jinnah, after losing the 1937 election, understood that he needs to turn communal and spread malicious lies about the Congress' hatred and bias towards Muslims of india. Mr Jinnah, in a speech at Aligarh muslim university said, that 2 crore musalmaan ko qurbaani deni hogi, taaki 7 crore ko Pakistan mil sake... You can confirm this from Prof Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed sahaab
Not generalizing but something I observed during the course of my life, when muslim community is in minority, they’re all up for secularism but when they’re in majority, they’d forget secularism.
Bus yehi baat hai 👍👍...humey europe main Burkha aur Masjid chahiye but Humari country main koi apna religion na follow karey...kya double standards hain. 😀
I am pretty sure wikipedia is still operational in Pakistan, right. As per wiki, Before the partition, according to the 1941 census, Hindus constituted 14.6% of the population in West Pakistan (which is now Pakistan)[a] and 28% of the population in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).[12][13][14] So, pakistan has completed genocided Hindus from a land which was rightfully theirs. After that, by what right does Pakistanis even talk about minority rights in India or for that matter, even Israel. What these nations are doing is not be .1% of what muslim nations do to non muslims.
@@ThePakistanExperience When you conveniently ignores forceful conversions and oppression..what was happend over the period in Pakistan it's a fact...why the opposite not happened in India.. did you ever heard any forceful conversions of Muslims to Hindus in india?
@@ThePakistanExperience if you read history of that time, you would know that Jinnah was actually afraid that because pakistan forced Hindus out, India would have done the same to muslims. But India, under Jawaharlal Nehru didn't and even today, there is hardly any Indian muslim who migrants to pakistan or even Bangladesh. This begs the question on what basis pakistanis talks about minority rights in india or kashmir issue or palestinian rights when they did far worse to the native Hindu population of Pakistan.
@Iqbal Bakht nope not all states are artificially all states have a history to be based on Geography to base borders on u are just trying on consol urself by telling all states are artifical pakistan has to be the only state who's one border is called Radcliff line and other is called Durand line both drawn by the British Punjab bieng artificall can be corrected by reuniting india and pak which we support so we don't support artifical Nations or states
All Indians commenting/viewing have you ever wondered why there's a stark difference between an Indian and a pakistani that is bcoz we were never taught history in this communal way, ever talk to a pakistani his world revolves around 2-3 keywords muslim, islam, haram-halal. So far this teaching has proved good for Indians so don't degrade your intellect with these kind of communal cringe, shocked to see so many Indians commenting.
Shut up. They should be given answer in their own language. People are pointing out their bigotry and you are saying we should have peace talks with bigots. Shame.
comparing lynchings in India with what has been happening in Pakistan for ages is comparing apples and oranges. I agree India particularly northern India to some extent can be a violent place at times. But it's not just for muslims It's for everyone. Of course if muslims are involved it takes different colors with media making it centrepiece of the news. Other such incidents don't make such a hue n cry.
My nana was from Rawalpindi. His last name was Duggal (as an aside, he told us that there was a whole locality in Rawalpindi named Duggalpura, don't know if it still exists, someone from that side can let me know pls) He told us about the night when the troubles started in Pindi so many times Always with tears in his eyes The horror and the loss of leaving his ancestral home behind, was always too much for him The way he spoke about that part of the world. The stories of summers spent in Murree hills. The various places in and around Rawalpindi described by him My greatest regret in life is that I couldn't take him to visit Rawalpindi before he passed away ☹️
Where was your Gandhi side from? I know a Gandhi family migrated from Sargodha, original all Gandhis would write their surname as Gandh, as their ancestors were perfume traders.
@@k.r.s.s9013 Gujranwala, but my dadaji settled in Lahore. And YES! he was a perfume trader. In fact, we are still in the fragrances business 😅 I knew about the last name origins though, my dadaji told me
Dr Ishtiaq gives a lot of references where Gandhi saved muslims from rioters in India. But did Gandhi do anything to save hindus from rioters in Pakistan? You should ask him when you meet him.
Gandhi was in India not in Pakistan but he asked Pakistan to save minority This peace loving guy was once said that when Hindus got killed India has right to do war to save the minority Means he care about everyone he just don't want bad for anyone and don't believe in revenge
India is not a hindu pakistan, do not see India as a mirror image of Pakistan. Gandhi stood for minorities in India is what differentiates India from Pakistan
@@goodsong_views As a statemen of a person who wants good for the humanity should have tried to save people in trouble. We see liberal democracies giving refuge to persecuted people. At that time India was recently partitioned so I think he could have tried something.
If Sikhs and Muslim supposed to have found a nation ..then it's not a partition of india..it will be like I have political power I will divide this nation...Sikhs stayed in india because we respect every religion I see many Sikh in hindu temple and even I go to gurudwara.... "Deh Shiva Bar Mohe Eha" this line from Sikhism gives me goosebumps whenever I hear it...I apologise if I am misquoting something
The main problem with Pakistan is that a majority of the ppl who live in that geographical area, have no LOVE for their country. There are two kinds of ppl who love the land, on which is denoted as "Pakistan" on the world atlas. 1. The people who migrated (read: chased out) to India.. Through their stories, they still remember their own ancestral land. They maybe millionaires in India, but if you give them a hypothetical opportunity to trade everything they have in India, for a chance to retire & to live in their ancestral land, they would go immediately. 2. Anti India population who support Pakistan( I am not targeting any religion here..) Similarly, the ppl of Pakistan, fondly remember lucknow, bhopal, Ajmer, jalandhar, delhi, shimla, bombay. They would also immediately trade their current material belongings to cross back.. But the main difference between these two sets of ppl, is that ppl who migrated to India, tried their best to move on, and mostly, had to start from scratch. Ppl who went to Pakistan (after graduation from AMU, till around 1955 - 56), went to get guaranteed jobs, where they wouldn't face competition from non Muslims. During partition, Pakistan burnt DAV UNIVERSITY lahore. It had to be relocated to Indian Punjab. But did India destroy AMU? NO! even though students studying on Indian government's money, betrayed their land and went to Pakistan. This, this is the difference. Jo log, jo kaum munaafik hoti hai, unka yehi hota hai
Even in today's east Punjab, i.e, Haryana, Himachal and Punjab states of India, Hindus are a majority. Even in Punjab, Sikhs form 58% of the population. Sikhs surely wouldn't have given anybody enough votes. But what the Sikhs give you is strength and their experience. The Sikh experience has shaped our Independence movement and hence my nation. They were the writers of my nation's story. Sikhs are not a population heavy community. They are a quality-over-quantity kind of community. One Sikh is equal to a hundred Sikhs. In the past, Hindus and Sikhs were nearly indistinguishable. But the muslims were always different. Hindus had their eldest sons ordained as Sikhs. Even now, many families of Punjabi khatris have Hindus sisters and Sikh brothers. All of them worship Mata-rani and attend the gurudwara. And that is part of the same religion to them. Even the Adi-granth has stories of Durga and Rama. All Punjabi Hindus have a photo of the akal-takht in their shops and homes. Of course, Sikhism is a different religion. It doesn't have idol worship or any havans like Hindus but these are surface level differences. At their core, a Sikh fights for dharma as any other Buddhist, Jain or Hindu would. And all the five main gurudware are in India. We should've gotten kartarpur sahib too. Then, the Sikhs would have their pilgrimages in India. If any of you think that the Khalistani episode is any indication that the Sikhs don't want to be Indians, let me tell you that bhagat Singh, mewa singh, KPS gill and countless others Sikhs have served their homeland. They served their homeland and not just saved Sikhs, but saved countless others too, including muslims.
It’s disrespectful to the minorities in Pakistan to show the news of minorities in India being targeted. There is no comparison between the two. The percentage of Islamic minority in India has increased 7-8% in 1947 to 15% now. This could not have happened if the hatred towards minority in India was even 10% of that in Pakistan.
The "fear" of Muslim that it would be persecuted in a Hindu Majority India stems from inherent intolerance of Islamic fundamentals - Dar-ul-harb & Dar-ul-Islam - where in muslims are supposed to be 200 % intolerant towards any non-Muslims, in case of a Muslim Majority state. Btw Sikhs never faced any religious persecution from larger Hindu community, but on the contrary Sikhs like Hindus historically faced religious persecution from Islamist rulers like Babur, Jehangir, Aurangzeb etc who are till date " Islamic Heroes " of the Muslims of Indian subcontinent. Even in 1947 The first blood was drawn, first massacres were committed of Sikhs and Hindus of Rawalpindi by the Muslims of the region, which has been proven to have tacit approval of Muslim league as well.
Sikhs were a very prosperous community in Rawalpindi .. majority business were owned by them ..more than hate for kafir it was much more calculated economic move to drive sikh out and capture their property
Yes I agree, this religion was formed in reaction to Muslim atrocities. Guru Gobind singh ji asked for one son to be given to form Marshall race, where they were trained to be warriors. We are Hindu brahmins and in our family tree we have many Sikhs. They even come to our marriages and other gatherings.
Sikhism is not antagonist to any religion. Eight out of ten Sikh Gurus did not raise arms against Mughals. Two did and they had Muslims in their army as well. Fight was against oppression not Islam.
Sikhs and Hindus are Iron brothers both being part of Dharmic religions.Jinnah offered blank documents to evereyone that shows the vision he had for running the nation, a man full of hindu hatred and his speeches were alway dubuious could not be trusted. Sikhs suffered first with Rawalpindi massacre. A nation born on hate can never prosper, when my grand grandfather's village was attacked he was given a proposal of converting to Islam as he was the nabardar of 50 villages and retain all his land, he decided against it, what he said was it's better to live as a beggar in India rather than living as a crorepati with Pakistan, his next generation will have to suffer all their lives because of his inability to withstand difficulties as a country born on hate for others can never prosper, and we all know that he was absolutely correct about it.
Shehzad one interesting fact is that Mohammed Ali Jinnah's grandson Nusli Wadia is one of India's richest entrepreneurs. He lives in Mumbai. Jinnah is his maternal grandfather. Nusli Wadia's son Ness is the owner of the IPL franchise Punjab Kings.
@@ThePakistanExperience Jinnah daughter married persi business tycoon... Jinnah did not gave his daughter paki citizenship... But he continued to drink alcohol... Vagaries of Father of Islamic Republic
@@97gordOnremsi There are various accounts and documented history that clearly proves he drank alcohol, wasn't fluent in Urdu or Gujarati and didn't know how to do namaaz.
west Pakistan's non Muslim population was not always 3-4 percent. it was 12 percent plus prior to partition. the right thing to say is that the majority of minorities were forced out between 1947 and 1951 during the partition riots. something equivalent did not happen in India.
@@ThePakistanExperience then you should have used like to like numbers. The 20-30 percent numbers including east Pakistan are also pre partition numbers. Doesn't make sense to compare a 1951 census number to a 1941 census number. West Pakistan lost 75 percent of its minorities during the partition and a lot of it was ethnic cleansing not any kind of voluntary movement. East Pakistan during the same time frame saw much lower movement in the same time period because it didn't see the same kind of cleansing initially, but the 1971 genocide perpetrated by west Pakistan and jamaat e Islami targeted Hindus and ended up reducing the Hindu population of Bangladesh by 30-50 percent as well. In contrast the top estimates of how many Muslims left/were forced to leave during partition is around 5 percent of Indian Muslims. This includes victims of partition violence in Punjab as well as the upper classes who thought they would have a better life in Pakistan.
Your perspective about the Sikhs being a part of Pakistan during partition is erroneous. The idea that a country is being made for Muslims excludes every other faith which is not a Muslim faith. Jinnah was a lawyer who wanted a separate Pakistan as a homeland for Muslims. His proposal to Sikhs to join Pakistan was a clever lawyerly move but completely devoid of the reality on the ground. While Sikhs are not Hindus, I would argue their closeness to Hinduism as compared to Islam is unambiguous. Hindus and Sikhs have historically never been antagonistic cultures. It is only now stupid politicians are inventing that divide. Islam and Sikhism have always been on the opposite side of the battlefield, and the argument that Sikhs could have gone with Pakistan at the time of partition is null and void.
How easily he said whole pakistan is a idea for the minority group but the idea is only for particular religion and the same religion never let another religion flourish. Literally this channel making podcast on thing Indians want to listen but nothing is changing in Pakistan and even in this time Pakistan is facing ecomical crises The Pakistani army increase there defence budget, there no wonder Pakistani Army has a country for themselves.
4:20 But Shehzad, Sikhs were not even the second majority in United Punjab. What you are proposing would have only caused more ruction.Sikhs in different parts of India would have also faced the aftermath and so would have the Hindus. Know this, in Indian Punjab Hindus and Sikhs are inseperable. Just go to any gurudwara in India you will understand.
Jinnah was just as much of an opportunist as those you speak of that took advantage of the minorities. He was looking for power & he knew in undivided India he wouldn’t be as big as a figure. Hence the Lahore resolution, direct action day & various other decisions he & Muslim league made to win their argument. This is why after his death the entire Muslim collapsed because he was the entire idea behind Pakistan
We in 🇮🇳 call Hindus ...Hindus Muslims ...Muslims ... Sikhs ...Sikhs and so on ... To give their religion due respect and identity just like we crave for ours ... Ye bat jis din samjh a jaegi ...Pakistan ki kismat badal jaegi ... So called intellectual Podcasters of Pakistan are also so backward in their approach to see the world and other community that it is shocking...
In India Muslim population has increased from 9.6percent to 14 percent of total population since 47 Because minority rights are enshrined in constitution!
Glad that India was partitioned or else we wouldn't have reached where we have reached today, though a long way to go. There are communal flare ups this side too but the Indians who are in minority, have prospered and contributed a lot and none have migrated giving religious persecution as a reason.
00:46 You are horribly WRONG here. It is true that before Partition, majority of Pakistan's Hindu population was in East Pakistan but that majority was a slim majority. If East Pakistan had 60% of Pakistan's Hindus, West had remaining 40%. As per 1941 Census, West Punjab was at least 20% Hindu or Sikh, and Sindh was 24% Hindu. Karachi had only 49% Muslim population and Lahore was 35% non-Muslim. In comparison, East Bengal aka East Pakistan, was 29% Hindu as per 1941 census. In 1951 census, West Pakistan had become 96-97% Muslim, whereas East Pakistan still had 22% Hindus. Migration of Hindus and Sikhs from West Pakistan was almost complete by the end of 1948 and was like a massive wave whereas migration of Hindus from East Pakistan was like a constant trickle. You Pakistanis know zero facts.
You compared the killing of muslims in india to the killings of non Muslims in pakistan but forgot or skipped to me tion that in india there is a system that is working for the justice irrespective of religion while in pakistan, the system is the part of the cause.
The more you listen and learn , this was always about property for themselves and not some religious ideology. How the need to be a property owner for Jinnah was much greater than having a state for Muslims. Knowing he would own full of Punjab the idea of having a joint ownership with Sikhs was not acceptable but learning he would have a smaller part of Punjab he was ready. So sad how men have used personal faith into a controlling mechanism to control property
India already got Sikh president, prime minister & many other important positions despite they being about 2% of totall population. In Pakistan none other than Muslims became prime minister or president. What so cringe worthy & funny is yet these Pakistanis thinks all religion got equality in Pak but in India evil hindus are discrimating everyone. Btw in late 2000s in our 80% hindu populated republic our President was a Muslim, PM was Sikh & ruling party leader a Christian and let alone no one went on protesting over it but hardly even cared and many like us thought it is the thirump of secularism and the motto of 'unity in diversity'. And last Thank you Jinnah for creating Pakistan & absorbing vast majority of good for nothing hatefilled folks of Sub-continent.
Forget about Sikhs. Pakistan can't even treat Shia's and Hazaras well. There is not 1 rational reason why it couldn't utilise the services of Atif Mian. This idea of persecution of minorities MIGHT be true, but it's solution was NEVER partition. One of the most persecuted GROUP -Dalits - Jogendranath Mandal - 1st law minster of Pak - his letter should've been added here. Dalits were more poor, faced more discrimination, were even not represnted properly. They stayed, so did Sikhs - and they have become PM, Prez, CMs, CJIs, Army Chiefs. Fun Fact: All this othering by a population which was barely converted to Islam150 yrs ago. If Pakistanis get time, do read about the North East Insurgency, there is barely 10% in commmon with mainland - language, culture, religion - even when they had a chance their leadership did not push the envelope far.
@@princer2893 bhaiyya he tu pakka.......hindi belt wala Wahi pe sanatani musalmano ko Abdul punchr bolte Maratha hu me maratha....wo bhi 96K......not that I believe in all this jativadi shit, kyoki isise bramnvad Aya aur jaha bramhn dominated he aap ke hindi states especially waha hindu communal mindset he...... Musalmano me aisa nahi, wo Har state me commual he
@@nikhildeshmukh6221 you should read more. Caste discrimination and persecution in Maharashtra is primarily between Marathas and Dalits. Please read once Gulamgiri (by Jyotiba Phule). As per riots are concerned are they homogenous? Is every riot H vs M? Partition is a nuclear option, it doesn't solve the problem infact creates more.
@@nikhildeshmukh6221 yeh we have a history of religious conflict bit we also have a history of living in harmony. The Indian national movement was a step in building harmony but the partition was a very painful disruption. It created new faultlines. We don't now what could have happened without partition. Anyone talking in definitives in this subject is wrong
Sikhs fought for the Indian freedom struggle. On other hand Muslims from the Muslim league never fought against the British. They didn't even launch any movement against the brits. Then why do you think Sikhs will shake hand with Muslims?
It is correct that sikhs wouldn't have joined Pakistan because the entire rhetoric of the muslim league was against non muslims but your reasoning is wrong.Sikhs and gorkhas along people like scindia helped the British in suppressing the revolt of 1857. Sikhs were a large part of the British Indian army. They Muslim league didn't fight for independence but many Muslims did. Don't adopt the Pakistani position that Muslim league was the sole representative of Indian Muslims and don't make blanket statements about any community.
we are basicaly hindu sindhis and my grand parent told me this that at the time of partition they were tortured in pakistan for being hindus and numerous riots broke out and because of that my grand parents parent left pakistan with nothing on a single train in 1947 and now we are living a decent and multi cultural diversty life in india. i am a fourth generation sindhi living in india and can't thank enough of my ancestors decision to come to india. although sindhi culture is almost extinct as we dont know what our clothes were and how to write and read sindhi language. mordern sindhis can just speak and understand sindhi and at home also maximm time i have seen people speaking hindi. during partition punjabis got half punjab, bengalis got half bengal, kashmir got half kashmir, sindhis got nothing. although the entire basis of hinuduism originated from them.
Hindu temples are the most beautiful among religious places. The grandeur of these holy places and the forms of art there are immaculate. Islam lacks that visible face. Christian cathedrals have some amount of that grandeur but like Islam they are standardized and at times they are monotonous and look like modern art. We need to bring back that peaceful Hindu glory back with more artful temples. East’s glory lies in reviving Hindu temples as knowledge centres and also as places of respect.
Sikhs were never going to go to Pakistan and to the contrary sikhs at every moment fought against the creation of Muslim Pakistan. We did not get the best deal with India but surely it has been way better than pity condition of non muslims in Pakistan.
Interesting. Ostensibly in the guise of talking about "minority rights", they're channeling Punjabi ethnonationalism by trying to appeal to Sikh separatism. They don't regret that the Partition of India happened, only that their ancestors didn't claim as much as they could have, or agitate for the right set of demands: they wish their ancestors hadn't demanded a Pakistan, but a Punjabistan, by stoking the separatist sentiments of Sikhs. Very sly. However, not sly enough. Pakistanis won't change. Expect demands for an irredentist 'Punjabistan' in the wake of this Pakistan's failure and breakup. Already this Pakistan is like Yugoslavia, where most of the wealth and power is concentrated in one region and with one ethnicity (Punjab and the Punjabis, like the Serbs of the erstwhile Yugoslavia) that dominates 80 percent of the country and its institutions. So yes, that Pakistan is already breeding several subnational separatist and secessionist movements is no surprise. The future of this Pakistan is as a rump Sunni Muslim Punjabistan and a collection of other successor states (Sindh, Balochistan, Afghania etc).
Jinnah also did the blank document shenanigans with Dalits of East Bengal and with Kings of Jodhpur and Bikaner. It was a ploy to get more territory, Gurdaspur and a few other districts. Jogindra Nath Mandal was to regret believing in the snake oil that was sold to him. The Sikhs and Jodhpur fortunately made no such mistake. It was to be a 'moth-eaten' Pakistan. Especially true after the Civil War (which eventually turned into an international conflict) of 1971.
I disagree with your analysis.....all these evaluations of Pakistani scholars are going on because something went wrong.....we would not have had this much discussion of the two nation theory if things were okay in pakistan......the fact of the matter is as soon as you try to create a state for muslims and Sikhs i.e. a state on lines of a particular identity other than your national identity.....shit is eventually gonna hit the roof in some form or the other. There is no institutionalised discrimination in India but still we have cases of lynchings or mob violence every once in a while. Two nation theory came into being only because it had the backing of zamindaars at that time who were a bit concerned of the policy changes INC was gonna make in India post independence because it would have led to a loss of their power and status. This is clearly evident from the creation of Bangladesh.....despite the Muslim identity ......these power hungry individuals were too afraid to share power with the Bengali muslims.......they took them for granted and eventually Bangladesh was created.
I disagree as a sikh we are mote close to Hindus culturally not muslims If you go to Himachal Pradesh then on hindu religious places you will many Sikhs and Hindus together doing Seva i also go to shiv bodi
I'm starting to wonder who is funding this channel. Basically what he's nostalgic for is a kind of Punjabistan, or Punjabi nationalist state, which will be the next iteration once this version of Pakistan fails. So naturally encouraging Sikhs to embrace a subnational identity (ie. Khalistanism) is part and parcel of this strategy. Welcome ISPR magic 😂
When Pakistan started to falter horrendously many pakistanis youtubers and analysts like this channel started revisiting history to try and mend ties with India...but the thing is even if these people are genuine, they comprise 0.001% or less in pakistani society...if you see the pakistani street videos one would get a clear view of how the normal muslim pakistanis sees tye world especially hindus and indians.....India should not let its foot off the pedal...just keep punishing Pak till it mends its ways or breaks up...
I don't agree that the percentage are so low, most people who advocated for peace today are same as yesterday. The big change is in the view of the only institution that matters in Pakistan. For the first time they are feeling the pinch. Earlier they would come down hard on voices for peace calling them anti-national, traitor etc. and taking punitive action against them. But now with no foreign assistance in sight they realise that trade with india is the only way. However I do share your skepticism that the moment they have breathing space they will revert to their original antics so we must be very vigilant and limit cooperation in areas that are absolutely necessary eg climate change, but we must also be open to avenues where we can establish pakistan's dependence on us. Energy, banking, food grains and telecommunications are sectors where we can unleash two of our monopolistic greedy AAs to establish a foothold. Yes That would also help Pakistani citizens but we should not be so blinded by hate that we miss an opportunity to assert our influence. Otherising and dehumanizing even our enemies is stupid. India has such hot border with China but we are so heavily reliant on Chinese imports that are stupid FM says that China is too strong for us. We have to create a power differential so large that disturbing us will have dire consequences for the Pakistani army. Unfortunately we have been governed by incompetent idiots for last 9 years who can't even make simple appointments
@@71espn ise kehte hai Majboori ka naam Mahatma Gandhi...once they fill up their coffers they would ve back to Al Jihad, kaaffir, Gazwa e hind..etc etc etc...yeh inki fitrat hai, 1400 saal se yahi karte aaye hai....bdw you cannot dehumanize an inhuman...last 1000 saal se bas hum hi insaniyat dikhate aa rahe hai...we should keep tightening the noose untill they mend their ways permanently.
Sorry u r living in utopia and are totally unaware of Sikh history. If not for the persecution and attempts at forced conversion of Hindus there would be no Sikh religion as we know it today . After the Sikh religion was formed the history is one of fighting to save your religion. This continued till Ranjit Singh came to power in Punjab . There have been battles with the Hindu hill rajas but they were all about collecting taxes religion was never involved. The Sikhs were protectors of the Hindus infact in many Hindu families the eldest son was made a Sikh . There are lot of marriages between Hindus and Sikhs -- there is no such practice with Muslims . It is Indira and then Rajiv who messed up Hindu Sikh relations big time that is why this Khalistan issue keeps cropping up -- of course with ISI funding .
How would a sikh homeland work. In 1947 only one district was majority sikh that too by by a bare margin. Massive riots had already taken place where sikhs and hindus fought on the same side. Many sikhs were intermarried with Hindus [khatri caste]. Pakistan should realize that its foundation as a country was bad and reform itself instead of having wet dreams. Also why are you not talking about the fact that west pakistani army drove out 7.5 million hindus from bangladesh [several of them who returned after the war and the genocide had ended]. The Pakistanis killed 30 times muslims in bangladesh compared to all the riots in India. So much for the safe homeland for south Asian Muslims. Let's not talk about 73 thousand pashtuns killed and 10 thousand balochis who have died too. RSS and all hindu extremists can only dream about killing as many Muslims as pakistani army does. The only thing pakistan has achieved is the creation of a state for the Muslim north indian elite to loot who migrated to pakistan in 1947.
Kalat was another example when Mr Jinnah said you write anything on a blank paper then he renaged his promise ! Even accepting that minority were less in Punjab (west) in pre partition period (I can challenge that) no effort was made by ruling junta in east Pakistan to save them rather unspeakable atrocities unleashed upon them at every moment after 1947till when Bangladesh formed
Muslim lynching, howsoever condemnable, in India is happening just recently. But minority persecution in Pakistan has been happening silently, accumulating to a large quantity from partition till now. As a result, comparing the miserable state of minorities in Pakistan with cow lynching is false equivalency. Tell me one thing, why you don't invite one non-Muslim guest on your show from Pakistan. Are you selectively excluding them, or none exists? This is an introspection you have to do. So many Pakistani youtubers getting common people's opinions, but i have seen none from a minority community. Please demystify this perplexity.
I have been watching yours shows for quite sometime and you come across as an intelligent pakistani. Great points, with some disagreement. LONG READ ALERT! Pakistanis should always understand that India's exclusionary hindutva movement is a reaction to Pakistan's TNT. The original activist movement of India was led by elitist and secular congress as a pressure group. With the arrival of Gandhi, when congress started increasing its demands and started turning into a mass socially inclusive total independence movement beyond it's mandate as pressure group of indian elites demanding small consessions, Jinnah was brought back from London to start muslim league as the entity of Muslims so as to discredit Congress as a hindu nationlist organization and not a secular Indian nationalist organization. Please note that AFTER the Muslim league was set up, RSS was born purely as a reaction in order to fight muslim nationalism with hindu nationalism. Both Muslim League and RSS were mirror images of each other advocating for and separation between muslims and hindus respectively. Majority of Hindus of the time didnt buy into RSS though. Coming to religion, Hinduism by it's very nature, as a polytheistic religion, accepts existence of allah and god in addition to it's own pantheon because existence of couple of more gods doesnt threaten the foundation of polytheistic hinduism. The monotheistic nature of islam coupled with rejection of "any other" god lays the foundation for a totalitarian and exclusivist society, that naturally led to TNT and Pakistan. India's extreme diversity of languages, sects and customs within the umbrella of hinduism, is a testament to the inherent diversity, secularism and tolerance of different beliefs in Hinduism that doesnt seek to homogenize the society around a single god or seek "purity" of belief. Not just hinduism, but also other indic religions like buddhism, and jainism share the same tolerance towards one another and they co-existed peacefully. This tolerance was also extended to historic foreign religious minorities of India-judaism and parsis that arrived way before Islam. Tolerance of other beliefs was a rule in Hinduism until Islam arrived with it's exclusivist and intolerant ideology. Hindutva unfortunately is a product of assimilation of 1000 years of muslim+christian thought into hinduism that seeks to create a pure/exclusivist society where everyone within the hindu society is equal. The argument being, if islam rejects hindu gods and hindu society and treats them as second class, hindus must reject allah and muslim society as a principle of reciprocity that it thinks is essential for self-preservation and protect hindus from repetition of that 1000 year long colonization by islam and christianity. 80% of south asian muslims are hindu converts and their "separate" identities had not crystallized despite the conversion even until the Brits arrived. Even after conversion, they continued practisng many hindu customs some of which continue to this day, particularly in marriage. The British tendency to catalogue and tabulate the society under "different categories" ossified the separate religious identity of hindus and muslims. There is an interesting anecdote that when the british carried out the first census, they would often come across people who would go to temple, dargah as well as mosque. The brits decided that "if he goes to mosque more than temple, classify him as muslim and if he goes to temple more than dargah, classify him as hindu". This was the seed of british inflicted hindu muslim partition. Anyways, one positive of Hindutva is that it is the strongest force against caste discrimination as it seeks to forge a consolidated hindu identity free of caste fragmentation that can "fight" Islam. Infact BJP wins big victory because of this grand hindu caste alliance that used to be fragmented under several regional caste based "social justice" secular parties until recently who used to win from hindu lower caste+muslim vote. Hindutva is Islam+christian exclusivist+intolerant value assimilated hinduism for the new age. 800 years of muslim rule and 200 years of british rule was bound to influence hinduism, and we see the outcome in the form of hindutva. Hindutva intolerance is just equal in measure to Islamic intolerance, they are both mirror images. If south asian muslims dropped their monotheistic islam mandated religious intolerance towards hindus and resultant separatism, realized their ethnic/genetic indian roots which ties them to their pre-islamic hindu ancestors who they share with current indian hindus, the hindutva defence mechanism of hinduism would dissapear.
Very aptly analysed the whole thing! Nothing withstanding Hindutva, Essenes of India is her tolerance. No matter whatever left/liberal pundits would say, no minority has lost rights to practice their faith in India. Simple measure is their population growth , economic conditions, political powers…all achieved by minorities here.
True true true. You have said it very straightforwardly. It is more of self defense which is in a very fragile state now. When all the provocation, stone pelting on processions, protest for every just reforms stops the need for Hindutva vanishes so does Hindutva. I think it is time for another Bhakthi movement to start . It is the natural way how our Sanatana Dharma revived everytime for lakhs and lakhs of years. All other physical fights our Bhagwans will take Avatarams will do. To keep this confidence and strength in our people we need another Bhakthi movement now.
Political Religion is the root cause of all the atrocities. Be it Pakistan or India. It is just that some Religions are better at the game of subjugation and filled with more superiority Complex, than other religions. Pakistan should be a prime example for India and its leaders that how dangerous this game of flirting Politics and religion is. India will never go to such a low even if it tries because it has a diverse mindset but why even take that road for small political gains.
Muslims & Sikhs as a separate country? Where would Punjabi Hidnus go? Why Sikhs were wiped out in West Punjab? What about Jains, Buddhists, Parsis, Jews & Christians in India? Jinnah actually promoted Drvidistan, and a deparate country for Chrstians too. It's divisive not constructive. In fact Dravidian activists wholeheartedly supported AIML in Madras during 1941 meeting. It's dubious thought ab initio.
Non-Muslims were only 3-4% in the present day Pakistan? Where do you get these ideas? Karachi had 51% Hindus and 8% Sikhs in 1941 census. Lahore had 40% Hindus. Multan had Punjabi newspapers run by Sikhs. Do you have a single Punjabi newspaper in a country where 60% of population is Punjabi? Christians voted for Pakistan. Are Christian minority rights protected better in Pakistan than in India? Wouldn’t plight of Sikhs have been similar to plight of Christians in Pakistan? Would Pakistan have lived up to its commitments to Sikhs any more than it lived up to its commitments to Bengalis?
British rulers played Hindu Muslim card and some power hunger leaders used that card very wisely and split the nation into two pieces. Bhai tum Aadha Pakana bechta hai
You can't compare how we treat our minorities to how you treat your minorities, i don't see muslims in India trying to run away to Pakistan, while on the other hand......... like you guys keep bringing up Gujarat riots what you ignore is the total number of people who were killed in those riots, Hindus and muslims included, twice of that number of Hindus, Christians and other minorities leave Pakistan for India EVERY YEAR. India's treatment of minorities is better than Egypt which isn't good but they too have 14 percent Christian population but those Coptic Christians have representation in all aspects of Egyptian society despite social and institutional discrimination at some level. So India's treatment of minorities may not be good but comparing how you treat your minorities to that of ours is kinda weird, cause our nearest peer in this is Egypt not your country.
Nice video, Shezhad. I like your conversations with Dr. Ahmed. I know there might be some level of persecution of Muslims by some tiny small percentage of radicals, majority faith in India, and it's highly condemable. But in pakistan, your state is supporting decrimination against your minority which is not the case in India. In pakistan, I have read those details of your constitution pages where it is clearly written that no non-Muslims can become pakistan's army chief, pm, president, chief minister, ISI, or intelligence chief. While India doesn't have this issue. India already had 2 R.A.W chiefs, 4 presidents , 2-3 education ministers, and 3 chief ministers ( in hindu majority states😅) from the Muslim community in the last 75 years. One of India most famous and respected presidents was during the rule of BJP, surprisingly during the vajpayee government. Moreover, one more thing I would add here is that in pakistan people only highlight lynching of Muslims in India. No one really talks about how hindus are choped off from the head by radical Muslims, too. Like I have never seen news from Pakistan that non Muslims cut the head of Muslims in Lahor or any of the places, but you can see that news in India many times, perhaps more than Muslims lynching incidents. In India, you can joke about majority religions gods in stand-up still you can become hero but I have never seen a single comedian in India who made fun of Prophet or Allah and those who did are chopped off from the head like Kamlesh Tiwari. So, as per my personal opinion, there is no comparison for the treatment of minority b/w India and pakistan, but pakistanis can disagree. Keep making such videos Shezhad, that's how you can change radical thinking of your country towards minority.
Islam was a divisive religion, a faith that segregated people into rigid groups of Muslims and non-Muslims, where the benefits of brotherhood and fraternity were limited only to the former, i.e Muslims, while the latter was treated with contempt and enmity.
You never had soft corner for Sikhs, you were focusing on the land. How to cover more land and cut down share of Hindus. You were not worried about religion being victimized. You had an ultra ego, that you were rulers once and you don't want to be ruled by Hindus.
i know this is a serious video but I can't help it when he says "there is a moment in history when zigged when we could have zagged" just puts a huge smile on my face.
Shehzad - you should ask a question to one of your historian panelists on the Nehru Liaquat pact. This pact obligated each country to protect each others’ minorities. Neither country brings it up anymore but I think pressure from Pakistan to India and vice versa on this front is not necessarily a bad thing if it leads to a better outcome for the people
The pact was to stop the continuous flow but in the long run it isn't a good thing. Indian Muslims are Indian and their protection is the duty of the Indian state. Pakistan has no locus standi in this matter and vice versa. Doing otherwise is a recipe for disaster for respective minorities.
@@Surajkumar-gk3dk Of course, someone named Kumar doesn't need it. The same way someone named Ali in Pakistan doesn't need it. Feel free to listen to your minorities who continually talk about discrimination.
@@waleedabbas4996 then please be open to share why size of minorties is rising insted of so much discrimination according to you and also please share the rason of your nation's shrinking population of minorty
@@waleedabbas4996 sir, to see what discrimination is all about you check your constitution which prohibits ‘Kafirs’ to assume highest political, military position. Then the Blasphemy laws which define the ‘Julm’. It actually tells world how to commit atrocities on humanity…..
Regarding sikhs, fact remains that Ranjit Singh I'd the hero of Sikhs and Hindu Punjabis and villain for Punjabi Muslims, and frankly speaking sikhs had nothing in common with the Muslims of KPK, Sindh, Bengal, Balouchistan and Muhajirs. and shehzad has failed to clarify what would have happened to hindu punjabis who were handling trade and commerce of Punjab.
U know what root cause is let's say tommorow all hatred disappeared between Hindus an muslims then what will be left of meaning of pakistan that is why it is in the best intrest of pakistani state to keep hatting and persecuting minorities
Bhai sahab aapka desh bana hi religion ke base p hai, Then how can you expect that neither mr.jinnah will speak in favour of othere religion nor against his religion ☯️. You can trim(cut) some branches of tree 🌴 for better shape and size but you can't change the roots of trees.
I want to know more of the "asymmetry" in the resource distributed between Pak & India. Didn't Gandhi fast for the complete disbursement of 50crores to Pak which was being held to be transferred in parts to monitor Pak's spending which actually turned out to be true as it was majorly spent on army and used AGAINST India within a year???
@Football-Pundit Nah, Even India disbanded parts of its army, it's your govt which thought they would have someuse of this much forces and continued with that.
@Football-Pundit Your Politicians being typical converts didn't use their brains, they should have taken time out of fanatic poetry and thought logically.
@Football-Pundit just tell me one thing how would you expect transfer of resources Bombay utha k pakistan me rkh dete ?? Ya Calcutta??? Your govt waged a war on india even before drafting a constitution, so think what kind of mentality your leaders had ???you mentioned everything what pakistan got but forget to mention that majority Muslims who voted for pakistan never went to pakistan , that time the Godse faction was demanding this only that either country won't break if it does then complete exchange of population is needed but Nehru and jinnah played their politics and India got it's first terrorist in form of Godse.
Factually incorrect information. In 1947 West Pakistan had 15% minority population. It is now 2%. East Pakistan had 22% minority population in 1947. Now it is 9%. Please get your facts right.
Muslim nationalism kaisay hua when I am saying they should have done it with thr Sikh Community? The idea was framing the demand for a separate homeland as a way to safeguard minority rights. Hindus were the majority hence Muslims and Sikhs being the minorities.
@@ThePakistanExperience Minority rights chilla kr separate state bnana kya hai uska koi term ho to btana apni galty maan lene sei koi chota nahi ho jata
@@Mjjjyyy iam also fan of shehzad but tuje kya lagta hai agar pakistan Aaj descent economy hota to shehzad jese liberal bhi kabhi jinnah pe questions krte?
@@ThePakistanExperience beta jis majority se itni fatti thi , usi majority mein muslims have double tripled in size while in the mean while the northeast became christian ...btw i love the pakistani saviour complex of banding all the minorities while jinnah chilah chilah kar specically muslim state demand kar raha tha ...your inability to undersand hindu nd sikh culture nd how diffrent they r from islam , makes ur mild hatred so much understadable ... btw its not your fault , afterall u all are sons of a country that came out of nowhere in last 80yrs only while we as people got independence .
@@ThePakistanExperience with all due respect to you brother, this presents the picture that Hindus and Sikhs did not get along well. I would argue while Sikhs tried to maintain good relations with both, they are historically and religiously closer to Hinduism. Hindus and Sikhs also had a common enemy in Punjab courtesy Mughals and Afghans later, while Muslims had better relations with them. Many hindus (punjabis and sindhis) till very recently used to pledge their first born son to Khalsa so that they could fight against the (mostly Muslim) perpetrators and suffered equally from the said rulers/perpetrators. Hinduism itself is more accepting of diverging theologies which made the cooperation easier. Also its a fanboy moment for me, as I long for good content from Pakistan and south Asia in general. Keep doing your good work :)
Politics usually takes the path of least resistance, and it is much easier to unite people on religious lines than with the abstract language of rights. It is easier to push people into tribal identities than to have them reach out and join hands. To create a consensus across religious lines that Hindus would use their majority to cast aside minorities would require monumental effort, sustained over the decades of the Muslim League's existence. It could not have happened overnight. Such an attempt would also prompt the Congress to counter with its own outreach measures. With an array of Western liberals across its leadership, I daresay this would be a harder fight for Jinnah. By painting this as a religious argument, he chose a framework where the Congress could not counter effectively. The many barristers in its ranks, trained in Western philosophy, would play to their strengths against secular, rights-based arguments. At the same time, the likes of Gandhi would probably reach within Hinduism to find messages of peace and universal brotherhood, which the religion offers in abundance. I suspect your thoughts on this may be tainted by the militant, aggressive Hinduism that the current Indian Government espouses. Do remember that this is not a historically dominant creed. Hinduism, current passions notwithstanding, is fundamentally an inward-looking, other-worldly religion. At most times, it is not an identity that is easy to conjure fear against - enough that groups with historical differences unite.
Recently I noticed your channel and adore your various posts. You are doing excellent job, keep it up!! However your curiosity in this post about Muslim and Sikh association at that of point i.e. in 1947 era is just innocent and funny
It's pretty clear that all Jinnah wanted is Land. When he realised that he won't be getting the whole Punjab, he thought to manipulate Sikhs. I'm pretty sure, his plan was to get land first and then go for genocide like they did in Bangladesh!
I am a sikh myself living in Kashmir from the last 28 years. Give me 1 reason why as a sikh i would want to live in 1947 made Pakistan?? Historically, we have been persecuted by Mughuls. Majority of of our gurudwaras were in India.. The only people you are saying who had their opinion on staying in Pakistan probably would have been living there and would not wanted to leave their lands and move the other side. Ideologically we have always connected more with hindus than we can ever with muslims.
Hindus and Sikhs are one. Leave violence in the past. We are one. Even in a Hindu Rashtra, never fear, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and all Sanatanis will always be prosperous.
Sikhism came from Hinduism of course you gonna have similarities with them.
@Anthony De Mello What about Israel?
@Anthony De Mello Lol what?! Israel is a jewish country.
Agreed 100%
Being a Sikh.. it had to be either our own nation or India. I think Sikhs and Hindus have more cultural and religious similarities than with muslims. It is amazing how Pakistani side always thinks we could have, should have chosen Pakistan. Two hyper sensitive religions would have been each other’s throats all the time. With India at least we have (sort of) our own state and language. So, 100% if not our own nation, then India. Sikh leaders negotiating were not sharpest of tools but at least they knew where did they have better chances to survive and thrive. Biggest downside was, we lost our historical and religious places for the Muslim dream. I think we are better off, being part of a secular nation with troubles rather than being part of Pakistan and slowly getting killed, chases away, converted or leaving to india eventually as refugees..
I think Sikhs should take over Pakistan,and call it Khalistan,it will be prosperous country,majority of muslims are all theifs and liars 😊
It is mandatory in Indian punjab to have high school certificate of punjabi language as subject to be eligible to apply for any government job (even janitor).
In Pakistan punjab, an elected member of parliament cannot address the parliament of punjab in punjabi.
Then 4 sikhs in Canada claim that their punjabi identity is under threat in India
Hindu And Sikh are Indic And muslims are Abrahamic
Spot on ❤. Also, how many muslims respect Sikh gurus and visit gurudwaras, as compared to hindus?
Moreover how cn we Sikhs forget the atrocities done by Muslim rulers on our Gurus and our community…siding with Pakistan was nvr an option…the only commonality is Punjabi language rest I feel since partition Indians n Pakistanis are poles apart.
Being aSikh I’m glad our ancestors chose to be an Indian and migrated to Delhi…cnt imagine being a minority in Pakistan would’ve been hell..
Totally agree with you 💯 as i sikh.......my grandfather moved to Delhi just after Partition, my dad was 7 year old when the Partition happened...I am so happy they came to Delhi. I despise Pakistan and what it stands for.
Because they only florish when hindu is in majority
@@MrKnight-T this isn't the right way to approach this, even if sikhs were majority, I'm sure we hindus would have stayed safe.
All darmic faiths Hinduism, Buddhism, sikh and Jainism, all are very inclusive and tolerant to different ideas and religions.
@@stylinnet2395 💯 on point…religion koi bhi hon…we all are proud Indians🇮🇳🇮🇳
@@stylinnet2395 hindu se mera matlb sanatan dharm jis me sab dharmic path aa gaya hindu sikh budh jain...
Leave the normal citizens who are not muslims in Pakistan.
Your hindu member of Senate, from balochistan awami party, Mr danesh Kumar, is regularly faced with pleas and comments from his fellow members of Senate, to read the Kalma and convert to Islam.
Can you think what will happen if a hindu lawmaker in maker in India, says to a fellow MP, who is not hindu (maybe muslim Christian jew jain Buddhist etc), to convert to Hinduism??
I'll tell you, that person would be running around the courts, asked to publicly apologize, and "sar tan se juda" waali naarebaaji hogi.
Plz don't assume that I am an Islamophobe.
I was at jama masjid, delhi yesterday and accompanied my friend while he broke his fast.
Pakistan is an experiment, which has failed miserably.
The religious fanaticism has crippled your country, your people's minds, and rationale.
The few ppl who have intellect, are just trying to leave the country.
paji this is what islam is all about
@@navjotsingh9076 true
True
@Iqbal Bakht I didn't say anything about the religion. I said about the so-called country... Learn to differentiate. And this, in essence, is your country's and your citizens' true problem. you idiots dont know how to differentiate between the 2
My grandfather was from multan ,though we lost our land and business ,but we are thankful to god we have taken good step to be in india ,waheguru ne mehar krti 🙏🏻
Using the term Non - Muslims for other faiths by liberal muslims is same as the 'Kafir' term used by Radicals. No Hindu, Sikh & Christian will use Non - Hindu, Non - Sikh or Non - Christian for other faiths. Using The term "There is no god Except Allah" itself is discriminatory and kind of showing disgusting superiority syndrome.
Calling an individual that is demeaning but that's not the same is showing charts showing the numbers of Muslims and Non-Muslims in Pakistan to show a statistic.
Tu Kya alien bolien Ajeeb Indians Jo Hindu ni hoga wo non Hindu hi hoga ise Tarah Jo Muslim ni hua wo non Muslim
@@musabishtiaq03 the tag non Muslim comes with its own religious baggage. The term kaffir is used for them, which means one who intentionally denies the truth. The one who conceals and rejects the truth while knowing it in their heart to be true. This is a very problematic concept cause this paints all non Muslims who have known and heard about Islam to be liars and cheats. Mainstream Islam makes no two ways about it.
However here it was used just for the convenience, as there are multiple minorities with same issue. Here it isn't an issue at all, though many here unjustly perceive though. This can't be generalised though and the term non Muslim can be said with intention of disrespecting someone.
@@ThePakistanExperience i know your intentions were not like that but that's how things gets normalised in mainstream.
@@musabishtiaq03 Aap Alien hi bole bhai, abhi aap m maturity ki kami nd opium ka asar h
Funniest thing is "assuming" that Sikhs would have preferred to stay with "Pakistan" or wouldn't have envisioned their "future" in your "Secular country". Sikhs were not stupid. They ruled over Afganistan.
Sikh never ruled over Afghanistan
@@umar7182 Sikhs ruled for a brief period over a part of Afghania that is now KPK province of Pakistan
@@umar7182 Sun sets in a blackhole and Earth is flat
@@umar7182 Sikh empire ruled over parts of Afghanistan, that's why dome parts of Pashtunistan lie inside Pak and Afghanistan wants them back.
@@umar7182 Aap Hari singh Nalwa ko bhul gaye hai kya??
The fact that you were thinking about adding sikhs for ur separate homeland rather than asking secularism in United India says a lot about Pakistani mindset, even if it is hypothetical, its always pakistan and never United India
typical divisive mindset of a fellow pakistani
Yeh "typical" aur "mindset" jaise shabd inte Indian kyun lagte hain 😂😂😂. English se Hatao aur Hindi ka hissa bna do inko.
Man this video has an agenda, to flare up Sikh .separatism
There is almost nothing like a secular Pakistani.
@@subhasisghosh66 thats the point, these so called divisive people are the ones who wish India to be divided with 1000 cuts
do not trust a word pakistani says, whatever his/her political ideology is
@@tyrant_hermit The comment is literally written in English!
The point that Pakistan did not get resources during partition is flawed. It got best aerated lands in undivided India. The food security was guaranteed.
Also a huge amount of money
they multiplied like rats, they quadrupled their population over 70yrs, 50 to 200 million, their fertility rate even today is 3.5+ so you can understand how well the resources are managed.
They also got aid money from USA.
They also sukd the jute revenue from Bangladesh
They get more advantage, still they cry.
Don't talk about resources that was not already part of the area. Talk about the resources that were collective and were under Dehli govt like money, arms and other stuff. Even Gandhi g has to intervene to compelled Indian govt to release
Best of luck for your vision for your country .👍 Due to partition we(sikhs) lost the most especially our holy and historical places... But as a Sikh I am grateful that I am the part of India 🇮🇳 (the great ancient civilization).Hope things get better in the future for both countries .🙏
ya i have seen mostly sikhs were major victims of parition
but it's in way a good that jinnah was unsuccesfull otherwise you would have not been alive
I feel so so angry that the great Mohandas who was so keen for justice to Muslims couldn't argue that Kartarpur Sahib should come to 🇮🇳. Even after 1971, indira gaandhi could/should have exchanged 95000 prisoner of war for Kartarpur Sahib. Bhutto was, at the time, the weakest he could have been.
Feel very very very angry with Congress 🤬🤬🤬
Mere thought of Sikhs included in Pakistan sends chilling thoughts. India without Sikhs is like person without soul. It is a matter of great sorrow for Indians that major Sikh holy sites are not with India. Jinnah not just wanted entire Punjab and Bengal but dismember India by creating multiple parts….
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa waheguru Ji ki Fateh... Jai shree Ram 🚩🚩🚩🚩
@@jidrit999 not Gandhi or Nehru . Only jinha and britishwas responsible . Gandhi and Nehru become puppeteers of situations and also very soft.
I am glad my ancestors choosed India 🇮🇳 over pakistan 🇵🇰. Otherwise Instead of an well educated astrophysicist I would have been a close minded muslim kid believing Allah blindly without questioning
Which caste you select or your ancestors 🤔
chose*
choosed is not a word. if your ancestors chose Pakistan at least you’d know basic english and not just islamophobic ideologies.
@@jetbllackwingspakistan? English?
I cannot imagine both words in the same sentence
And your obsession with language is what broke pakistan in two parts in 1971
But pakistanis are not the ones who learn from the past
So your comment here is understandable
Read about Joseph colony incident.
Entire Christian colony was burnt to the ground, and Pakistan foreign minister was releasing statement against Canada because a hijabi girl was reportedly harassed by drunk men at a train station
I feel Pakistan has institutionalized discrimination in the constitution while India has ensured that our constitution stays secular and does not discriminate based on religion. Everything else is just a effect.
India is not secular just because of the constitution but because its majority Hindu. Give credit where its due.
Even Pakistan and Bangladesh's constitution has minority rights but look where they are now.
Our police, civil servants, courts were never strong enough to control a mob in riots or execute rule of law.
Mentioning your minorities as Non muslims is itself- kind of discrimination.. expected better from you shehzad
Ye kya woke ness hay boss?
Non-Muslims are in the minority in Pakistan. This is not discrimination. This is mathematics.
@@ThePakistanExperience binary of muslims and non muslims is discrimination ..should I call you non Indian?? No because you have distinct identity - pakistani.
Labelling someone from your POV is itself a discrimination ..they have their distinct identity of pakistani hindu or pakistani sikh ..have you ever seen someone in India referring Indian muslims as Non Hindus ??
@@ThePakistanExperience It is not woke ness, but you have to come out of this muslim in oneside and ghair muslim on another side. The black and white way of seeing things.
@@thirdwoice true
Yaar Gautam tum kuch zyada hi sensitive nahin hi rahe? There are bigger fish to be fried than nomenclature
The thing is, back then, Hindus and Sikhs came from one family tree, and even now, there have always been Hindu-Sikh marriages, which are common in India. Both are Indian-based cultures and religions. There is no reason why Sikhs would have remained in their current form in Pakistan. Those who became Sikhs were the only sons of Hindus back then, and they protected Hindus largely in the Punjab region.
Those who became Muslims (pre-independent India) were also Hindus…living in denial leads to wt Pakistan is facing today…n acceptance of it has led to flourishing Sikh community in India..🇮🇳
Yes we are Hindu brahmins and before the was a tradition to to give your eldest son to Sikhism. It was after Guru Govind singh ji maharaj said to give your sons to Sikhism. Even now there are Sikhs in our family tree.
@@DoomSlayerTheGamer12. exactly my friend thinks he is from Arab 😂, ya Allah
@@bluebird1227 if I was not a Brahmin, I wanted to be a Sikh, it is the same like Sikhism believes in karma, birth and rebirth and that we all are part of Brahman and we all are part of it
@@DoomSlayerTheGamer12.see you r a hindu
3:11
That's how some people understood it??
Really??
Jinnah, after losing the 1937 election, understood that he needs to turn communal and spread malicious lies about the Congress' hatred and bias towards Muslims of india.
Mr Jinnah, in a speech at Aligarh muslim university said, that 2 crore musalmaan ko qurbaani deni hogi, taaki 7 crore ko Pakistan mil sake...
You can confirm this from Prof Dr Ishtiaq Ahmed sahaab
Not generalizing but something I observed during the course of my life, when muslim community is in minority, they’re all up for secularism but when they’re in majority, they’d forget secularism.
Bus yehi baat hai 👍👍...humey europe main Burkha aur Masjid chahiye but Humari country main koi apna religion na follow karey...kya double standards hain. 😀
I am pretty sure wikipedia is still operational in Pakistan, right.
As per wiki,
Before the partition, according to the 1941 census, Hindus constituted 14.6% of the population in West Pakistan (which is now Pakistan)[a] and 28% of the population in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).[12][13][14]
So, pakistan has completed genocided Hindus from a land which was rightfully theirs. After that, by what right does Pakistanis even talk about minority rights in India or for that matter, even Israel. What these nations are doing is not be .1% of what muslim nations do to non muslims.
Thats before Partition. Most of them moved during or in the couple of years after Partitionm
@@ThePakistanExperience but muslim population more than tripled in india after partition. In % of population.
@@ThePakistanExperience
When you conveniently ignores forceful conversions and oppression..what was happend over the period in Pakistan it's a fact...why the opposite not happened in India.. did you ever heard any forceful conversions of Muslims to Hindus in india?
@@ThePakistanExperience if you read history of that time, you would know that Jinnah was actually afraid that because pakistan forced Hindus out, India would have done the same to muslims. But India, under Jawaharlal Nehru didn't and even today, there is hardly any Indian muslim who migrants to pakistan or even Bangladesh.
This begs the question on what basis pakistanis talks about minority rights in india or kashmir issue or palestinian rights when they did far worse to the native Hindu population of Pakistan.
@@maruthireddy4111
So Muslims went from 15 % to 45% eh?
Your Hindu propaganda is mind-blowing.
😅😅😅
We are happy living in India connected to our roots. India is our roots. We would never ever have preferred Pakistan artificial country.
*living
@@ps4474 corrected bai.
@@AmandeepSingh-ud5wp *bhai thanks.
@@ps4474 Calm down, grammarly.
@Iqbal Bakht nope not all states are artificially all states have a history to be based on
Geography to base borders on u are just trying on consol urself by telling all states are artifical pakistan has to be the only state who's one border is called Radcliff line and other is called Durand line both drawn by the British
Punjab bieng artificall can be corrected by reuniting india and pak which we support so we don't support artifical Nations or states
All Indians commenting/viewing have you ever wondered why there's a stark difference between an Indian and a pakistani that is bcoz we were never taught history in this communal way, ever talk to a pakistani his world revolves around 2-3 keywords muslim, islam, haram-halal. So far this teaching has proved good for Indians so don't degrade your intellect with these kind of communal cringe, shocked to see so many Indians commenting.
Shut up. They should be given answer in their own language. People are pointing out their bigotry and you are saying we should have peace talks with bigots. Shame.
comparing lynchings in India with what has been happening in Pakistan for ages is comparing apples and oranges. I agree India particularly northern India to some extent can be a violent place at times. But it's not just for muslims It's for everyone. Of course if muslims are involved it takes different colors with media making it centrepiece of the news. Other such incidents don't make such a hue n cry.
My nana was from Rawalpindi. His last name was Duggal (as an aside, he told us that there was a whole locality in Rawalpindi named Duggalpura, don't know if it still exists, someone from that side can let me know pls) He told us about the night when the troubles started in Pindi so many times
Always with tears in his eyes
The horror and the loss of leaving his ancestral home behind, was always too much for him
The way he spoke about that part of the world. The stories of summers spent in Murree hills. The various places in and around Rawalpindi described by him
My greatest regret in life is that I couldn't take him to visit Rawalpindi before he passed away ☹️
Where was your Gandhi side from? I know a Gandhi family migrated from Sargodha, original all Gandhis would write their surname as Gandh, as their ancestors were perfume traders.
@@k.r.s.s9013 Gujranwala, but my dadaji settled in Lahore. And YES! he was a perfume trader. In fact, we are still in the fragrances business 😅
I knew about the last name origins though, my dadaji told me
I am from jhelum 😊
Dr Ishtiaq gives a lot of references where Gandhi saved muslims from rioters in India. But did Gandhi do anything to save hindus from rioters in Pakistan? You should ask him when you meet him.
Gandhi was in India not in Pakistan but he asked Pakistan to save minority
This peace loving guy was once said that when Hindus got killed
India has right to do war to save the minority
Means he care about everyone he just don't want bad for anyone and don't believe in revenge
India is not a hindu pakistan, do not see India as a mirror image of Pakistan. Gandhi stood for minorities in India is what differentiates India from Pakistan
@Football-Pundit He himself was a casteist in his earlier public life.
@@goodsong_views As a statemen of a person who wants good for the humanity should have tried to save people in trouble. We see liberal democracies giving refuge to persecuted people. At that time India was recently partitioned so I think he could have tried something.
@@nandi7772 he definitely did, I mean his hunger strike could reduce violence is a big thing.
If Sikhs and Muslim supposed to have found a nation ..then it's not a partition of india..it will be like I have political power I will divide this nation...Sikhs stayed in india because we respect every religion I see many Sikh in hindu temple and even I go to gurudwara....
"Deh Shiva Bar Mohe Eha" this line from Sikhism gives me goosebumps whenever I hear it...I apologise if I am misquoting something
The main problem with Pakistan is that a majority of the ppl who live in that geographical area, have no LOVE for their country.
There are two kinds of ppl who love the land, on which is denoted as "Pakistan" on the world atlas.
1. The people who migrated (read: chased out) to India.. Through their stories, they still remember their own ancestral land. They maybe millionaires in India, but if you give them a hypothetical opportunity to trade everything they have in India, for a chance to retire & to live in their ancestral land, they would go immediately.
2. Anti India population who support Pakistan( I am not targeting any religion here..)
Similarly, the ppl of Pakistan, fondly remember lucknow, bhopal, Ajmer, jalandhar, delhi, shimla, bombay. They would also immediately trade their current material belongings to cross back..
But the main difference between these two sets of ppl, is that ppl who migrated to India, tried their best to move on, and mostly, had to start from scratch.
Ppl who went to Pakistan (after graduation from AMU, till around 1955 - 56), went to get guaranteed jobs, where they wouldn't face competition from non Muslims.
During partition, Pakistan burnt DAV UNIVERSITY lahore. It had to be relocated to Indian Punjab.
But did India destroy AMU?
NO!
even though students studying on Indian government's money, betrayed their land and went to Pakistan.
This, this is the difference.
Jo log, jo kaum munaafik hoti hai, unka yehi hota hai
Even in today's east Punjab, i.e, Haryana, Himachal and Punjab states of India, Hindus are a majority. Even in Punjab, Sikhs form 58% of the population. Sikhs surely wouldn't have given anybody enough votes. But what the Sikhs give you is strength and their experience. The Sikh experience has shaped our Independence movement and hence my nation. They were the writers of my nation's story. Sikhs are not a population heavy community. They are a quality-over-quantity kind of community. One Sikh is equal to a hundred Sikhs.
In the past, Hindus and Sikhs were nearly indistinguishable. But the muslims were always different. Hindus had their eldest sons ordained as Sikhs. Even now, many families of Punjabi khatris have Hindus sisters and Sikh brothers. All of them worship Mata-rani and attend the gurudwara. And that is part of the same religion to them. Even the Adi-granth has stories of Durga and Rama. All Punjabi Hindus have a photo of the akal-takht in their shops and homes. Of course, Sikhism is a different religion. It doesn't have idol worship or any havans like Hindus but these are surface level differences. At their core, a Sikh fights for dharma as any other Buddhist, Jain or Hindu would. And all the five main gurudware are in India. We should've gotten kartarpur sahib too. Then, the Sikhs would have their pilgrimages in India.
If any of you think that the Khalistani episode is any indication that the Sikhs don't want to be Indians, let me tell you that bhagat Singh, mewa singh, KPS gill and countless others Sikhs have served their homeland. They served their homeland and not just saved Sikhs, but saved countless others too, including muslims.
It’s disrespectful to the minorities in Pakistan to show the news of minorities in India being targeted. There is no comparison between the two. The percentage of Islamic minority in India has increased 7-8% in 1947 to 15% now. This could not have happened if the hatred towards minority in India was even 10% of that in Pakistan.
The "fear" of Muslim that it would be persecuted in a Hindu Majority India stems from inherent intolerance of Islamic fundamentals - Dar-ul-harb & Dar-ul-Islam - where in muslims are supposed to be 200 % intolerant towards any non-Muslims, in case of a Muslim Majority state. Btw Sikhs never faced any religious persecution from larger Hindu community, but on the contrary Sikhs like Hindus historically faced religious persecution from Islamist rulers like Babur, Jehangir, Aurangzeb etc who are till date " Islamic Heroes " of the Muslims of Indian subcontinent.
Even in 1947 The first blood was drawn, first massacres were committed of Sikhs and Hindus of Rawalpindi by the Muslims of the region, which has been proven to have tacit approval of Muslim league as well.
Sikhs were a very prosperous community in Rawalpindi .. majority business were owned by them ..more than hate for kafir it was much more calculated economic move to drive sikh out and capture their property
@@gpgautam1842 it's always more than one factor which leads to such genocidal acts of violence against a community.
Do you realize that Sikhism as a religion is extremely antagonistic to Islam?
😂
Yes I agree, this religion was formed in reaction to Muslim atrocities. Guru Gobind singh ji asked for one son to be given to form Marshall race, where they were trained to be warriors. We are Hindu brahmins and in our family tree we have many Sikhs. They even come to our marriages and other gatherings.
Not really, Sikhism has more in common with Islam than Hinduism
Sikhism is not antagonist to any religion. Eight out of ten Sikh Gurus did not raise arms against Mughals. Two did and they had Muslims in their army as well. Fight was against oppression not Islam.
4:20 every Pakistanis will be Pakistanis demanding seperate homeland for sikhs and muslims still this politics is ingrained in every Pakistani mind
Subcontinental converts brain thinks like that.
Sikhs and Hindus are Iron brothers both being part of Dharmic religions.Jinnah offered blank documents to evereyone that shows the vision he had for running the nation, a man full of hindu hatred and his speeches were alway dubuious could not be trusted. Sikhs suffered first with Rawalpindi massacre. A nation born on hate can never prosper, when my grand grandfather's village was attacked he was given a proposal of converting to Islam as he was the nabardar of 50 villages and retain all his land, he decided against it, what he said was it's better to live as a beggar in India rather than living as a crorepati with Pakistan, his next generation will have to suffer all their lives because of his inability to withstand difficulties as a country born on hate for others can never prosper, and we all know that he was absolutely correct about it.
Shehzad one interesting fact is that Mohammed Ali Jinnah's grandson Nusli Wadia is one of India's richest entrepreneurs. He lives in Mumbai. Jinnah is his maternal grandfather.
Nusli Wadia's son Ness is the owner of the IPL franchise Punjab Kings.
Interesting
@@ThePakistanExperience Jinnah daughter married persi business tycoon... Jinnah did not gave his daughter paki citizenship... But he continued to drink alcohol... Vagaries of Father of Islamic Republic
@@ThePakistanExperience I'm surprised, you didn't know that Nusli Wadia is Mohammad Ali Jinnah's grandson?🙄
@Radhika: you think Shehzad doesn't know about this 😂😂😂
@@97gordOnremsi There are various accounts and documented history that clearly proves he drank alcohol, wasn't fluent in Urdu or Gujarati and didn't know how to do namaaz.
west Pakistan's non Muslim population was not always 3-4 percent. it was 12 percent plus prior to partition. the right thing to say is that the majority of minorities were forced out between 1947 and 1951 during the partition riots. something equivalent did not happen in India.
Yes it was greater prior to partition. I meant post partition it has been around 3-4%
@@ThePakistanExperience then you should have used like to like numbers. The 20-30 percent numbers including east Pakistan are also pre partition numbers. Doesn't make sense to compare a 1951 census number to a 1941 census number.
West Pakistan lost 75 percent of its minorities during the partition and a lot of it was ethnic cleansing not any kind of voluntary movement. East Pakistan during the same time frame saw much lower movement in the same time period because it didn't see the same kind of cleansing initially, but the 1971 genocide perpetrated by west Pakistan and jamaat e Islami targeted Hindus and ended up reducing the Hindu population of Bangladesh by 30-50 percent as well.
In contrast the top estimates of how many Muslims left/were forced to leave during partition is around 5 percent of Indian Muslims. This includes victims of partition violence in Punjab as well as the upper classes who thought they would have a better life in Pakistan.
Your perspective about the Sikhs being a part of Pakistan during partition is erroneous. The idea that a country is being made for Muslims excludes every other faith which is not a Muslim faith. Jinnah was a lawyer who wanted a separate Pakistan as a homeland for Muslims. His proposal to Sikhs to join Pakistan was a clever lawyerly move but completely devoid of the reality on the ground.
While Sikhs are not Hindus, I would argue their closeness to Hinduism as compared to Islam is unambiguous. Hindus and Sikhs have historically never been antagonistic cultures. It is only now stupid politicians are inventing that divide. Islam and Sikhism have always been on the opposite side of the battlefield, and the argument that Sikhs could have gone with Pakistan at the time of partition is null and void.
How easily he said whole pakistan is a idea for the minority group but the idea is only for particular religion and the same religion never let another religion flourish. Literally this channel making podcast on thing Indians want to listen but nothing is changing in Pakistan and even in this time Pakistan is facing ecomical crises The Pakistani army increase there defence budget, there no wonder Pakistani Army has a country for themselves.
Leave the religion aspect, they don't even consider Ahmediyas, Mohajirs, Shias as Muslims.
4:20 But Shehzad, Sikhs were not even the second majority in United Punjab. What you are proposing would have only caused more ruction.Sikhs in different parts of India would have also faced the aftermath and so would have the Hindus. Know this, in Indian Punjab Hindus and Sikhs are inseperable. Just go to any gurudwara in India you will understand.
Jinnah was just as much of an opportunist as those you speak of that took advantage of the minorities. He was looking for power & he knew in undivided India he wouldn’t be as big as a figure. Hence the Lahore resolution, direct action day & various other decisions he & Muslim league made to win their argument. This is why after his death the entire Muslim collapsed because he was the entire idea behind Pakistan
We in 🇮🇳 call Hindus ...Hindus
Muslims ...Muslims ...
Sikhs ...Sikhs and so on ...
To give their religion due respect and identity just like we crave for ours ...
Ye bat jis din samjh a jaegi ...Pakistan ki kismat badal jaegi ...
So called intellectual Podcasters of Pakistan are also so backward in their approach to see the world and other community that it is shocking...
In India Muslim population has increased from 9.6percent to 14 percent of total population since 47
Because minority rights are enshrined in constitution!
Glad that India was partitioned or else we wouldn't have reached where we have reached today, though a long way to go.
There are communal flare ups this side too but the Indians who are in minority, have prospered and contributed a lot and none have migrated giving religious persecution as a reason.
00:46 You are horribly WRONG here. It is true that before Partition, majority of Pakistan's Hindu population was in East Pakistan but that majority was a slim majority. If East Pakistan had 60% of Pakistan's Hindus, West had remaining 40%. As per 1941 Census, West Punjab was at least 20% Hindu or Sikh, and Sindh was 24% Hindu. Karachi had only 49% Muslim population and Lahore was 35% non-Muslim. In comparison, East Bengal aka East Pakistan, was 29% Hindu as per 1941 census. In 1951 census, West Pakistan had become 96-97% Muslim, whereas East Pakistan still had 22% Hindus. Migration of Hindus and Sikhs from West Pakistan was almost complete by the end of 1948 and was like a massive wave whereas migration of Hindus from East Pakistan was like a constant trickle. You Pakistanis know zero facts.
You compared the killing of muslims in india to the killings of non Muslims in pakistan but forgot or skipped to me tion that in india there is a system that is working for the justice irrespective of religion while in pakistan, the system is the part of the cause.
You can never be not biased until you think Islam is progressive. Not even one person would have believed that pakistan is not a Islamic republic.
Sikh religion itself United to fight against mughals.
The more you listen and learn , this was always about property for themselves and not some religious ideology. How the need to be a property owner for Jinnah was much greater than having a state for Muslims. Knowing he would own full of Punjab the idea of having a joint ownership with Sikhs was not acceptable but learning he would have a smaller part of Punjab he was ready. So sad how men have used personal faith into a controlling mechanism to control property
according to my old man.. in 1947.. loyalty to a newly created Pakistan was expressed through how much you could loot the Kaffir.. nothing has changed
India already got Sikh president, prime minister & many other important positions despite they being about 2% of totall population.
In Pakistan none other than Muslims became prime minister or president.
What so cringe worthy & funny is yet these Pakistanis thinks all religion got equality in Pak but in India evil hindus are discrimating everyone.
Btw in late 2000s in our 80% hindu populated republic our President was a Muslim, PM was Sikh & ruling party leader a Christian and let alone no one went on protesting over it but hardly even cared and many like us thought it is the thirump of secularism and the motto of 'unity in diversity'. And last Thank you Jinnah for creating Pakistan & absorbing vast majority of good for nothing hatefilled folks of Sub-continent.
Forget about Sikhs. Pakistan can't even treat Shia's and Hazaras well. There is not 1 rational reason why it couldn't utilise the services of Atif Mian. This idea of persecution of minorities MIGHT be true, but it's solution was NEVER partition. One of the most persecuted GROUP -Dalits - Jogendranath Mandal - 1st law minster of Pak - his letter should've been added here. Dalits were more poor, faced more discrimination, were even not represnted properly. They stayed, so did Sikhs - and they have become PM, Prez, CMs, CJIs, Army Chiefs. Fun Fact: All this othering by a population which was barely converted to Islam150 yrs ago.
If Pakistanis get time, do read about the North East Insurgency, there is barely 10% in commmon with mainland - language, culture, religion - even when they had a chance their leadership did not push the envelope far.
India me jo riots huve,,,,aaj bhi chal rahe he uspe bhi ek lecture de
@@nikhildeshmukh6221 😂😂Abdul beta asli naam se comment kro
@@princer2893 bhaiyya he tu pakka.......hindi belt wala
Wahi pe sanatani musalmano ko Abdul punchr bolte
Maratha hu me maratha....wo bhi 96K......not that I believe in all this jativadi shit, kyoki isise bramnvad Aya aur jaha bramhn dominated he aap ke hindi states especially waha hindu communal mindset he......
Musalmano me aisa nahi, wo Har state me commual he
@@nikhildeshmukh6221 you should read more. Caste discrimination and persecution in Maharashtra is primarily between Marathas and Dalits. Please read once Gulamgiri (by Jyotiba Phule).
As per riots are concerned are they homogenous? Is every riot H vs M? Partition is a nuclear option, it doesn't solve the problem infact creates more.
@@nikhildeshmukh6221 yeh we have a history of religious conflict bit we also have a history of living in harmony. The Indian national movement was a step in building harmony but the partition was a very painful disruption. It created new faultlines. We don't now what could have happened without partition. Anyone talking in definitives in this subject is wrong
Sikhs fought for the Indian freedom struggle. On other hand Muslims from the Muslim league never fought against the British. They didn't even launch any movement against the brits. Then why do you think Sikhs will shake hand with Muslims?
Many many tried, didn't succeeded
It is correct that sikhs wouldn't have joined Pakistan because the entire rhetoric of the muslim league was against non muslims but your reasoning is wrong.Sikhs and gorkhas along people like scindia helped the British in suppressing the revolt of 1857. Sikhs were a large part of the British Indian army. They Muslim league didn't fight for independence but many Muslims did. Don't adopt the Pakistani position that Muslim league was the sole representative of Indian Muslims and don't make blanket statements about any community.
Sikhs are thriving in India- one PM, so many generals... They are part of the wider Indic/ Hindufold.....
we are basicaly hindu sindhis and my grand parent told me this that at the time of partition they were tortured in pakistan for being hindus and numerous riots broke out and because of that my grand parents parent left pakistan with nothing on a single train in 1947 and now we are living a decent and multi cultural diversty life in india.
i am a fourth generation sindhi living in india and can't thank enough of my ancestors decision to come to india.
although sindhi culture is almost extinct as we dont know what our clothes were and how to write and read sindhi language.
mordern sindhis can just speak and understand sindhi and at home also maximm time i have seen people speaking hindi.
during partition punjabis got half punjab, bengalis got half bengal, kashmir got half kashmir, sindhis got nothing.
although the entire basis of hinuduism originated from them.
Yes hinduism is still mejority in amerkot and tharparkar districts of sindh that border india there should have been an east sindh
Mine grandfather also migrated from sindh, Pakistan to India without a single rupee
Hindu temples are the most beautiful among religious places. The grandeur of these holy places and the forms of art there are immaculate. Islam lacks that visible face. Christian cathedrals have some amount of that grandeur but like Islam they are standardized and at times they are monotonous and look like modern art. We need to bring back that peaceful Hindu glory back with more artful temples. East’s glory lies in reviving Hindu temples as knowledge centres and also as places of respect.
Sikhs were never going to go to Pakistan and to the contrary sikhs at every moment fought against the creation of Muslim Pakistan. We did not get the best deal with India but surely it has been way better than pity condition of non muslims in Pakistan.
Interesting. Ostensibly in the guise of talking about "minority rights", they're channeling Punjabi ethnonationalism by trying to appeal to Sikh separatism. They don't regret that the Partition of India happened, only that their ancestors didn't claim as much as they could have, or agitate for the right set of demands: they wish their ancestors hadn't demanded a Pakistan, but a Punjabistan, by stoking the separatist sentiments of Sikhs. Very sly. However, not sly enough. Pakistanis won't change. Expect demands for an irredentist 'Punjabistan' in the wake of this Pakistan's failure and breakup. Already this Pakistan is like Yugoslavia, where most of the wealth and power is concentrated in one region and with one ethnicity (Punjab and the Punjabis, like the Serbs of the erstwhile Yugoslavia) that dominates 80 percent of the country and its institutions. So yes, that Pakistan is already breeding several subnational separatist and secessionist movements is no surprise. The future of this Pakistan is as a rump Sunni Muslim Punjabistan and a collection of other successor states (Sindh, Balochistan, Afghania etc).
Jinnah also did the blank document shenanigans with Dalits of East Bengal and with Kings of Jodhpur and Bikaner. It was a ploy to get more territory, Gurdaspur and a few other districts. Jogindra Nath Mandal was to regret believing in the snake oil that was sold to him. The Sikhs and Jodhpur fortunately made no such mistake.
It was to be a 'moth-eaten' Pakistan. Especially true after the Civil War (which eventually turned into an international conflict) of 1971.
I disagree with your analysis.....all these evaluations of Pakistani scholars are going on because something went wrong.....we would not have had this much discussion of the two nation theory if things were okay in pakistan......the fact of the matter is as soon as you try to create a state for muslims and Sikhs i.e. a state on lines of a particular identity other than your national identity.....shit is eventually gonna hit the roof in some form or the other.
There is no institutionalised discrimination in India but still we have cases of lynchings or mob violence every once in a while.
Two nation theory came into being only because it had the backing of zamindaars at that time who were a bit concerned of the policy changes INC was gonna make in India post independence because it would have led to a loss of their power and status.
This is clearly evident from the creation of Bangladesh.....despite the Muslim identity ......these power hungry individuals were too afraid to share power with the Bengali muslims.......they took them for granted and eventually Bangladesh was created.
I disagree as a sikh we are mote close to Hindus culturally not muslims If you go to Himachal Pradesh then on hindu religious places you will many Sikhs and Hindus together doing Seva i also go to shiv bodi
Bengali Muslims were not spared Sikhs ??? No way
I'm starting to wonder who is funding this channel. Basically what he's nostalgic for is a kind of Punjabistan, or Punjabi nationalist state, which will be the next iteration once this version of Pakistan fails. So naturally encouraging Sikhs to embrace a subnational identity (ie. Khalistanism) is part and parcel of this strategy. Welcome ISPR magic 😂
Only comment which resembles my thoughts. Analysis to the core.
When Pakistan started to falter horrendously many pakistanis youtubers and analysts like this channel started revisiting history to try and mend ties with India...but the thing is even if these people are genuine, they comprise 0.001% or less in pakistani society...if you see the pakistani street videos one would get a clear view of how the normal muslim pakistanis sees tye world especially hindus and indians.....India should not let its foot off the pedal...just keep punishing Pak till it mends its ways or breaks up...
I don't agree that the percentage are so low, most people who advocated for peace today are same as yesterday. The big change is in the view of the only institution that matters in Pakistan. For the first time they are feeling the pinch. Earlier they would come down hard on voices for peace calling them anti-national, traitor etc. and taking punitive action against them. But now with no foreign assistance in sight they realise that trade with india is the only way.
However I do share your skepticism that the moment they have breathing space they will revert to their original antics so we must be very vigilant and limit cooperation in areas that are absolutely necessary eg climate change, but we must also be open to avenues where we can establish pakistan's dependence on us. Energy, banking, food grains and telecommunications are sectors where we can unleash two of our monopolistic greedy AAs to establish a foothold. Yes That would also help Pakistani citizens but we should not be so blinded by hate that we miss an opportunity to assert our influence. Otherising and dehumanizing even our enemies is stupid. India has such hot border with China but we are so heavily reliant on Chinese imports that are stupid FM says that China is too strong for us. We have to create a power differential so large that disturbing us will have dire consequences for the Pakistani army. Unfortunately we have been governed by incompetent idiots for last 9 years who can't even make simple appointments
@@71espn ise kehte hai Majboori ka naam Mahatma Gandhi...once they fill up their coffers they would ve back to Al Jihad, kaaffir, Gazwa e hind..etc etc etc...yeh inki fitrat hai, 1400 saal se yahi karte aaye hai....bdw you cannot dehumanize an inhuman...last 1000 saal se bas hum hi insaniyat dikhate aa rahe hai...we should keep tightening the noose untill they mend their ways permanently.
Sorry u r living in utopia and are totally unaware of Sikh history. If not for the persecution and attempts at forced conversion of Hindus there would be no Sikh religion as we know it today . After the Sikh religion was formed the history is one of fighting to save your religion. This continued till Ranjit Singh came to power in Punjab . There have been battles with the Hindu hill rajas but they were all about collecting taxes religion was never involved. The Sikhs were protectors of the Hindus infact in many Hindu families the eldest son was made a Sikh . There are lot of marriages between Hindus and Sikhs -- there is no such practice with Muslims . It is Indira and then Rajiv who messed up Hindu Sikh relations big time that is why this Khalistan issue keeps cropping up -- of course with ISI funding .
How would a sikh homeland work.
In 1947 only one district was majority sikh that too by by a bare margin. Massive riots had already taken place where sikhs and hindus fought on the same side. Many sikhs were intermarried with Hindus [khatri caste].
Pakistan should realize that its foundation as a country was bad and reform itself instead of having wet dreams.
Also why are you not talking about the fact that west pakistani army drove out 7.5 million hindus from bangladesh [several of them who returned after the war and the genocide had ended].
The Pakistanis killed 30 times muslims in bangladesh compared to all the riots in India.
So much for the safe homeland for south Asian Muslims. Let's not talk about 73 thousand pashtuns killed and 10 thousand balochis who have died too. RSS and all hindu extremists can only dream about killing as many Muslims as pakistani army does.
The only thing pakistan has achieved is the creation of a state for the Muslim north indian elite to loot who migrated to pakistan in 1947.
Kalat was another example when Mr Jinnah said you write anything on a blank paper then he renaged his promise !
Even accepting that minority were less in Punjab (west) in pre partition period (I can challenge that) no effort was made by ruling junta in east Pakistan to save them rather unspeakable atrocities unleashed upon them at every moment after 1947till when Bangladesh formed
Muslim lynching, howsoever condemnable, in India is happening just recently. But minority persecution in Pakistan has been happening silently, accumulating to a large quantity from partition till now. As a result, comparing the miserable state of minorities in Pakistan with cow lynching is false equivalency. Tell me one thing, why you don't invite one non-Muslim guest on your show from Pakistan. Are you selectively excluding them, or none exists? This is an introspection you have to do. So many Pakistani youtubers getting common people's opinions, but i have seen none from a minority community. Please demystify this perplexity.
There is no problem with Islam. Islam IS the problem 😅
Thank you for partition. We were blessed with good riddance 🙏
I have been watching yours shows for quite sometime and you come across as an intelligent pakistani. Great points, with some disagreement. LONG READ ALERT! Pakistanis should always understand that India's exclusionary hindutva movement is a reaction to Pakistan's TNT. The original activist movement of India was led by elitist and secular congress as a pressure group. With the arrival of Gandhi, when congress started increasing its demands and started turning into a mass socially inclusive total independence movement beyond it's mandate as pressure group of indian elites demanding small consessions, Jinnah was brought back from London to start muslim league as the entity of Muslims so as to discredit Congress as a hindu nationlist organization and not a secular Indian nationalist organization. Please note that AFTER the Muslim league was set up, RSS was born purely as a reaction in order to fight muslim nationalism with hindu nationalism. Both Muslim League and RSS were mirror images of each other advocating for and separation between muslims and hindus respectively. Majority of Hindus of the time didnt buy into RSS though. Coming to religion, Hinduism by it's very nature, as a polytheistic religion, accepts existence of allah and god in addition to it's own pantheon because existence of couple of more gods doesnt threaten the foundation of polytheistic hinduism. The monotheistic nature of islam coupled with rejection of "any other" god lays the foundation for a totalitarian and exclusivist society, that naturally led to TNT and Pakistan. India's extreme diversity of languages, sects and customs within the umbrella of hinduism, is a testament to the inherent diversity, secularism and tolerance of different beliefs in Hinduism that doesnt seek to homogenize the society around a single god or seek "purity" of belief. Not just hinduism, but also other indic religions like buddhism, and jainism share the same tolerance towards one another and they co-existed peacefully. This tolerance was also extended to historic foreign religious minorities of India-judaism and parsis that arrived way before Islam. Tolerance of other beliefs was a rule in Hinduism until Islam arrived with it's exclusivist and intolerant ideology. Hindutva unfortunately is a product of assimilation of 1000 years of muslim+christian thought into hinduism that seeks to create a pure/exclusivist society where everyone within the hindu society is equal. The argument being, if islam rejects hindu gods and hindu society and treats them as second class, hindus must reject allah and muslim society as a principle of reciprocity that it thinks is essential for self-preservation and protect hindus from repetition of that 1000 year long colonization by islam and christianity. 80% of south asian muslims are hindu converts and their "separate" identities had not crystallized despite the conversion even until the Brits arrived. Even after conversion, they continued practisng many hindu customs some of which continue to this day, particularly in marriage. The British tendency to catalogue and tabulate the society under "different categories" ossified the separate religious identity of hindus and muslims. There is an interesting anecdote that when the british carried out the first census, they would often come across people who would go to temple, dargah as well as mosque. The brits decided that "if he goes to mosque more than temple, classify him as muslim and if he goes to temple more than dargah, classify him as hindu". This was the seed of british inflicted hindu muslim partition. Anyways, one positive of Hindutva is that it is the strongest force against caste discrimination as it seeks to forge a consolidated hindu identity free of caste fragmentation that can "fight" Islam. Infact BJP wins big victory because of this grand hindu caste alliance that used to be fragmented under several regional caste based "social justice" secular parties until recently who used to win from hindu lower caste+muslim vote. Hindutva is Islam+christian exclusivist+intolerant value assimilated hinduism for the new age. 800 years of muslim rule and 200 years of british rule was bound to influence hinduism, and we see the outcome in the form of hindutva. Hindutva intolerance is just equal in measure to Islamic intolerance, they are both mirror images. If south asian muslims dropped their monotheistic islam mandated religious intolerance towards hindus and resultant separatism, realized their ethnic/genetic indian roots which ties them to their pre-islamic hindu ancestors who they share with current indian hindus, the hindutva defence mechanism of hinduism would dissapear.
Very aptly analysed the whole thing! Nothing withstanding Hindutva, Essenes of India is her tolerance. No matter whatever left/liberal pundits would say, no minority has lost rights to practice their faith in India. Simple measure is their population growth , economic conditions, political powers…all achieved by minorities here.
one of the best comments. very straightforward analysis.
True true true. You have said it very straightforwardly. It is more of self defense which is in a very fragile state now. When all the provocation, stone pelting on processions, protest for every just reforms stops the need for Hindutva vanishes so does Hindutva. I think it is time for another Bhakthi movement to start . It is the natural way how our Sanatana Dharma revived everytime for lakhs and lakhs of years. All other physical fights our Bhagwans will take Avatarams will do. To keep this confidence and strength in our people we need another Bhakthi movement now.
You have said it all💯🔥
People who say minorities are safe in Pakistan should ask the Christians in Gojra.
When are you inviting Harris sultan 🤔❓
Shezad just one line
' Deh Shiva bar mohe'
Thank God they are safe in India
Political Religion is the root cause of all the atrocities. Be it Pakistan or India. It is just that some Religions are better at the game of subjugation and filled with more superiority Complex, than other religions. Pakistan should be a prime example for India and its leaders that how dangerous this game of flirting Politics and religion is. India will never go to such a low even if it tries because it has a diverse mindset but why even take that road for small political gains.
Muslims & Sikhs as a separate country? Where would Punjabi Hidnus go? Why Sikhs were wiped out in West Punjab?
What about Jains, Buddhists, Parsis, Jews & Christians in India? Jinnah actually promoted Drvidistan, and a deparate country for Chrstians too. It's divisive not constructive.
In fact Dravidian activists wholeheartedly supported AIML in Madras during 1941 meeting.
It's dubious thought ab initio.
Non-Muslims were only 3-4% in the present day Pakistan? Where do you get these ideas?
Karachi had 51% Hindus and 8% Sikhs in 1941 census. Lahore had 40% Hindus. Multan had Punjabi newspapers run by Sikhs. Do you have a single Punjabi newspaper in a country where 60% of population is Punjabi?
Christians voted for Pakistan. Are Christian minority rights protected better in Pakistan than in India? Wouldn’t plight of Sikhs have been similar to plight of Christians in Pakistan? Would Pakistan have lived up to its commitments to Sikhs any more than it lived up to its commitments to Bengalis?
Argument of W Pakistan consistently having 3-4 percent minority is disingenuous. The minority population was nearly 15-20 percent pre partition.
Where can I read the play Jis Lahore nai dekhya o Jamyai nai ?
British rulers played Hindu Muslim card and some power hunger leaders used that card very wisely and split the nation into two pieces. Bhai tum Aadha Pakana bechta hai
You can't compare how we treat our minorities to how you treat your minorities, i don't see muslims in India trying to run away to Pakistan, while on the other hand......... like you guys keep bringing up Gujarat riots what you ignore is the total number of people who were killed in those riots, Hindus and muslims included, twice of that number of Hindus, Christians and other minorities leave Pakistan for India EVERY YEAR.
India's treatment of minorities is better than Egypt which isn't good but they too have 14 percent Christian population but those Coptic Christians have representation in all aspects of Egyptian society despite social and institutional discrimination at some level. So India's treatment of minorities may not be good but comparing how you treat your minorities to that of ours is kinda weird, cause our nearest peer in this is Egypt not your country.
Nice video, Shezhad. I like your conversations with Dr. Ahmed. I know there might be some level of persecution of Muslims by some tiny small percentage of radicals, majority faith in India, and it's highly condemable. But in pakistan, your state is supporting decrimination against your minority which is not the case in India. In pakistan, I have read those details of your constitution pages where it is clearly written that no non-Muslims can become pakistan's army chief, pm, president, chief minister, ISI, or intelligence chief. While India doesn't have this issue. India already had 2 R.A.W chiefs, 4 presidents , 2-3 education ministers, and 3 chief ministers ( in hindu majority states😅) from the Muslim community in the last 75 years. One of India most famous and respected presidents was during the rule of BJP, surprisingly during the vajpayee government. Moreover, one more thing I would add here is that in pakistan people only highlight lynching of Muslims in India. No one really talks about how hindus are choped off from the head by radical Muslims, too. Like I have never seen news from Pakistan that non Muslims cut the head of Muslims in Lahor or any of the places, but you can see that news in India many times, perhaps more than Muslims lynching incidents. In India, you can joke about majority religions gods in stand-up still you can become hero but I have never seen a single comedian in India who made fun of Prophet or Allah and those who did are chopped off from the head like Kamlesh Tiwari. So, as per my personal opinion, there is no comparison for the treatment of minority b/w India and pakistan, but pakistanis can disagree. Keep making such videos Shezhad, that's how you can change radical thinking of your country towards minority.
In Allah, we trust. In public, we burst. In cousins, we lust. Our brains, we rust.
Islam was a divisive religion, a faith that segregated people into rigid groups of Muslims and non-Muslims, where the benefits of brotherhood and fraternity were limited only to the former, i.e Muslims, while the latter was treated with contempt and enmity.
You never had soft corner for Sikhs, you were focusing on the land. How to cover more land and cut down share of Hindus.
You were not worried about religion being victimized. You had an ultra ego, that you were rulers once and you don't want to be ruled by Hindus.
i know this is a serious video but I can't help it when he says "there is a moment in history when zigged when we could have zagged" just puts a huge smile on my face.
❤
Shehzad - you should ask a question to one of your historian panelists on the Nehru Liaquat pact. This pact obligated each country to protect each others’ minorities. Neither country brings it up anymore but I think pressure from Pakistan to India and vice versa on this front is not necessarily a bad thing if it leads to a better outcome for the people
The pact was to stop the continuous flow but in the long run it isn't a good thing. Indian Muslims are Indian and their protection is the duty of the Indian state. Pakistan has no locus standi in this matter and vice versa. Doing otherwise is a recipe for disaster for respective minorities.
india dosen't need that
@@Surajkumar-gk3dk Of course, someone named Kumar doesn't need it. The same way someone named Ali in Pakistan doesn't need it.
Feel free to listen to your minorities who continually talk about discrimination.
@@waleedabbas4996 then please be open to share why size of minorties is rising insted of so much discrimination according to you and also please share the rason of your nation's shrinking population of minorty
@@waleedabbas4996 sir, to see what discrimination is all about you check your constitution which prohibits ‘Kafirs’ to assume highest political, military position. Then the Blasphemy laws which define the ‘Julm’. It actually tells world how to commit atrocities on humanity…..
Regarding sikhs, fact remains that Ranjit Singh I'd the hero of Sikhs and Hindu Punjabis and villain for Punjabi Muslims, and frankly speaking sikhs had nothing in common with the Muslims of KPK, Sindh, Bengal, Balouchistan and Muhajirs. and shehzad has failed to clarify what would have happened to hindu punjabis who were handling trade and commerce of Punjab.
U know what root cause is let's say tommorow all hatred disappeared between Hindus an muslims then what will be left of meaning of pakistan that is why it is in the best intrest of pakistani state to keep hatting and persecuting minorities
Bhai sahab aapka desh bana hi religion ke base p hai,
Then how can you expect that neither mr.jinnah will speak in favour of othere religion nor against his religion ☯️.
You can trim(cut) some branches of tree 🌴 for better shape and size but you can't change the roots of trees.
I want to know more of the "asymmetry" in the resource distributed between Pak & India. Didn't Gandhi fast for the complete disbursement of 50crores to Pak which was being held to be transferred in parts to monitor Pak's spending which actually turned out to be true as it was majorly spent on army and used AGAINST India within a year???
Yep they used it to fund war against Kashmir. Sahi kaha he ki ghas kha lenge but India ke saamne nhi jhukenge. Ab ghaas khane ka time aa gya he.
@Football-Pundit Nah, Even India disbanded parts of its army, it's your govt which thought they would have someuse of this much forces and continued with that.
@Football-Pundit Your Politicians being typical converts didn't use their brains, they should have taken time out of fanatic poetry and thought logically.
Pakistan didn't share loans at the time of partition.
@Football-Pundit just tell me one thing how would you expect transfer of resources Bombay utha k pakistan me rkh dete ?? Ya Calcutta??? Your govt waged a war on india even before drafting a constitution, so think what kind of mentality your leaders had ???you mentioned everything what pakistan got but forget to mention that majority Muslims who voted for pakistan never went to pakistan , that time the Godse faction was demanding this only that either country won't break if it does then complete exchange of population is needed but Nehru and jinnah played their politics and India got it's first terrorist in form of Godse.
Where is the complete podcast?
Factually incorrect information. In 1947 West Pakistan had 15% minority population. It is now 2%. East Pakistan had 22% minority population in 1947. Now it is 9%. Please get your facts right.
"hum sikho ko apne saath kr lete"
Hinduon ne kya bigada hai?
fan hu tumhara, pr mild muslim nationalism dikh rah isme
Muslim nationalism kaisay hua when I am saying they should have done it with thr Sikh Community?
The idea was framing the demand for a separate homeland as a way to safeguard minority rights. Hindus were the majority hence Muslims and Sikhs being the minorities.
@@ThePakistanExperience Minority rights chilla kr separate state bnana kya hai uska koi term ho to btana
apni galty maan lene sei koi chota nahi ho jata
@@Mjjjyyy iam also fan of shehzad but tuje kya lagta hai agar pakistan Aaj descent economy hota to shehzad jese liberal bhi kabhi jinnah pe questions krte?
@@ThePakistanExperience beta jis majority se itni fatti thi , usi majority mein muslims have double tripled in size while in the mean while the northeast became christian ...btw i love the pakistani saviour complex of banding all the minorities while jinnah chilah chilah kar specically muslim state demand kar raha tha ...your inability to undersand hindu nd sikh culture nd how diffrent they r from islam , makes ur mild hatred so much understadable ... btw its not your fault , afterall u all are sons of a country that came out of nowhere in last 80yrs only while we as people got independence .
@@ThePakistanExperience with all due respect to you brother, this presents the picture that Hindus and Sikhs did not get along well. I would argue while Sikhs tried to maintain good relations with both, they are historically and religiously closer to Hinduism. Hindus and Sikhs also had a common enemy in Punjab courtesy Mughals and Afghans later, while Muslims had better relations with them. Many hindus (punjabis and sindhis) till very recently used to pledge their first born son to Khalsa so that they could fight against the (mostly Muslim) perpetrators and suffered equally from the said rulers/perpetrators. Hinduism itself is more accepting of diverging theologies which made the cooperation easier.
Also its a fanboy moment for me, as I long for good content from Pakistan and south Asia in general. Keep doing your good work :)
Answering his question in one word: Master Tara Singh Malhotra
Pehle ye non Muslim kehna band karo....aap pakistani hindu bhi keh shakte the....lekin aap ki parvarish hi madrasa se hui he shayad.
Pakistani state's founder believed that they could erase thousand year of histroy with a stroke of pen.
Can you add subtitles for the urdu part? For international audiences?
Politics usually takes the path of least resistance, and it is much easier to unite people on religious lines than with the abstract language of rights. It is easier to push people into tribal identities than to have them reach out and join hands.
To create a consensus across religious lines that Hindus would use their majority to cast aside minorities would require monumental effort, sustained over the decades of the Muslim League's existence. It could not have happened overnight.
Such an attempt would also prompt the Congress to counter with its own outreach measures. With an array of Western liberals across its leadership, I daresay this would be a harder fight for Jinnah.
By painting this as a religious argument, he chose a framework where the Congress could not counter effectively. The many barristers in its ranks, trained in Western philosophy, would play to their strengths against secular, rights-based arguments. At the same time, the likes of Gandhi would probably reach within Hinduism to find messages of peace and universal brotherhood, which the religion offers in abundance.
I suspect your thoughts on this may be tainted by the militant, aggressive Hinduism that the current Indian Government espouses. Do remember that this is not a historically dominant creed. Hinduism, current passions notwithstanding, is fundamentally an inward-looking, other-worldly religion. At most times, it is not an identity that is easy to conjure fear against - enough that groups with historical differences unite.
Good point
@@ThePakistanExperience Posted that midway accidentally, ichha ho toh baaki padh lena.
Ramadan mubarak!
Really liked the views presented here
Recently I noticed your channel and adore your various posts. You are doing excellent job, keep it up!! However your curiosity in this post about Muslim and Sikh association at that of point i.e. in 1947 era is just innocent and funny
Please go through the Census 1941 figures..many districts including Lahore and Karachi had Hindu & Sikh population of more than 40 per cent.
It's pretty clear that all Jinnah wanted is Land. When he realised that he won't be getting the whole Punjab, he thought to manipulate Sikhs. I'm pretty sure, his plan was to get land first and then go for genocide like they did in Bangladesh!
Pakistan apne karmo ka fal payega tabah ho barbad hoga bahot logo ki hay mili hai...