Why was there no Sikh Country after the Partition of India?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ส.ค. 2022
- The Partition of India in 1947 saw the division of the former British Raj into the modern states of India and Pakistan. India would have a majority Hindu population while in Pakistan the majority would be Muslim. One of the largest religious minorities affected by the chaos of the Partition were the Sikhs, largely living in the Punjab region which was split between Pakistan in the East and India in the West. So why didn't the Sikhs get an independent state where they could make a religious majority? Why didn't Sikhistan or Khalistan become a reality in 1947?
Raid the Merch Market:
teespring.com/en-GB/stores/hi...
Go Fund My Windmills (Patreon):
/ historywithhilbert
Join in the Banter on Twitter:
/ historywhilbert
Enter the Fray on Facebook:
/ historywhilbert
Indulge in some Instagram..?(the alliteration needs to stop):
/ historywithhilbert
Send me an email if you'd be interested in doing a collaboration! historywithhilbert@gmail.com
#India #Indian #Sikh
![[TH] VCT Pacific Stage 2 - Week 1 Day 2 // GEN vs T1 | PRX vs TLN](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZkFjjJNwzH0/mqdefault.jpg)
Punjab as a whole was never Sikh majority, it's only after partition that the Sikh population got concentrated in the Indian part of Punjab following mass migrations and became demographically majority in that part of Punjab.
its' deeper than that. the historical \-cultural region of punjab (on the indian side) includes parts of what are haryana and himachal (and arguable bits of RJ). so the modern indian state of punjab is not representative of indian punjab. due to sikh party politics, at the time of state reorganisation, they shaved off as many Hindu majority areas as possible, to have an unchallenged Sikh majority state to rule over.
@@anonymouslyopinionated656 the Union government of India was also responsible and actually played a major role in organising Sikh majoritarian politics, the whole separatist movement was initially supported by the then ruling party of India until it eventually backfired Delhi.
Kartik harit Sikh empire consisted on 10% Sikhs.
Why even after partition was not sikh majority till haryana was made and even today only 57% of punjab is sikh majority
He mentioned that fact in 4:04
In college I had a professor who is a Jain originally from Mumbai. Even though he taught business courses he'd occasionally discuss the partition of India. I learned so much about India that I still wish to visit there some day.
You are welcome bro.
Jains and parsi are one of the best people
@@friendlyatheist9589 He was one of the friendliest professors I ever had. Even when students were being rude af to him. He'd be stern but not angry and say something like, "I've always treated you with respect and I expect the same in return. If you can't do that leave this class."
Don't drink the water, or drinks made with tap water included lassi or anything like that.
@@RinzSach yes bro Pakistan is highly developed and Modern country than india pakistan is super power who give loans to us Indian they are not dependent on other countries financially like us because Pakistan have one of the most visionary and non corrupt leaders like Shahbaz Sharif Nawaz Sharif ashif zaradai even Europeans come to Pakistan for having a better life no pollution in Pakistan no terrorism and radicalism Pakistan is an inspiration of world
Many Sikh's came here to Scotland and have been an integral part of our communities for decades now. Amazing people.
They truly are an honourable bunch.
Sikhs in America also seem to be a noble and trustworthy people.
Do Scottish Sikhs eat haggis curry?
@@MrAllmightyCornholioz They make Haggis Pakora, yes. It's yummy. 👍
@@anneonymous4884 Their work ethic is second to none.
Sir as a Sikh form Indian Punjab I would say that from what I have experienced growing up in Punjab is that Punjab is a state of Punjabis that means Hindu Muslim Sikh Christians of Punjab are culturally very connected to each other and I would say that taking out any part of this community would greatly affect the present Punjab. In Punjab many Sikhs believe in Muslim gurus as well as Hindu gurus and in turn some Sikh gurus also greatly affect religious knowledges of Muslims and Hindus of Punjab ; fundamentally Sikhism is religion which doesn't want conversion but the cooperation of other communities for peace and prosperity (ਸਰਬੱਤ ਦਾ ਭਲਾ Sarbat da bhala may everyone prosper , its one of the teachings we say in our prayers) that means Sikhs have no authority for forced conversion of people to believe in the ideas and thoughts that we believe are correct. The king Maharaja Ranjit Singh was known for his unbiased stance towards any religion in his judgement. And I think Guru Nanak dev ji our first guru's teaching is something everyone would agree on and it is like the fundamental correct according to all religions and his teachings is one of many factors which kept the Punjabi community together even today.
here's some of his teachings :
1. Vaand Chhako - with the grace of the Lord, whatever you have received, share it with the needy and then consume.
2. Kirat Karo - One should not exploit others to enjoy self-happiness. Earning without fraud and working diligently is what he preached
3. Naam Japo: Chant the name of 'True God'. Sri Guru Nanak Dev emphasized meditating on God's name to gain control over five evils- kama, krodh, lobh, moh, ahankar means lust, anger, greed, attachment and ego
4. Sarbat daa bhalaa: Ask Lord for everyone's happiness. Sri Guru Nanak dev ji emphasized the concept of universal brotherhood.
5. Speak the truth without any fear.
and one more thing Punjabis don't want things like Khalistan it is all the just the outcome of bad governance of our India's dark periods
we are happy to be a small part of India's wheel of progress.
The problem is that in our country religion is politicized a lot and unwanted factors of outer forces also influenced this dark period greatly.
If people understand that our political parties exploiting us on the basis of religion then India would have progressed at a faster rate.
ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਕਾ ਖਾਲਸਾ 🚩🚩
ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਕੀ ਫਤਿਹ 🚩🚩
Well said.
Islam has no connectivity with Hinduism whatsoever. Sikhism took some ideas of Islam. But many Sikhs leaving paxtan to come to hindu majority India because Islam = disease
ਇਹ ਸਾਰੀਆਂ ਕਹਾਣੀਆਂ ਠੀਕ ਹਨ...ਪਰ ਅਸਲ ਸਵਾਲ ਇਹ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਅਸੀਂ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਆਪਣੇ ਸੱਚੇ ਇਤਿਹਾਸ ਨੂੰ ਸਵੀਕਾਰ ਕਰਨ ਦੀ ਹਿੰਮਤ ਕਦੋਂ ਅਤੇ ਕਿੱਥੋਂ ਮਿਲੇਗੀ? ਅਸੀਂ ਕਦੋਂ ਆਪਣੀਆਂ ਅੱਖਾਂ ਤੋਂ ਕੱਪੜਾ ਹਟਾ ਕੇ ਇਹ ਇਤਿਹਾਸਕ ਸਬੂਤ ਦੇਖਾਂਗੇ ਕਿ ਸਾਡਾ ਅਸਲ ਘਰ ਪਾਕਿਸਤਾਨ ਵਿਚ ਲਾਹੌਰ ਹੈ, ਨਾ ਕਿ ਭਾਰਤੀ ਪੰਜਾਬ?
ਸਾਡਾ ਲਾਹੌਰ ਮਹਾਰਾਜਾ ਰਣਜੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਦਾ ਰਾਜ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਉਸ ਦਾ ਰੋਹਬ ਅੱਜ ਵੀ ਲਾਹੌਰ ਵਿੱਚ ਹੈ। ਸਾਡਾ ਨਨਕਾਣਾ ਸਿੱਖ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਬਾਨੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਦਾ ਜਨਮ ਅਸਥਾਨ ਹੈ। ਕੀ ਅਸੀਂ ਜਨਮ ਅਸਥਾਨ ਨੂੰ ਭੁੱਲ ਸਕਦੇ ਹਾਂ?
ਇਹ ਇਤਿਹਾਸਕ ਸਬੂਤ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਸਾਡਾ ਅਸਲ ਘਰ ਪਾਕਿਸਤਾਨ ਵਿੱਚ ਲਾਹੌਰ ਹੈ, ਨਾ ਕਿ ਭਾਰਤੀ ਪੰਜਾਬ। ਇਹ ਉਹ ਹੈ ਜੋ ਦੀਪ ਸਿੱਧੂ ਸਾਨੂੰ ਆਪਣੇ ਗੀਤ ਵਿੱਚ ਦੱਸ ਰਿਹਾ ਸੀ ( th-cam.com/video/8N6c0czogxw/w-d-xo.html )
ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਕੋਲ ਲਾਹੌਰ ਹੈ। ਇਸ ਨੂੰ ਕੋਈ ਨਹੀਂ ਬਦਲ ਸਕਦਾ। ਜਿਵੇਂ ਯਹੂਦੀ ਇਜ਼ਰਾਈਲ ਦੇ ਮਾਲਕ ਹਨ, ਸਿੱਖ ਲਾਹੌਰ ਦੇ ਮਾਲਕ ਹਨ।
ਅਸੀਂ ਕਦੋਂ ਤੱਕ ਭਾਰਤ ਨੂੰ ਆਪਣਾ ਵਤਨ ਕਹਾਂਗੇ ਅਤੇ ਆਪਣੀ ਅਸਲੀ ਮਾਤ ਭੂਮੀ ਨੂੰ ਨਜ਼ਰਅੰਦਾਜ਼ ਕਰਾਂਗੇ ਜੋ ਸਾਨੂੰ ਬੁਲਾਉਂਦੀ ਰਹਿੰਦੀ ਹੈ?
ਆਓ ਬਹਾਦਰ ਭਰਾਵੋ ਆਪਣੇ ਘਰ ਵਾਪਸ ਲਾਹੌਰ ਚੱਲੀਏ। ਭਾਰਤ ਨੂੰ ਭੁੱਲ ਜਾਓ। ਚਲੋ ਆਪਣੇ ਅਸਲੀ, ਇਤਿਹਾਸਕ, ਗੁਰੂ-ਪ੍ਰਦਾਨ ਘਰ: ਲਾਹੌਰ-ਪਾਕਿਸਤਾਨ ਨੂੰ ਚੱਲੀਏ।
ਸਿਰਫ਼ ਲਾਹੌਰ ਵਿੱਚ ਹੀ ਅਸੀਂ ਕਹਿ ਸਕਦੇ ਹਾਂ “ਰਾਜ ਕਰੇਗਾ ਖ਼ਾਲਸਾ”। ਮੈਂ ਦੁਹਰਾਉਂਦਾ ਹਾਂ, ਬਹਾਦਰ ਸਿੱਖ ਭਰਾਵੋ, ਆਓ ਇਹ ਕਦੇ ਨਾ ਭੁੱਲੀਏ ਕਿ ਸਾਡੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਬਖਸ਼ੇ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਦਾ ਅਸਲ ਘਰ ਲਾਹੌਰ ਹੈ, ਭਾਰਤ ਨਹੀਂ।
ਭਾਰਤੀ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਪੰਜਾਬੀ, ਬਿਹਾਰੀ, ਮਦਰਾਸੀ, ਭਈਆ ਅਤੇ ਹੋਰ ਸਾਰੇ ਭਾਰਤੀਆਂ ਦਾ ਹੈ, ਪਰ ਲਾਹੌਰ ਸਿਰਫ਼ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਦਾ ਹੈ।
ਅਸੀਂ ਇਸਨੂੰ ਕਿਵੇਂ ਭੁੱਲ ਗਏ?
@@jannatibiryani1991 😒😒 - Koi gall hoyi ethe Khalistan di jeda tu khoteyan wngu gallan krda pya.
Utte ohne aap mannya ya ki Sanu Khalistan nai chaida.... Fer v lggya hoya ya tu
5:09 huge inaccuracy, Muslim league only got support of most Muslims during the 40s especially after 1942 when the British arrested the entire congress top leadership over the Quit India movement (incidentally the Congress president during that whole period was Maulana Azad, a muslim). Before that in the 1937 elections they struggled to even gain seats in muslim majority provinces with their support base being largely restricted to elite urdu speaking muslims in northern India, while the muslims in muslim majority provinces like Punjab, Bengal, and NWFP backed the local parties or the Congress (in the case of NWFP). Most muslim organisations supported the nationalist movement for most of the colonial period, with even the Muslim league being a Congress ally till their proposal for a coalition government in UP got denied, Jinnah himself was once a major nationalist leader.
Yup it's Urdu Elites or Jaggirs who demanded a Seperate State
The Punjab unionist party basically swept all of Punjab province and almost won as many seats as the Muslim League did in the 1937 elections despite the fact they only contested elections in Punjab province. 😂
Khizar Hayat Tiwana, Chhotu Ram, and Tara Singh were the big reasons as to why the unionist party had such strong support from Punjabi Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs.
Wrong, in 1936 elections congress didn’t win many Muslim seats. It was the regional parties which were also allies of congress who got Muslim seats for congress. Congress never had support of Muslims, even maulana azad was a self proclaimed atheist in the 20s or 30s which decimated his popularity within the Muslims and it was only after partition that the Muslims of india went to him due to lack of options
@@rajeevparmar8844 yeah that tends to happen when your population is 5x as big
@@msr7373 Congress won 26 of the 58 muslim reserved seats it contested, better strike rate than the league. Elections happened in 1937 not 1936. I haven't seen any sources mention Azad's alleged atheism.
As a Sikh who's heavily researched this topic for years, I don't fully agree with many of the points made in this video. However, I do appreciate you raising awareness on this subject matter.
true
Where do you disagree brother?
Hi mr Ranjit Sangha, i am really curious to understand Sikh history from origin till now. But i don't trust the material i see or watch. Pls suggest
Which part do you disagree with?
@@theoldbanyan5227
You cant trust anything, history is messed up a whole country was stolen and now everyone is trying to rehash a new narrative to keep the status quo but failing miserably it like trying to polish a terd, like this video.
I never comment on videos, but as a Sikh, I want to thank you for making this video. Understandably, the partition focuses on the immense impact and upheavel that was inflicted on to the Hindu and Muslim communities. But, it is much appreciated that you have also mentioned the Sikh perspective, and how we were de facto stateless after the end of the British Raj.
khalistani nonsense
the sikhs never had a state in the first place. even the sikh empire had a muslim majority.
Well forgot 1971 Pakistan Army themselves call Punjab as a Revenge for what happened in 1971
@@yolemae6580 but it was a Sikh state
not canada is ur state , enjoy.
Better video idea: why wasnt sindh partitioned ? Karachi was hindu majority before partition, sindh was 25% hindu at least but now its 7
@KaZee123 so why are there still sindhi hindus there today ?
25% makes it hindu majority?
@KaZee123 are you crazy or something.
eastern sindh was majority hindu
Sindh as a whole was about 27% Hindu based on the last census before partition (1941). The cities were mostly Hindu majority but they were small at the time. There were also a few rural districts in the east that were Hindu majority, but otherwise the province was Muslim majority.
By this logic why weren’t UP Bihar Madras etc partitioned? Why not even a single Muslim ruled but non Muslim majority state was allowed to accede to Pakistan but multiple non Muslim ruled (and even some Muslim ruled) Muslim majority states like Kashmir Kapurthala and Bantva given to india? All these areas had pockets of Muslim majoirty , Sindh only had 1.3 million Hindus compared to 9 million Muslims in UP, 5 million in Bihar, 5 million in Madras and states, 2 million in Bombay and states, 1.5 million in CP and central india Etc. So if Sindhi Hindus wanted a state for themselves then the Muslims of all these regions had a right to ask for a portion of their native state as well. Why only majority be allowed to make decisions for minority as well ?
They have their own country, it's called Canada
lol
Ek no bhai
lmao
@@jannatibiryani1991 why don't you Sikhs take back Sindh and Lahore then . We Indians are with you . You can change your capital from Amritsar to Lahore 😊😊
@@jannatibiryani1991 go and ask the question to British or pakistan and ur right Sindh should be for Sikh
Bengal and Punjab are the worst sufferers of partition till this date.
Bc they were the only places partitioned
Really interesting! Thanks for making this video!
Really enjoyed this video, although I knew about the subject matter beforehand, most TH-camrs don't really cover this--awesome that you did. I'd love to see more.
No-one covers it because no-one cares. Make your own content
@@darkjudge8786 covering niche stuff is always nice. I'd rather see a new subject than something I've seen hundreds of times
@@darkjudge8786 People have watched this video and more people are going to keep watching it. I enjoyed it and I'm sure many others did. So people do care. Also why should he be expected to make his own content about a subject, not everyone is a TH-camr. Just let him be happy about the fact that a niche topic is covered.
what was the british dark game behind partition is expained on this channel
th-cam.com/video/hBr_kZXeAsg/w-d-xo.html
last time I was this early, the Sikhs had their own country
lol
So never?
same bro
That's sikh
@@hsthast7183 there was one
sikhs have always been a important part of indian society and it's case with every indian religion that we coexisted peacefully respecting and participating in each others culture and religious activities which is true to this day, this partition thing has no supporting base in the context of indian religions
In 1710 after several battles sikhs led by banda singh bahadur killed mughal governor wazir khan in battle of chappar chiri and became de facto rulers of punjab . After that sikhs formed 12 principalities called Misls . These 12 misls controlled vast territories fast forward to 1799 five of these joined together to form what we called sikh empire but actually there was also a second sikh empire. Phulkian misl which was part of dal khalsa (army of all sikhs) and fought against mughals and abdali and aslo one of 7 who don't join Maharaja Ranjit Singh was strongest of all controlled region of malwa of present day punjab. They raised punjab regiment which is second oldest regiment of india they formed an alliance with british fearing the might of ranjit singh's empire after defeat of sikh empire these states still ruled by sikh rulers which british called princely states or native States.Phulkian misls are now into four division nabha state ,patiala state,jind state, faridkot state. Patiala state was the largest with around 15,495 km sq of land and population of 2 million of which 50 percent were sikhs and faridkot state was also sikh majority with 58 percent population. There were several british administered districts in which sikhs were majority such as moga (64%) tarn taran (51%) jagroan (50%) and few more . Before partition these states were given option to join either pakistan India or stay neutral. King of patiala state was offered by jinnah to join pakistan.jinnah even sign blank paper and give it to ruler of patiala for demands he declined. There were several reasons why King of patiala joined india even sikhs had huge percentage in indian army could fight anybody.
1. He don't want the sikh state to become a puppet state between India and Pakistan.
2. Punjab naturally had no recourses such as ( coal ,iron etc) to sustain prosperous future.
3. Sikhs are actually more closer to Hindus rather than muslims.
4.he figured that even if someday hindu nationalist succeeded in making india Hindu rastra (hindu nations) sikhs will enjoy some freedom as compared to pakistan shria law etc . He came to conclude this because prominent hindu nationalist such as swami vivekananda and veer savarkar were admirer of sikhs and even sarvarkar once stated that there should seperate sikh nation in 1929.
All in all , sikh states joined india formed union called PEPSU ( Patiala and east punjab union ) . Which had area of around 26000 km sq had sikh majority and after partition sikhs and hindus became majority in several districts after muslims were gone ultimately the present day punjab became sikh majority. There is a fact that the doaba region of Punjab was always a hindu majority even before partition and its still hindu majority and malwa region was always sikh majority even in pre partition era and its still is . According to 1941 census the present day punjab was sikh majority st 51 percent.
I also want to mention the fact that sikhs are majority in those districts that were founded by them such as tarn taran ,moga,bathinda ,barnala ,patiala , sangrur etc . Jalandhar were historically ruled by hindus and even today its hindu majority likewise all these districts mentioned remained majority to those whom they were founded by .
For those who want a beautiful reality check of those hogwash comment, I would suggest searching “1984 Sikh Genocide”. 30,000 Sikhs were hunted down and murdered by the Indian state in 1984. And these people still call it a “riot” to this day.
@@Deepsingh-ok2eo very good information. Please suggest a book
Yea like massacre of 84 ? Bs
@@jazzmaan8714 it was unfortunate though none of the Indians wanted anything like that happen it just escalated to such level
Didnt cover much but appreciate the effort. Thankyou.
I’ve always wondered this is 🇬🇧British Partitioned off 🇲🇲Myanmar (then the Burma province) as well as 🇵🇰Pakistan & 🇧🇩Bangladesh as the World’s 3rd Largest ☸️Buddhist country alongside the World’s 2nd & 3rd Largest ☪️Islamic countries from the 🕉Hindu-majority India, so I thought it was logical to think why the Brits didn’t think to Partition a ☬Sikh country at the same time.
(it’s fun the realise how the World’s ☪️2nd, 🕉3rd, ☸️4th & ☬ 5th Largest Religions coexist in this subcontinent!)
Burma was not separated in the partition of India, but had become self-ruled in 1935, and was always to become its own country.
U forgot jainism adivasi tamil etc
@@HinduPAGANcowpissdrinkerRAKESH Adivasi means tribal whilst Tamil is a language தமிழ் - these are not Religions (what India was partitioned upon) 😂😂
@@AchyutChaudhary Isn't Tamil a ethnic group?
@@kkkk25yearsago79 I mean technically you can count all Mother Tongue languages as ‘Ethnic Groups’ in the country (eg. Tamilians, Telugus, Bengalis, Hindis, Urdus) - but we rarely ever use words like ‘Ethnicity’ & ‘Race’ in our country. In fact, our decadal Census don’t have Ethnicity & Race labels either, instead they use Caste, Tribe, Religion & Mother Tongue to classify people.
Hello Hilbert. I grew up among children with parents from all over the old British India in Bradford. I also had been told that the family had Indian army ancestry and I could be part Indian myself.
It is always interesting to see your videos on such topics.
One of the most amusing experiences I had was to go on a stag night with a load of Sikh lads to Bernard Manning's club in Manchester. They loved it.
Hilbert is the nerdiest name ever. I feel bad for him.
@@scintillam_dei It is Frisian and I think it distinctive. It goes right with his main study topic of old North Sea cultures.
they aren’t real Sikhs then. Sikhs are not allowed to drink alcohol
@@daniel-cc7bn My Muslim friend's uncle thought I was a Muslim when I did not drink alcohol as he bought a round of beers in Frankfurt, back when things were not so strictly interpreted and folk seemed to me to make their own judgments more often.
My Sikh friends back then seemed to enjoy a drink more often than not.
In 1710 after several battles sikhs led by banda singh bahadur killed mughal governor wazir khan in battle of chappar chiri and became de facto rulers of punjab . After that sikhs formed 12 principalities called Misls . These 12 misls controlled vast territories fast forward to 1799 five of these joined together to form what we called sikh empire but actually there was also a second sikh empire. Phulkian misl which was part of dal khalsa (army of all sikhs) and fought against mughals and abdali and aslo one of 7 who don't join Maharaja Ranjit Singh was strongest of all controlled region of malwa of present day punjab. They raised punjab regiment which is second oldest regiment of india they formed an alliance with british fearing the might of ranjit singh's empire after defeat of sikh empire these states still ruled by sikh rulers which british called princely states or native States.Phulkian misls are now into four division nabha state ,patiala state,jind state, faridkot state. Patiala state was the largest with around 15,495 km sq of land and population of 2 million of which 50 percent were sikhs and faridkot state was also sikh majority with 58 percent population. There were several british administered districts in which sikhs were majority such as moga (64%) tarn taran (51%) jagroan (50%) and few more . Before partition these states were given option to join either pakistan India or stay neutral. King of patiala state was offered by jinnah to join pakistan.jinnah even sign blank paper and give it to ruler of patiala for demands he declined. There were several reasons why King of patiala joined india even sikhs had huge percentage in indian army could fight anybody.
1. He don't want the sikh state to become a puppet state between India and Pakistan.
2. Punjab naturally had no recourses such as ( coal ,iron etc) to sustain prosperous future.
3. Sikhs are actually more closer to Hindus rather than muslims.
4.he figured that even if someday hindu nationalist succeeded in making india Hindu rastra (hindu nations) sikhs will enjoy some freedom as compared to pakistan shria law etc . He came to conclude this because prominent hindu nationalist such as swami vivekananda and veer savarkar were admirer of sikhs and even sarvarkar once stated that there should seperate sikh nation in 1929.
All in all , sikh states joined india formed union called PEPSU ( Patiala and east punjab union ) . Which had area of around 26000 km sq had sikh majority and after partition sikhs and hindus became majority in several districts after muslims were gone ultimately the present day punjab became sikh majority. There is a fact that the doaba region of Punjab was always a hindu majority even before partition and its still hindu majority and malwa region was always sikh majority even in pre partition era and its still is . According to 1941 census the present day punjab was sikh majority st 51 percent.
I also want to mention the fact that sikhs are majority in those districts that were founded by them such as tarn taran ,moga,bathinda ,barnala ,patiala , sangrur etc . Jalandhar were historically ruled by hindus and even today its hindu majority likewise all these districts mentioned remained majority to those whom they were founded by .
I wish Sihki was more widely known. Such an interesting faith tradition.
Sikhs in America are known for being victims of anti-Muslim attack despite being non-Muslims.
You should convert to Sikhism
@Alexios I Komnenos to be fair, Hinduism is so vast you could conceive of it as both. To conceive of Hinduism as a single is to conceive the west largely practiced a single faith called Abrahamism that shares 95% of its doctrine but has several sects based on disagreements over some relatively minor doctrinal grounds. When you flip it around to the western conception of religion, then yeah it seems better to think of India as having several distinct faith traditions, but I think there are merits to both views. The people in india seemed to have few issues considering Buddhism and Jainism as weird sects of aesthetics at least.l, and from the outside it does look a lot like Sikhism is an attempt to bridge the gap between Hinduism and Islam in an area where many practices both religions.
@Alexios I Komnenos tbh Muslims hindus and Sikhs weren't different in Punjab. All celebrated all festivals. So, only considering that sikhs also celebrated hindu festivals will obviously bring impressions that Sikhs are hindu sect but we should also look that More Hindus and Muslims celebrated Sikh Festivals.
Sikhi was already a different religion in 1699, when Guru Gobind Singh ji created the Khalsa.
If you Consider Sikhi as a sect of Hinduism then definition of Religion is non existent, then Christianity is a sect of Judaism and Islam is a sect of Christianity.
@@gursimarsingh5505 yes that is exactly what I just says lol
And now we see a fun exchange between the people of the subcontinent and the occasional British guy.
Great video, I knew.very little of this.
I ENJOINED IT VERY MUCH!
PLS DO A EPISODE ABOUT THE KALISTAN SEPERATISM!
Khalistan movement is mostly dead in India. The only supporters of Khalistan are Pakistanis and radical Sikhs living in the UK and Canada
@Alexios I Komnenos it's not the entire thing because he only reached a little into the 1970s, and the khalistan movement was most active during the 80s and 90s
I will suggest you to check channel called "basics of sikhi" to learn about khalistan movement and other Sikh history. This channel teaches you a lot
Fantastic video! Subbed.
In my opinion, the move to religious division instead of splits along ethnic lines which was accelerated by the British was ultimately disastrous. In its post-partition aftermath, the problem is only getting worse as both India and Pakistan seek to destroy ethnonationalism and move towards religious nationalism to hold together artificial nation-states. Punjab was strongest as a unified Punjab, just as a unified Bengal was stronger before being split in twain. The fact that both Bengalis and Punjabis died in droves for the independence movement is certainly correlated with a major push to split their influence and power between "opposing" nations.
Very well researched video. Well done sir!
All these stories are fine...But the real question is -- when and from where will we Sikhs get the courage to accept our true history? When will we remove the cloth over our eyes to see and accept the historic proof that our real home is Lahore in Pakistan, and not Indian Punjab?
Our Lahore is the kingdom of Maharaja Ranjit Singhand his ROOH still is in Lahore. Our Nankana is the birthplace of Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism. Can we forget Janam Asthan?
This is Historic Proof that our real home is Lahore in Pakistan, and not Indian Punjab. This is whar Deep Sidhu was telling us in his song ( th-cam.com/video/8N6c0czogxw/w-d-xo.html)
Sikhs own Lahore. Nobody can change that. Just as Jews own Israel, Sikhs own Lahore.
For how long will we call India our homeland and ignore our real homeland that keeps on calling us?
Come on brave brothers let us move back home to our Lahore. Forget India. Lets go OUR REAL, HISTORICAL, GURU-GRANTED HOME: LAHORE-PAKISTAN.
Only in Lahore can we can say “RAJ KAREGA KHALSA”. I repeat, brave Sikh brothers, let us never forget that the real home of Sikhs granted by our Guru and is Lahore and not India.
Indian Punjab belongs to Punjabi, Bihari, Madrasi, Bhaiyya, and all other Indians, but Lahore belongs to Sikhs alone.
How did we forget it?
In 1710 after several battles sikhs led by banda singh bahadur killed mughal governor wazir khan in battle of chappar chiri and became de facto rulers of punjab . After that sikhs formed 12 principalities called Misls . These 12 misls controlled vast territories fast forward to 1799 five of these joined together to form what we called sikh empire but actually there was also a second sikh empire. Phulkian misl which was part of dal khalsa (army of all sikhs) and fought against mughals and abdali and aslo one of 7 who don't join Maharaja Ranjit Singh was strongest of all controlled region of malwa of present day punjab. They raised punjab regiment which is second oldest regiment of india they formed an alliance with british fearing the might of ranjit singh's empire after defeat of sikh empire these states still ruled by sikh rulers which british called princely states or native States.Phulkian misls are now into four division nabha state ,patiala state,jind state, faridkot state. Patiala state was the largest with around 15,495 km sq of land and population of 2 million of which 50 percent were sikhs and faridkot state was also sikh majority with 58 percent population. There were several british administered districts in which sikhs were majority such as moga (64%) tarn taran (51%) jagroan (50%) and few more . Before partition these states were given option to join either pakistan India or stay neutral. King of patiala state was offered by jinnah to join pakistan.jinnah even sign blank paper and give it to ruler of patiala for demands he declined. There were several reasons why King of patiala joined india even sikhs had huge percentage in indian army could fight anybody.
1. He don't want the sikh state to become a puppet state between India and Pakistan.
2. Punjab naturally had no recourses such as ( coal ,iron etc) to sustain prosperous future.
3. Sikhs are actually more closer to Hindus rather than muslims.
4.he figured that even if someday hindu nationalist succeeded in making india Hindu rastra (hindu nations) sikhs will enjoy some freedom as compared to pakistan shria law etc . He came to conclude this because prominent hindu nationalist such as swami vivekananda and veer savarkar were admirer of sikhs and even sarvarkar once stated that there should seperate sikh nation in 1929.
All in all , sikh states joined india formed union called PEPSU ( Patiala and east punjab union ) . Which had area of around 26000 km sq had sikh majority and after partition sikhs and hindus became majority in several districts after muslims were gone ultimately the present day punjab became sikh majority. There is a fact that the doaba region of Punjab was always a hindu majority even before partition and its still hindu majority and malwa region was always sikh majority even in pre partition era and its still is . According to 1941 census the present day punjab was sikh majority st 51 percent.
I also want to mention the fact that sikhs are majority in those districts that were founded by them such as tarn taran ,moga,bathinda ,barnala ,patiala , sangrur etc . Jalandhar were historically ruled by hindus and even today its hindu majority likewise all these districts mentioned remained majority to those whom they were founded by .
Very interesting. Thank you
Very simple reason, they weren't in majority in the Punjab state.
Only 14% Punjabis were Sikhs. How could a Sikh state can be formed in a state where Sikhs are in minority.
They were possibilities of an independent united Punjab, which wasn't possible due to Hindu Muslim hatred.
Jinnah, father of Pakistan had offered Sikhs to join Pakistan with united Punjab but it was unacceptable for Punjabi Hindus who were 34% of the state's population..
There were many other problems too, like how could it survive as a land-locked state but the above reason was the prime one.
@Mughal Nationalist My friend this was 1940 not 1400
If one side invaded the other one would react immediately and again sikh were Martial race so they couldve still hold Their ground for few years and Indians/Pakistani who were unorganised after independence
@Mughal Nationalist Yeah it'd be like Poland all over again
@@kkkk25yearsago79 Lol, Sikh aren't considered as a martial race but Punjabis, both Hindu Muslims and Sikhs.
Even in that jatt Hindus, jatt Muslims and jatt Sikhs were considered more martial.
Infact even if Sikh state Punjab was independent, within years it would have been invaded by India and Pakistan and its fate would have been worse than Poland.
KRISHNKANT It will be formed now. Modi will break up mata bharat. Vote for BJP.
@@garrys3312 They tried to form and tasted dust.
And anyway, today in Punjab state, 44% are Hindus. There is no way a religion based sikh state can be formed.
I don’t mean to come off as insensitive or dismissive of peoples, but I’m becoming more and more convinced that the Partition was a mistake. Even if those who wanted it were well-intentioned.
No, you are absolutely incorrect.
I am an Indian and consider partition a good thing implemented badly.
No shit
Def a huge mistake. Further sewed division and ruined many lives.
Partition was not a Mistake. Incomplete demographic exchange WAS
Joining West Pakistan and Bangladesh into one country was a mistake too
The bigger question is why was there no Hindu country after partition when partition was done on basis of religion? If you get the answer of this question you will automatically get the answer of your next question that why there was no separate nation for Sikhs?
That’s because india didn’t just have Hindus and Muslims. You still have millions of sikhs Buddhist Jains Parsis Animists Christians Etc and none of them asked for partition. So it’s not for the Muslims but because of these communities that india had to remain secular
@@msr7373 why did the Muslims need their own country in the first place? They thought they were better than everyone else and deserved their own country. They didn't want to live with anyone else. That type of thinking is whats wrong in the world
@@msr7373 then why create seprate muslim nation, so that india become isolate in asia by bangladesh and oakistan from both side and india dont get acces to major trade route
India isn't one state country it does not have a single majority language like Bangladesh do 98% people are Bengali majority . The country i India itself is Continent
Don't forget Nepal was Hindu state now it's a secular
Please visit Micahistory 2, it would mean a lot!
Thank you for this video and speaking on the matter, it is very interesting. There is a long history here and I think once people fully understand what the Sikhs have been through under hindustan rule, it will come as no surprise why autonomy is wanted however what is interesting is that India seems to label any Sikh who utters the word Khalistan/sovereign state as an extremist/separatist/terrorist, these are terms they use interchangeably. It should be noted that this entire movement of self determination was in response to state oppression and the Sikh genocide. People have an inherent need to control their own destiny, make their own choices and determine their own future. Any attempt to suppress this feeling will only lead to resistance and further discontent. The desire for Sikh sovereignty is not a crime, they want a safe, secure homeland because they have been targeted. The Indian state silencing, ‘disappearing’ or jailing under fabrication of those with different ideological views, is a crime. It’s also important to understand that the Anandpur resolution put forward in the 70s was asking for Punjab’s state rights, for more autonomy, all requests were rejected by the central government. The movement of Khalistan came about fully in 1986 a few years after the 1984 Sikh state sanctioned genocide and followed by operation woodrose. Sikhs took up arms to defend themselves against mass killings and the Indian state massacring them, klf and such organizations who took up arms were born. Anytime Sikhs to this day speak of rights or sovereignty or fight the discrimination and draconian measures they are maligned, thrown in jail under false charges or executed. Such disappearance of Sikhs are not uncommon in India, these were the same tactics used in the 80s and 90s as they are currently doing (current call for Sikh state, led by Amritpal singh, who has since been targeted/silenced). It seems a new generation of Sikh youth has flourished and the Indian state are out to destroy it, again. It is widely known that the Indian state is grossly corrupt and seems to be on a trajectory towards ethnic cleansing with the current government, as Hindu extremism grows in size and are given free reign with impunity.
*The 1984 Sikh genocide, sometimes labelled incorrectly as ‘anti-Sikh riots’, not even 40 years ago, our generation. It's important to mention as there is much trauma associated with it. Riots denote an act of spontaneity, these killings were orchestrated state sponsored violence, organised and aided by the Indian state, targeting innocent Sikhs. The then prime minister’s two Sikh bodyguards shot her dead, for her role in killing innocent Sikhs and desecrating the golden temple and 30 other Sikh temples during operation bluestar. Many innocents people were killed in addition to countless temples burnt. There have been independent objective reports from people at the scene that the Indian army had instructed regular civilians at the temple to come out, reassured them that they would be safe and proceeded to shoot them dead. Then prime minister indira ghandi claimed they were after an ‘extremist’ who was gathering weapons in the golden temple, although this has been a point of contention from the Sikh community and the question arises was he in all 30 of the temples they attacked. It should also be noted that weapons have always been a part of the Akal takht since guru gobind singh’s time, as a means for Sikhs to protect themselves and others, this is what they believe in. There is an interesting interview (on youtube) of ex politician subramanian swamy, a Hindu nationalist who spent some time with Sant Jirnail singh bhindranwale. What then ensued by the country was a state sanctioned Sikh genocide, the hunting down of innocent Sikhs. Congress released voting lists and school lists so they could identify Sikh families/houses across cities, mobs in the hundreds (sometimes thousands) comprised of all types of Hindu men surrounded Sikhs houses, buses, businesses, temples etc. Weapons and kerosene were distributed. Genocidal mobs were paid for every Sikh they killed, more for prominent Sikhs, they were told they could keep the loot, jewellery and cash of the houses and businesses they robbed before they burnt families alive and burnt the houses, businesses and places of worship to dust. Police were instructed to ignore any calls and cries for help and have been quoted from survivors telling them ‘don’t worry, it won’t be long now, you too will be burnt alive soon’. Women and children were gang raped and burnt alive, men and children were tortured and set alight, placing flammable tyres around their necks, babies as young as 1 month old burnt alive. Tens of thousands butchered, mainly burnt alive, and hundreds of thousands displaced, left with nothing. Refugee camps were set up, women were also dragged from these camps and raped. All layers of society, including high ranking government officials, politicians, police and regular citizens committed and aided in barbaric horrors against innocent Sikhs just going about their lives. Justice has never been served, instead they were protected and promoted by the Indian state. Alongside an ongoing economic genocide - water rights, farming, electricity etc. Begs the questions, are they truly safe in India, how do you overcome your government genociding you.
*The Anandpur resolution. After peaceful measures failed (Punjabi Suba Movement), Sikhs decided to make a draft of all demands in 1973 and was given the name 'Anandpur Sahib Resolution'. Which mainly requests more autonomy for Punjab, some of the points were - reminded of the Federal structure for Punjab, that Punjab should have an autonomy to make its own decisions, as promised before the Independence. Return of Chandigarh as a part of Punjab, as it was inside Punjab and still was made a shared capital between Punjab and Haryana. Remove casteism from Punjab, to help the farmers by restricting the tax strategy, make Punjabi 1st language in Punjab and should be given importance in the neighbouring states. To recognize Sikhism as a separate faith in the Indian Constitution, to help Kashmiri migrants, to protect the interests of minorities from other states, to abolish excise duty from tractors so that the small scale farmers could easily buy and live their earning. To setup a system of reasonable minimum wages to the labourers, during those times the rights of Labour class were exploited so to ensure their living minimum wages which would invoke respectable income for the labourers. To establish a audio broadcast system for Sachkhand Harmander sahib to world for which *Khalsa* would pay. Amendments in Hindu succession act which stated a girl after the death of her husband could not claim on the property of in-laws, this point was included to protect the rights of women. To exempt the agricultural land totally from tax, as small scale farmers did not have adequate machinery for farming, leading to minimal savings. There should be *no reservation* in government jobs and other areas on basis of the caste in any state. Water dispute - 75% of the Punjab's water is already given to the other states without any permission of state and the SYL (Satluj Yamuna Link) would divide the rest water also, leading to scarcity of water in Punjab even after having 3 rivers. To establish 6 sugar mills and 4 textile mills in Punjab so that the farmer doesn't have to go to other states to sell his products. The Central government denied all the demands.
The area of punjab was ruled by maharaja ranjit Singh. A Sikh ruler. So why wasn’t this made into the Sikh state? Otherwise an interesting video and you right about the lack of numbers for sikhs.
Conversely, many enter tribal and intergroup conflicts were put to rest during colonial periods. And flare up afterwards.
Very interesting. I was under the impression there was a much larger percentage of Sikhs in the area during that time. I thought they were more closely allies with the Hindus so didn't push for an independent state during the partition.
They were this guy is cluless
@@karanvarma4843 It’s not hard to open the 1931 and 1941 census of Punjab. Maybe if WhatsApp University taught you to look for facts instead of making them up, people would take you folks more seriously.
Pak/Bangladesh is not a muslim majority state. They are Islamic state. They are governed as per Shariah.
India is a pluralistic society which has Hindus as majority.
So Hindus/Sikhs/Buddists/Jains no one got an exclusive country of their own. Only muslims got that.
As per the decree of Gandhi (India's father of the nation) - Muslims need to be appeased, even at the cost of Hindu religion, culture or motherland which the Dharmic people consider as holy.
😂😂😂😂 don't praise us that much we arre not worthy of it (bd fact)
As a sikh i can say india is our country we don't want a separate country our relgion believes in service to humanity
Basically a Sikh for you is to be a slave bi+ch. Each to their own.
Be quiet you hindu troll
If you believe in humanity then why not speak out after India attacked Sri Darbar Sahib, killed 100000 Sikhs, raped Sikh women and did Beadbi of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. India did not exist before 1947. Punjab has never been part of Bharat. We have always been independent. Guru Nanak Dev Ji blessed us with Paatshahi. Guru Gobind Singh Ji blessed us with Raj. Khalistan Zindabad
@@GuptSingh1469tu aur Tera khalistan dono Lund pe rakhti hai RAW. Tere khalistani dheere dheere oopar jaare hai aur tum Randiyo ko Pata bhi nahi hai😂
@@GuptSingh1469congress attacked...say like that Sikhs and Hindus were just victims of congress govt..before bhindranwale hindus and Sikhs lived happily...Sikhs from Pakistan who were getting butchered by Pakistani Sunni extremists also reached india lived happily in india.. congress did horrible things to hindus also.. congress was even silent when jihadis in kashmir were butchering kashmiri hindus...
Excellent explanation
I heard the Northerner in him :-) sounds like Mark Wood, the fast bowler.
Good video
Undivided punjab never had sikh majority
for viewers kind of Information, there is no country with national religion Hindu or Jain or sikh in the world so we can't say that India is a Hindu national country we are people who love to live in harmony and in root bases not even recognize each other as different religions
All the main TV channels in the UK carried documentaries about the partition on the lead up to the anniversary and beyond. The telling of firsthand accounts.
I would have thought, that they are still available on catch-up services.
.
After losing the war from british Punjab or we can say sikh were brought in British empire after 100 year where as rest of the india was already under british raj for 100 years. And when leaving the british tied both horses and donkey with the sams rope. Sikhs are still struggling for there freedom.
Would be interesting to hear an Alt history about how such a nation would relate to politics in the region.
@Alexios I Komnenos except Sikhs still only make 1.4% of Canada whereas religiously speaking both Hindus & Muslims make up higher percentage
India this is bharat continental heare tamil,telugu,malayalam,kannada,marathi,gujarati,bengali.all community partner's call us bharat continental of world peace nation's
So informative and well presented@
Sikhs are an integral part of India even before the British came in. They played a crucial role in the Independence and even today they make up a huge percentage of power throughout India. People should understand that when Gurunanak founded Sikhi to fight the oppressions against the Mughal Islamic rulers (these were the times of Bhakti Movement in the Hindu communities), the first people to join Sikhism were the people from the Hindu families. They treated it as a revolution within the Hindu communities in that region to join the Khalsa and fight against the Mughal rulers. Sikhs will always be a part of India, similar to other cultures and states.
It seems as some kind of oddity, that partition brought immense suffering to sikhs but not a state. Like Kurds, sikhs have suffered at the hands of history.Some fault can be attributed to Maharaja Ranjit Singh. He could have made Punjab predominently Sikh. But he treated all his subjects fairly & equally. Here lies the paradox. When Sikhs are in power, they treat others with tolerance. But when out of power, sikhs have to face suppression & barbarity.
I think you're forgetting a Historical fact. Most Sikhs back then and some even today are related to Hindus and Muslims. In order to convert Punjab to Sikh majorty, he'd have to turn brothers and cousins against each other.
how could he have made it Sikh, when they were less than 20%, without 4/5 of the population you lose most of your taxes
Sikhs need to stop playing victim, they are highest earners in India, so much for oppression
@hello all by that logic why not give it all to the British they ruled a bigger region for longer period. MRS ruled for 40 years, Punjab has been around for 5000 years, Sikh religion has only been around for 500 years
@hello all Sikhs are not from India most of the places they are from are in Pakistan, they are not special they don't get more rights than other people of the Punjab. They also sold out to the British for a lower tax rate. Now many of them have ran away to Britain and Canada.
@hello all Nepal is a Hindu country, the British couldn't capture it
Sikhs dosent belong to India, India belongs to Sikhs, it belongs to everyone who identifies with this ancient civilisation, Sikhs, Jains, Hindus, Buddhists, and many others, are different, but we all live together, respect each other and call ourselves one, Its only the Christians, the Muslims and the Communists (not nessecerily the population, but the institutions) who can't coexist with anyone who is different from them.
@@mirzabaig17 you are not even a Sikh what are you talking about, I am Sikh, I am proud of my country India, when anyone come to attack us they will find us on the border
Thanks I wish you make more videos on Sikhs
Sikhistan would’e been a state with an OP army.
in ur dreams
Majority sikh don't see them as different from hindus actually. Almost all sikhs i know have hindu gods in their shop especially ganesha.
@@friendlyatheist9589 that is a lie
@@friendlyatheist9589 that means they aren’t real sikhs as worship of more than one god and idol worship is forbidden in their religion
@@friendlyatheist9589 yea sure keep peddling your bs propaganda. Sikhs are NOT Hindus!
I really wanna know more about Sikhs, Buddhists or Jains, but it's hard to know where to look.
There is a channel called "basics of sikhi". plus it is english. It teaches you about Sikhs and their history .....highly suggest you to check it out. They have a long playlist
To know more about Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains you should look at India... Birth place of all these religions
Hindusism and sikhism are the same religion
The main plot is that India's partition was based on Muslims vs non-Muslims. Sardar Patel to nehru every indian leader tried their best to convince jinnah & some elite class to not ➗ us based on religion but failed. Many hindu+Punjabi/ Buddhists majority areas(lahor, Chittagong) still were given to pakistan by British, for so called buffer zone.
And what was Khalistani movement
What is ULFA ??
Why AFSPA implemented in North East India?
Are these group also Muslims?
And what was Khalistani movement
What is ULFA ??
Why AFSPA implemented in North East India?
Are these group also Muslims?
It's just CHT hill Tribes who came from Burma, cambodia in 1600/1700 during Bengal sultane and Mughal war
Chittagong was always a Bengali Muslim mejority region
And those who are not muslims are also Bengali not sino Group
And most of em are now choosing Christianity not Buddhism
If you love CHT you can return karminganj, Murshidabad and Dinajpur which were Muslim Mejority but given to india in 1947 as a corridor and take CHT Hill tracks back
We would be happy to exchange these regions
If CHT tribes dislikes us they can return to Myanmar and NE India
Its the same as asking "why there isn't any hindu country after partition". Only muslims wanted a different country, so they got it. Others just wanted independence.
Im not trying to start a flame war but its less that Pakistan was for Muslims and India for Hindus and more so Islamic separatism with Pakistan for Muslims and India for anyone and everyone. One is a secular multi religious state who is currently in 2020s succumbing to religious nationalism, while the other is a state that was literally founded on religious nationalism.
Why did anyone deserve a religious state? Hindus didn't get one. Jains didn't get one. Buddhists didn't get one. Why did Muslims get one and why do Sikhs think they deserve one?
The main reason for participation was the extremism and bigotry against Muslims of the Indian subcontinent. Being a non Muslim I can see it everywhere. The hate, the venom Indians have for Muslims is disgusting. With the current pace I wouldn't be surprised if India broke again
Typical 'western' hypocritical narrative. Video starts with saying 'Hindus got India" when in fact all Indian religions including Hindus, Christians, Muslims, Parsis, Sikhs, Jews, Budhists, Jains etc were part of India as a secular state. Surprisingly this channel may never describe their nation as Christian even though most western nations are over 90% Christian
India was never a country before 1947
@@tanveercheema3802 that's a problem with your indoctrination coz you never learn or want to know the truth. Indian, Chinese, Egyptian & Mesopotamian are ancient civilizations and I'm not here to teach you that if you don't even know about your own places like Harappa or Mohenjodaro. Yes India got independence in 1947; unfortunately Pakistan was created then by the Imperialist British to cater to their geo political interests and to do their dirty work which Pakistan has been dutifully doing past seven decades for dollars
We want our own nation sikh 🙏
which part in indian as well as in pakistani punjab sikhs are minority
Let's hope they get their own state somewhere in Brampton in this century :)
“States”, borders, flags, democratic rule and nationalistic governance that we understand today are a completely different and foreign concept that we were never used to and very effective in division.
Religious fuelled partition was only a factor for Muslims. Sikhs never had that separatist tendency. Christians are also large in number on the Malabar Coast but never demanded a separate state either. Minorities such as Sikhs, Christians never felt threatened or bothered by living in a democracy that was majority Hindu unlike many Muslims who prior to British rule were used to ruling over Hindus. That being said there has been a recent Sikh separatist movement exasperated by atrocities against them during the 1980s however it remains a small minority. Most Sikhs are patriotic and disproportionately serve in the army. Have been amongst freedom fighters calling for an independent India (not just Sikh India). We have also had a Sikh PM and are very proud of their contributions.
Ab ye sab chod bhai ek aur partion hoga fir se 24% hone hi wale hain
Hindus always respect and hold a special place for Sikh gurus because they protected Hindus from the ruthless invaders of central Asia.
You gave them that huge in 1984
Sikhs never saved any hindu to begin with
Lol
Sikhs were always concentrated in Punjab,how the hell did they saved hindus
@@unknown..642 it was need of time
Breaking india will result in this
And Sikhs weren't innocent at all
Lmao "saved" ? Nobody saved no one , everyone Cared about their own territories
invaders of "Central Asia"? what a nice way of trying to whitewash Indian Muslim history.
Full support for khaliatan/Sikhistan in Canada
But our gurus and sikh brothers and sisters will live in India 🇮🇳❤️✨
No this is wrong, you see Panjab was its own country before the annexation of the British in 1849 but after independence the first Prime Minister of India promised Panjab its own country (Khalistan) , in fact the first Prime Minister of India fooled Panjabi's that Panjab is part of Hindustan ( India ) when it wasn't.
buddhism, jainism, sikhism and hinduism arent exactly religons!! They r dharma..
They have their disagreements for sure but that doesnt stop them from celebrating each other's festivals, visiting each other's temples and taking part in each other's rituals.
They arent like abrhamics " oh you disagree so u have choosen death", Indian philosphy is an open source software, gurus come and start their own traditions, if they are able to attract no crowd then they fade away, if they r able to attract a moderate portion then they become a sect within hinduism and if they recieve potranage and get a significant following then they become their own dharma, seperating themselves from sanatana dharma ( hinduism)
No one stops them .... Thats what makes hinduism so uniique it never undermines its
child philosophies( sikhism buddhism and jainism) cus it believes nothing is perfect or permanent,
"Changes are bound to happen as time passes" that keeps hinduism fluid and open for discussionn
Sikhism is completely separate
@@jag6846 no
@@jag6846 lol not sikhism just follows one of the school of thought of Sanatan dharma. All these dharmki religion came from there. Sikhism did not came from Hindusim. Hinduism is also an offspring of sanatan dharma as sikhism Jainism and Buddhism.
@@jag6846 you have to been illiterate to think sikhism is seperate religion. Sikhism is not even a religion. Hindusim jain Buddhist none of them are religion. Religion is an abrahimic concept
@@jag6846 You are very ignorant of your religion if that's what you think.
Hindu epochs such as the Mahabharata and Ramayana are discussed in the Guru Grant Sahib.
Hindu families would raise their first born son a Keshedhari Sikh during times of war, many of which relapsed back into Hinduism at later times.
Basic philosophies are share - dharma, karma, moksha etc.
Greetings to the proud people of the indian subcontinent from Egypt
Love from Punjab Pakistan 🇵🇰
Arab is pakistani daddy's @@rizvimalang313
Congratulations on a fine video as is shown by the huge numbers of comments. This being said I am doubtful mine will ever be read, nevertheless I can't help but add my 2 cents.
I am too lazy to confirm this presently, but it was my understanding that there were several independent kingdoms within India at the time of the British Raj (hence there are still maharajas and princes around today). These all chose to be incorporated into greater India at independence, except Kashmir which wanted to be a separate state. Pakistan would not allow this claiming it entirely part of their country (the "K" in Pakistan). Kashmir chose to go with India as the ruler was a Sikh, resulting in its partition and subsequent border wars, complicated further by disputes with China.
Do you think Ukraine may represent a modern Sikh state attempt? Not sure In race or whatever but In the hill families etc? Great vid thank you
1:20 "Hindus got the state of India". Then would you be ok with the muslims being deported/converted. First you say that India is just Hindu version of porxtan. Then you want independence of porxtan exclusively for muslims as well as let them have 'equality' in India. Then you also want our motherland to be divided between Hindu and sikh brothers who can never stay independent without each other.
India is a British construct. Punjab will be free one day whether you like it or not.
@@harleenkaur1408 how exactly. The so called East Punjab was again partitioned into Himachal Pradesh & Haryana. What is left of Punjab is also 40% Hindu, while Sikhs are 57%. Not sure how there will be an independent state with a minority that big, unless you want violent civil war & unnecessary bloodshed. Plus a major part of original Punjab now lies in Pakistan.
@@harleenkaur1408 India was a country even before the British were a thing. Even before the Romans reached Britain, India was a thriving empire. And Punjab was a part of it.
@@harleenkaur1408 Megasthenes, a scholar from ancient Greece has even written about India in his book 'indica'. So has Huang Tsang. India is also mentioned in the book 'journey to the west'.
@@harleenkaur1408 Pakistan's name was formed in Britain. Who is a British construct now? All of you khalistanis keep talking about independence of Punjab. But none of you has the guts to challenge pakistan controlled Punjab. Why such hypocrisy?
Only pakistan got divided from India on the basis of religion
India was and still a secular states
Only muslim wanted their seperate state and others
So there was no point of creating Sikh state
India was never a 'secular' state. It is just a pluralist state. There is a difference, despite the word "secular" being thrown around in India politics, most Indians have no clue what it means.
@@anonymouslyopinionated656 lol Indians don't know what it means?? Mind u we Indians value our school education more than u Westerners who think dropping out of school is a fad.
We have get to see daily newsroom debates on secularism(even though it's mostly garbage but still) .
india being ''secular'' on paper doesn't change that it prosecutes Muslims. its funny how ''islamic'' pakistan has hindus in parliment despite making less than 1% but ''secular'' India doesn't have a single Muslim in the current govt despite them being over 15% of the population. People who defend India are ridiculous. they just released rapists and murderers of a Muslim woman.
@@yolemae6580 ah yes, let's generalize all of India for the action of one right wing party, Oh by the way Abdul ur bias for Pakistan clearly is showing itself there.
@@anonymouslyopinionated656 what every you say but you were never Discriminated by religion in india
There are many inaccuracies in this video! The facts should have been checked before publishing this.
this is the root of all the religious tension right now
Would like to see you make a video on the Indian invasion of Hyderabad its an important part of partition thats overlooked and forgotten.
True. Also goa sikkim
@@HinduPAGANcowpissdrinkerRAKESH India didn't invade Sikkim, its succeeded to India after an overwhelming referendum. And India freed Goa from Portugal control.
@@hsthast7183 his profile photo is literally "jhaat ka bal"
@@udayrathod3786 thats the straightest 'jhaat ka baal' i have ever seen 😂
According to the regulations of Indian and Pakistani independence, landlocked stated had no choice other than to join the country they were surrounded with.
And also, a plebiscite was also done, on which people voted for India. So it doesn't count.
I support a Sikh Country in Punjab
Pakistani Punjab
Uday Rathod Jai Jodha Bai jiski ch00* muslaman ne maari
In 1710 after several battles sikhs led by banda singh bahadur killed mughal governor wazir khan in battle of chappar chiri and became de facto rulers of punjab . After that sikhs formed 12 principalities called Misls . These 12 misls controlled vast territories fast forward to 1799 five of these joined together to form what we called sikh empire but actually there was also a second sikh empire. Phulkian misl which was part of dal khalsa (army of all sikhs) and fought against mughals and abdali and aslo one of 7 who don't join Maharaja Ranjit Singh was strongest of all controlled region of malwa of present day punjab. They raised punjab regiment which is second oldest regiment of india they formed an alliance with british fearing the might of ranjit singh's empire after defeat of sikh empire these states still ruled by sikh rulers which british called princely states or native States.Phulkian misls are now into four division nabha state ,patiala state,jind state, faridkot state. Patiala state was the largest with around 15,495 km sq of land and population of 2 million of which 50 percent were sikhs and faridkot state was also sikh majority with 58 percent population. There were several british administered districts in which sikhs were majority such as moga (64%) tarn taran (51%) jagroan (50%) and few more . Before partition these states were given option to join either pakistan India or stay neutral. King of patiala state was offered by jinnah to join pakistan.jinnah even sign blank paper and give it to ruler of patiala for demands he declined. There were several reasons why King of patiala joined india even sikhs had huge percentage in indian army could fight anybody.
1. He don't want the sikh state to become a puppet state between India and Pakistan.
2. Punjab naturally had no recourses such as ( coal ,iron etc) to sustain prosperous future.
3. Sikhs are actually more closer to Hindus rather than muslims.
4.he figured that even if someday hindu nationalist succeeded in making india Hindu rastra (hindu nations) sikhs will enjoy some freedom as compared to pakistan shria law etc . He came to conclude this because prominent hindu nationalist such as swami vivekananda and veer savarkar were admirer of sikhs and even sarvarkar once stated that there should seperate sikh nation in 1929.
All in all , sikh states joined india formed union called PEPSU ( Patiala and east punjab union ) . Which had area of around 26000 km sq had sikh majority and after partition sikhs and hindus became majority in several districts after muslims were gone ultimately the present day punjab became sikh majority. There is a fact that the doaba region of Punjab was always a hindu majority even before partition and its still hindu majority and malwa region was always sikh majority even in pre partition era and its still is . According to 1941 census the present day punjab was sikh majority st 51 percent.
I also want to mention the fact that sikhs are majority in those districts that were founded by them such as tarn taran ,moga,bathinda ,barnala ,patiala , sangrur etc . Jalandhar were historically ruled by hindus and even today its hindu majority likewise all these districts mentioned remained majority to those whom they were founded by .
1:49 That flag makes me anxious.
Really nice video some better stuff then people just randomly wanting to fight sikhs
As a matter of fact. independent Sikh country can never survive alone! it will either be annexed by Pakistan or India.
Or heavily supported by either of the country to Survive via trade routes, most likely Pakistan
@@kk-gc1ii Khalistan exists in your dreams only
@@kk-gc1ii Why everything has to begin and end with Modi? Khalistan existed inside the Turban of Maun Mohan Singh. Because he was brainless robot
SHIVA BLESS 🇮🇳
ALLAH BLESS 🇵🇰
WAHEGURU BLESS SIKHSTAN
LoL keep dreaming
@@anitathakur9340 Why are you such a snowflake?
Shiva allah none can bless since they don't exist. Wahe guru was just a preacher died long ago so he can not bless anyone either. Sikhistan will always remain a dream if you want sikhistan go to lahor Pakistan for it.
KHALISTAN ZINDABAD
@@friendlyatheist9589 Give us sovereignty in any one of Indian district we will conquer Lahore in matter of 1-2 years
Do Sikhs and Hindus share the same community when living abroad in the west or do they form their own separate communities?
@@johnguy25that's racist.
A Sikh And Jain country for each if both nations populations or demographics went by the book would of been some of the most criminally liberated zones yeah.
Sikhism is a mix of Islamic theology with dharmic concepts of the sub-continent. It jad adherents all the way up to Afghanistan which jad a vibrant population untill the Soviet in invasion. For many hindus like myself I find it easy to go to the golden temple and pray just like I would do at any of my other temples. Very accepting faith like Budhism.
@@simbasingh5733 Sikhism is full of Bhakti and Sufi philosophy. No religion is pure for that matter. Not Hinduism nor islam. All are derivative of prior religions. You are probably too young and not gone through the scripture. Atleast listen to the kirtans being sung when you visit the Golden temple. They are a celebration of Indian culture and philosophy which is my favorite part of visiting the temple.
@@simbasingh5733 So the rest of my response was good i take. I will take that!
@@simbasingh5733 Plenty of curry mixed in ;)
If you are a real truth-seeker please make video on why there was no Hindu state after partition of India, as pakistan was entirely made on the line of religions. And this video also discusses new state based on religion. Thanks!
They will say that India is a Hindu state.
The main reason for participation was the extremism and bigotry against Muslims of the Indian subcontinent. Being a non Muslim I can see it everywhere. The hate, the venom Indians have for Muslims is disgusting. With the current pace I wouldn't be surprised if India broke again
@@harlowida Isn't it same for the Hindus as well? Let's be even handed regarding this. Don't try to potray as if only one community is to be blamed, and the other is innocent.
Its just an Abrahamic priviledge narrative you are propagating. World is not only for Abrahamics.
India is a Hindu state. Nepal is too.
The last part of the subcontinent that the British Raj annexed was The Khalsa Raj, it was diverse had equality and lots of volunteering work to the point there was no crime, no hunger or homelessness like in gurudwaras using the system of seva, now when we want the Khalsa Raj again or Khalistan it’s heavily propagandized as terroristic, even tho the Indian state constantly oppresses both the Sikh and Muslim population, People get arrested for protesting let alone gather in groups of 4 at time
Having been to India and Kashmir, I know more about it than the average TH-camr.
All these historical stories are fine...But the real question is -- when and from where will we Sikhs get the courage to accept our true history? When will we remove the cloth over our eyes to see and accept the historic proof that our real home is Lahore in Pakistan, and not Indian Punjab?
Our Lahore is the kingdom of Maharaja Ranjit Singhand his ROOH still is in Lahore. Our Nankana is the birthplace of Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism. Can we forget Janam Asthan?
This is Historic Proof that our real home is Lahore in Pakistan, and not Indian Punjab. This is whar Deep Sidhu was telling us in his song ( th-cam.com/video/8N6c0czogxw/w-d-xo.html)
Sikhs own Lahore. Nobody can change that. Just as Jews own Israel, Sikhs own Lahore.
For how long will we call India our homeland and ignore our real homeland that keeps on calling us?
Come on brave brothers let us move back home to our Lahore. Forget India. Lets go OUR REAL, HISTORICAL, GURU-GRANTED HOME: LAHORE-PAKISTAN.
Only in Lahore can we can say “RAJ KAREGA KHALSA”. I repeat, brave Sikh brothers, let us never forget that the real home of Sikhs granted by our Guru and is Lahore and not India.
Indian Punjab belongs to Punjabi, Bihari, Madrasi, Bhaiyya, and all other Indians, but Lahore belongs to Sikhs alone.
How did we forget it?
You guys were litterally driven out of there by Pakistan, how do you think you can take it back.
@@Roachh2877 In 1710 after several battles sikhs led by banda singh bahadur killed mughal governor wazir khan in battle of chappar chiri and became de facto rulers of punjab . After that sikhs formed 12 principalities called Misls . These 12 misls controlled vast territories fast forward to 1799 five of these joined together to form what we called sikh empire but actually there was also a second sikh empire. Phulkian misl which was part of dal khalsa (army of all sikhs) and fought against mughals and abdali and aslo one of 7 who don't join Maharaja Ranjit Singh was strongest of all controlled region of malwa of present day punjab. They raised punjab regiment which is second oldest regiment of india they formed an alliance with british fearing the might of ranjit singh's empire after defeat of sikh empire these states still ruled by sikh rulers which british called princely states or native States.Phulkian misls are now into four division nabha state ,patiala state,jind state, faridkot state. Patiala state was the largest with around 15,495 km sq of land and population of 2 million of which 50 percent were sikhs and faridkot state was also sikh majority with 58 percent population. There were several british administered districts in which sikhs were majority such as moga (64%) tarn taran (51%) jagroan (50%) and few more . Before partition these states were given option to join either pakistan India or stay neutral. King of patiala state was offered by jinnah to join pakistan.jinnah even sign blank paper and give it to ruler of patiala for demands he declined. There were several reasons why King of patiala joined india even sikhs had huge percentage in indian army could fight anybody.
1. He don't want the sikh state to become a puppet state between India and Pakistan.
2. Punjab naturally had no recourses such as ( coal ,iron etc) to sustain prosperous future.
3. Sikhs are actually more closer to Hindus rather than muslims.
4.he figured that even if someday hindu nationalist succeeded in making india Hindu rastra (hindu nations) sikhs will enjoy some freedom as compared to pakistan shria law etc . He came to conclude this because prominent hindu nationalist such as swami vivekananda and veer savarkar were admirer of sikhs and even sarvarkar once stated that there should seperate sikh nation in 1929.
All in all , sikh states joined india formed union called PEPSU ( Patiala and east punjab union ) . Which had area of around 26000 km sq had sikh majority and after partition sikhs and hindus became majority in several districts after muslims were gone ultimately the present day punjab became sikh majority. There is a fact that the doaba region of Punjab was always a hindu majority even before partition and its still hindu majority and malwa region was always sikh majority even in pre partition era and its still is . According to 1941 census the present day punjab was sikh majority st 51 percent.
I also want to mention the fact that sikhs are majority in those districts that were founded by them such as tarn taran ,moga,bathinda ,barnala ,patiala , sangrur etc . Jalandhar were historically ruled by hindus and even today its hindu majority likewise all these districts mentioned remained majority to those whom they were founded by .
@@Deepsingh-ok2eo
Thanka for the additional info but Vivekananda wasn't a hindu nationalist
@@Roachh2877 India has only defeated by Pakistan because of Sikhs, otherwise some 4 foot tall vegans who worship cows couldnt do anything
As far as I know, the partition was that Pakistan was for Muslims only and everybody else were to live in India: it was the Muslim League who instigated this.
Also there is an interesting character parallel maybe in “Sir Roger Rohaut”(England) and guru Ravidas maybe. If you consider a name change into the “noble” English side as happened quite often when generals or leaders of all kinds villa to retire.
They all hide at that point like witness protection on paper. The Janus thing was big with them and parallels are the norm. They sired England in my belief. Sire/shire they would trade places with far off other nobles when rebellions would occur etc.
I believe the Brahmins were such and every nation has its related version through time. No harm no foul but yeah that seems to be what I’ve come to in my thoughts. Like prima nocti but more like the sheriff and postman in a town ends up daddy in secret… lol but not joking. With love
pretty sure the answer is that tiny religious minorities are generally not given their own states to run when much larger groups would like to use that land too.
Even NE region of india was forcefully emerged with india, that region were ruled by different kingdom and chieftains. Pls, make a video about NE region of india.
The current Republic of India = British India v2.0. Nothing really has changed. The British just transferred power over to their lapdogs (North Indian Brahmins) in 1947.
Ok south bhi seperate, North bhi seperate, Kashmir bhi seperate
Arunachal Pradesh on the other hand is mostly patriotic, it depends on situation man.
@@shivammore9502 speak in english, what is bhi?
@@anujnautiyal8539 it's not about being patriotic or not. i simply said make a history about NE region which is mostly missing in mainland indian textbooks. people needs to know how NE was forced to emerge with india even if the truth hurts.
A new Sikh state in India Khalistan should emerged.
Haha Europeans at it again
No , Pakistan's Punjab was historically region of the Sikhs. That should be the New Land of the Sikhs
@@PrashadKaPrasad Why don't you Hindus stop colonizing Punjab. Punjab is for Sikhs, So, Hindus should stop occupying Punjab.
@Inaam Ulhaq
How ironic sarr , the 🅱️uslims of South Asian (who were sikh/hindus) who couldn't protect their mothers from invaders are now claiming themselves as a tru 🅱️uslim saar. Never forget your roots brother. Even the Arabs and the Turks don't accept y'all as their own. So whose coward now?? And don't claim yourself as Arab 😂 , you yourself know y'all are not converted through sword.
@Inaam Ulhaq you can't ignore the truth brother. Ofc at some point y'all were Sikhs or hindus but then y'all 🅰️ncestors thought of not paying some more Jizya tax or some invader came and 🅿️egged your mother or sister and that's how yall born and from then on following this Arabic ☪️ult. Y'all can't hide ur cowardness brotha 😭🤣 , you can't never.
well done
There are many reasons but
The biggest will be when you have all country why would you confine yourself to a particular region
They choose to be part of India
* Guru Tegh Bahadur is known as Hind Ki Chadar, which translates into 'Shield of India' and is regarded as the most selfless martyr of the country
Even till 1940
The Ruling Parties of (Sindh and Punjab )(Present day pakistan ) were The Unionists parties
They were in favour of a United India
but after that the muslim league light up the society
several riots made Muslims full of fear and as the result they voted for pakistan in 1946 well even back then the % allowed to vote was only 25 - 30 % of the total adult population
We are a dharmic family and respect our mother, the oldest and remained the steadiest due to its philosophies of quaIity over quantity. I reject the regional aspects of that time that tainted it.
Sikhs don't believe in Hindu fairtale books.
seedha bol na muslim ko bharat se bhagana hai
@KaZee123 true
This vid feels incredibly biased to some degree
Theirs a lot of historical inaccuracy
Also british propaganda along with colonial tampering lead to a messy partition
The British would never allow such a superpower to just appear in geopolitics
It somehow coincidentally gave the chinese easy access through west asia without major competition
Typical British
@KaZee123 Islam and other abrahmic relegion are BS
Sikhi rejects Hinduism
Your bharat mata is a false prostitute created by the British
Just to clarify some things in this video: Before the British, the Sikh ruled Panjab under Maharaja Ranjit Singh where people of all faiths were treated equally and lived in peace. Under Ranjit Singh, the Sikhs were still a minority yet this is not an issue as Sikhs are warriors, they're lions (Singh's). Sheep always outnumber Lion's but 1 Lion can take care of a 1000 sheep. This shows that you don't have to be a majority to rule a state.
The Sikh sided with the Congress whilst fighting for independence from the British under the impress they would be free and have political autonomy as a federal state just like the US system. This didn't not occur hence the fight for a separate Sikh state since the 50s. Key dates to prove this is the protests and subsequent raid of Harmandir Sahib in 1955, the Panjabi Suba movement resulting in a further partition of Panjab 1966 and of course the Dharam Yudh Morcha and Operation Bluestar in 1984 followed by the ongoing armed resistance til this day.
Thank
Its a democracy now and majority rules not the minority, power comes from the barrel of a gun not from a sword.
Go tell the Kashmiris of how lovely it was to live under sikh rule and how half their population starved to death under Sikhs discrimination against Muslims. The only Muslim that we’re treated ok were Punjabi Muslims
@@quiasnoorzad surely better than present administration of Kashmir
I would add that it’s gaining momentum again though it was always active. Indian state killed more than 20k Sikh youth in year following 1984 till 1992 and refuse to release the Sikh “political” prisoners who have served their sentences.
Even though India had majority muslim state, it was created as secular state for everyone including muslims and Sikhs, so Sikh needing a different state is not relevant, all indian freedom fighters was against partition is because of jinah that Pakistan was created,that for showing the princely state most of the people forget about it,India diverse place with different language,so creating countries based on language doesn't make sense,and is the reason why Bangladesh became independent
Many people refer to it as a partition of punjab not india
samyajyoti de in 1947 sikhs had a choice to get their own nation but stuck with India not to break it even more like you said, because of broken promises made to them by India Hindu government, India should have been a model for the world to see all religions living in harmony but instead Hindustan slowly becomes land for only Hindus.
Sikh sacrifices for freedom
Prior to Indian independence Sikhs were less than 1.5% of the population, but their contribution to the freedom struggle was immense:
77% of those sent to the gallows were Sikh as were 81% of those sentenced to life imprisonment.
During the Quit India Movement many indiscriminate arrests were made and Sikhs contributed 70% of the total Punjabis arrested.
More than 60% of the 20,000 who joined the Indian National Army were Sikhs.
100-150 million refugees resulted from partition in August 1947 with 40% of all Sikhs becoming refugees.
Partition resulted in up to 2 million people being murdered and another 10-50 million being injured.
Sikhs betrayed and promises broken
India's founding fathers gave numerous solemn promises that the Sikhs freedom and dignity would be safeguarded. Jawahar lal Nehru said that the brave Sikhs of Punjab are entitled to special consideration. I see nothing wrong in an area set up in the north of India wherein the Sikhs can also experience the glow of freedom. These promises were conveniently forgotten after independence and the Sikhs were dismissively told by the same Nehru that the circumstances had now changed
Sikhs have rejected India's Constitution
Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru gave the Sikhs assurances that after India achieves political freedom no Constitution shall be framed by the majority community unless it is freely acceptable to the Sikhs. This promise was repeated throughout the period up to independence. When the Constitution was produced in 1950 it failed to deliver any safeguards or political rights for the Sikhs as a people or nation. The Sikhs therefore refused to sign the Constitution and have never accepted it. Article 25 even denies Sikhism, the fifth largest faith in the world, separate recognition as a religion an affront that is widely seen as a deliberate act of suppression of the Sikhs.
Demands for greater autonomy were dismissed
The Indian authorities have systematically discriminated against the Sikhs since 1947 and subverted or suppressed all legitimate political demands for greater autonomy. The Anandpur Sahib Resolution of 1973 set out the basis on which the Sikhs were prepared to accept a political union within India, as a federal state. This demand for internal self-determination was pursued through decades of peaceful protest and attempts at negotiation with the central government. The demands were never seriously considered and given the history of the conflict between the Sikhs and India since 1984, this would now be too little too late.
Gross violation of Sikh human rights
In the last 30 years the Indian authorities have unleashed a rein of terror through gross violation of human rights of Sikhs in an attempt to extinguish the calls for freedom and Sikh independence. In June 1984 the Indian army attacked the Golden Temple Complex and 125 other Sikh Gurdwaras in Punjab and massacred tens of thousands of innocent Sikh pilgrims. This laid the foundation stone for an independent sovereign Sikh State, Khalistan.
In November 1984 tens of thousands of innocent Sikhs were massacred in Delhi and over 130 other cities throughout India by well-orchestrated mobs under the direct supervision of senior Indian politicians and officials.
Over 250,000 Sikhs have been murdered and disappeared since 1984. Many Sikh political prisoners still languish in Indian jails without charge or trial and others have been falsely charged and sentenced to death by hanging. Illegal detention and torture of Sikhs is common place and well documented by independent human rights organisations.
Sikh nationhood and independence
Sikhs first secured political power in the form of an independent state in 1710, after suffering centuries of foreign invasions and alien domination. The larger sovereign Sikh state was established in 1799 and was recognised by all the world powers. The Sikhs, after the two Anglo-Sikh wars, lost their kingdom and the Punjab came under British rule in 1849. However, in giving up power Sikhs were party to several Treaties with the British.
Sikh Personal Law Denied
After independence Sikhs have been denied Sikh Personal Law. Hindu Laws has been forced on Sikhs be it be the marriage act or income Tax. Sikhs marriages are registered under hindu act and while filling income tax Sikhs as HUF
Thank you 🙏🏽
Half baked knowledge lmao. Let me break ur lies .
1) Hinduism and Sikhism have same ultimate goal - Liberation and unification with God. Common concepts- reincarnation; kirtans ; Ik Omkar ( in Hinduism Advait Vadanta) . Hindu and Sikhs marry each other without no problem. My uncle's wife belongs to Sikhism as well.
2) Sikhs did not fall from sky. It were hindus themselves who volunteered to bring reforms and created a new religion. Ex : Sikhs have caste system problem too which is an example of their hindu roots.
3) Sikhs were also loyal to British. Sikhs helped British to crush native 1857 revolt. Did we call them traitors? No.
4 ) Sikh genocide was facilitated by Congress after Congress leader Indra Gandhi was shot dead by her sikh bodygaurds .Hindus dislike the Congress most.
5) Sikhs don't need to register under hindu marriage act there is Anand marriage act for Sikhs now.
6) Article 25 - In sub-clause (b) of clause (2), the reference to "Hindus" shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the "Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion".
Note : Hindu is a geographical term which mean people living under indus belt.
Please keep ur filth away from us. Thankyou
You seem to have misunderstood the concept of Sikhism. Sikhism and Hinduism are much more intertwined. Khalsa is a concept that emerged 300 years ago against Islamic oppression, but Punjabis as ethnic and linguistic group have existed for long. Infact, there has been a long tradition in Punjabi Hindus to make their eldest son a Sikh (Khalsa Warrior). That's because the knowledge of warfare and self defense was pretty much restricted to the Kshatriya Caste(Rajputs back then). But by becoming the part of Khalsa community, you could learn the art of combat to protect your family and village, given the fact the Punajb was the gateway to the subcontinent and first line of defense against invaders and was constantly at threat.
but he is talking about today not in 1500s. Sikhs don't want to be associated with Hindus in 2022. I wonder why that is?
@@mirzabaig17 Sure, I'll tell you why. It has more to do with the legal aspect eversince the Minority Commission Act of 1992 gave Sikhs a minority status in Constitution. Perhaps your exposure to Sikh sentiments come from politicians indulging in identity politics and few Khalistani Radical or Canada based NRIs, but speaking entirely from a social perspective - the Sikh and Punjabi Hindu community is very much fluid and marriages btw the two communities is very common. And it's obvious, because they essentially come from the same community. Bhatia, Chhadha, Walia, Sahney, Narula,Kohli,Malhotra to name some, you'll find in both Sikh and Hindu communities. Even within the same Punjabi family, you can find one line of brothers/cousins who are Sikh and other Hindus
The % of indigeneous population in U.S/ Canada is 2-4.5%
French population in Canada is 22.8%
Muslim Population in Europe is 6 %
Maoris make up 16% of the population in NewZealand
And 3-8 % OF Australians are the true original inhabitants
So how about partitioning these countries and creating states for them?
Dont be so mad. At least the uk knows that there were at least two religion on the subcontinent.
u have mistaken...Muslims got Pakistan but all other religions got India although hindus were in majority
Britishers should have put some negotiations on the table among sikhs at that time. Since Sikhs has overwhelmingly supported Britishers in WW1 &2 Just like jews. They could have offered us a big part of Punjab.
Many people in my country, Indonesia, could not differentiate Hinduism and Buddhism
@@kushjindal2939 And in my country also, Buddhism is associated with the Chinese
@@anandantor99Buddhism is branch of Hinduism.
I love your videos i just want to state we cal it Khalistan. Which is named from Khalsa which means pure and Stan meaning place. Thanks for covering this