Why isn't Sri Lanka a Part of India?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 เม.ย. 2024
- Start speaking a new language in 3 weeks with Babbel 🎉. Get up to 60% OFF your subscription ➡Here: bit.ly/4dgvE6f
Why isn't Sri Lanka a Part of India?
♦Consider supporting our work and Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @knowledgia
♦Consider supporting us on Patreon :
/ knowledgia
♦Please consider to SUBSCRIBE: goo.gl/YJNqek
♦Our general knowledge channel: / @masteringknowledge
♦Music by Epidemic Sound
Big Thank you to:
Николай Димитров, Tobias Tron, Mahmoud Shahin, Justin Bourke, Augustus Caesar, Chaim laser
Joshua Kerr, Slayer, John McKeon ,Michael Morale,Rory,Smithy3371,The Angry Celt
#History #Documentary
Start speaking a new language in 3 weeks with Babbel 🎉. Get up to 60% OFF your subscription ➡Here: bit.ly/4dgvE6f
1:30 minute in video ad.
I don't care how much spam Babbel tries to shove down my throat or if they sponsor every single video in every channel in YT, I'm still NEVER watching their stupid fucking platform.
And Raid's Law states that any app/product that spends as much time and money in marketing as Raid: Shadow Legends does is either utter garbage, filled with predatory microtransactions or both.
Another question, why the Bahamas isn't part of USA?
"...not AI"
That's a jab on Duolingo, isn't it?
Before portuguese came , those Costal places were filled with sinhalese villages it was a part of kingdom of kandy, 90% of socalled sri lankan tamil was Brought here by portuguese , dutch , british to costal aria to work as slave workers time to time from india, for various slave purposes (before they were lower cast tamils in india , sakkiliyar, roddi,.. etc , who later became suicide attackers and were forced to do so by upper cast tamils ) after the massacred of those costal living sinhalese by colonizers then immediately sinhalese villages became tamil villages , after ponnambalam ramathan (also migrated from south india and who didn' t even knew much about ceylon
people or culture and british gave him higher possession in government than sinhalese becouse sinhalese were alway fighting for freedom against the british ) became registar general changed those indian tamils
Identity as a ceylon tamils and nowadays they says they are oldest here , my advice you to read old ceylon gazettes and what was did by
Ponnambalam ramathan and arunachalem🧐 and read old portuguese , dutch colonial records
26 years of civil war was created by british , dutch and portuguese 500 years of colonialism and their slave labours outnumbered native people and disenfranchised the identity of vanni and north-eastern coastal living sinhalese.
The simple answer is Sri Lanka has always been an Independent country, (Not in the British colonial era). In Sri Lankan Written History, even 2500 years ago Sri Lanka was an Independent country.
True, but it still doesn't make any sense since most Indian states have had their own independent kingdoms and empires similar to Sri Lanka. I just don't understand what sets them apart from the other Indian states that they feel like they don't belong to the same family tree.
@@blackout4802 Mainly unique culture , Religious background , Developed technologies , Political background and others..... Although some people groups in the Indian subcontinent have similar cultural characteristics, it is the scholarly opinion that since 500-600 years of the Buddha there were distinctive cultural factors.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Oh yeah
@@blackout4802Sinhala people are of a different ethnicity. Sri Lankans are mostly Buddhist. Don't know why many Indians don't know these simple things.
@@shauncaruna387 Sinhalese trace their ancestry directly to Vijaysimha and Tambapani Empire. By that virtue they are literally an offshoot of Bengalis. The tamils in the northern Sri Lanka are the aboriginals of the island innit.
Its like a question
"Why is japan not a part of Chaina? "😂😂
Ecxactly
😂😂😂👍
😂😂👍
😂
Anyone here from Sri Lanka 🇱🇰
👇
Yep 😍😍😍
Of course 🇱🇰
Sri Lanka never been a part of India for last 5000 years
Bro It would make sense if it was "500" years instead of 5000 years.
@@srgplay4526 Sri Lanka has a 2500 years old history as an independent country.
What about chola invasion and ruling ceylon 😂
Chola is a dynasty, which is not just India. There were no single entity or empire named India
@@Kavin13570 It was short lived. They only captured the northern parts of Sri Lanka. Sri Lankan king Vijayabahu was the one who brought down great Chola empire.
Sri Lankans are unique.
In additional,the beauty of Sri Lanka lies in its unique blend of natural wonders, cultural richness, and warm hospitality..And there're different weather conditions experienced in different parts of Sri Lanka despite it being an island..
An Indo-Aryan ethnic group in the sea surrounded by Dravidians and Austronesians.
@@jostnamane3951nope more like mix of Helay(indeginous peoeple)Dravidans and Aryans
Hi,
❤ srilanka from Bangladesh🙂
@@sanithuyumeth6333 we are all mixed.
Sree lanka is an independent country love from kerala india.
❤🇱🇰
ചിങ്ങളം, ഈഴനാട് in malayalam (chingalam, eezhanaad)
Its not sreelanka, bro
It's sri lanka
gammac cuddah♥♥♥
@@user-qp1fj3hr8f ok bro
what I noticed is Sri Lankan culture is similar to Thailand, Vietnam etc. It's really different from India. Maybe mainly because of Buddhism (Sinhalese culture. not the Tamils).
It's clear to see in countries like Australia where Sri Lankans, Thai and Vietnamese all live. All three groups and others (mostly the Theravada groups) have opened Buddhist temples together for example dating back to the 1970s and common festivals like the South and Southeast Asian New Year in April are celebrated in pan-Asian style. For example, the pageant "game" that is celebrated for the New Year is done with Sri Lankan, Thai, Cambodian and Burmese women dressing up in their traditional clothing.
But Sri Lanka has a completely different culture from them
Srilanka culture is close to India mainly ( Kerala and Tamil Nadu) not like you said.
@@Lowlife-ix6ojSri Lankan people are 70% Theravada or Southern Buddhists. Thailand is more than 80% Theravada buddhist. Both countries share the same beliefs, and they also worship Hindu Gods on side. They had more diplomatic relationships with each other than with India for over 2000 years. The only tiny difference is Sri lanka got colonised by British which confused our identity a bit. But even today in foreign countries, Sri Lankans and Thai, burmese people live close due to temple locations etc.
Sri lanka culture is similar to kerala and Tamil Nadu. Kerala and Tamil Nadu have a distinct culture compared to North India
Most Sri Lankans (80%) are Sinhalese and speak the Sinhala language which only exists in Sri Lanka. It's a unique nation with unique people and unique culture. And it was never a part of India.
unlike Nepalis,Bangladeshis,Pakistanis no Sri Lankans couldn't speak Hindi.
As an Indian we support sovereignty and integrity of Srilanka ❤
All the best to Sri Lankans. My best wishes that you prosper.
🇮🇳🤝🇱🇰
Thanks. Now we need independence from Rajapakses and Corruption
@@irfanzavahir5289 also islam.
@@smitprmr bro can’t say two sentences without mentioning Islam. Go cry a river
@@smitprmrislam what?
I don`t know why Western Think Asia haven`t existence before colonization , India and Sri lanka been separated more than 2500 years of written history , you only talked about just 500 years of colonization ??
Yeah, that was weird.
I mean, I get how the focus would be on colonialism, seeing as it was the most recent significant political upheaval in the region, but it would have been nice to hear a bit more than "it shares culture, linguistics and ethnicity with parts of India" and "it has a long and complex history".
How did it come to share this culture? How has the island interacted with the mainland in the past?
One must have tried to invade the other at least once.
@alphy wrong information .srilanka never part of indian .its totally different country.
Because Sri Lanka is a GOOD country
❤
sri lanka never was a part of India although some parts of India were conquered by sri lanka in the past and some indian empeires took control of some parts of sri lanka.
Yeah . the some Indian empires you are talking about are the chola dynasty .they are also been a sovereign entity up until the european' s arrival
@@PlayerScaveIf you speak about Cholas when you say " they are also been a sovereign entity up until the Europeans arrival."
That's false !
Cholas disappeared between the 13th and 14th centuries, long ago before Europeans come in the area !
The Chola Realm will be temporarily under the Madurai Pandyas and Delhi Sultanate rules, afterward come the Vijayanagari Period. When the European came in the region, ancient Chola kingdom at his greatest extent was divided between numerous kingdoms.
@@drodro7672yes, you are correct.
The absolutely correct comment I was looking for... thank you!
Really enjoyed this breakdown of Sri Lanka’s history and its relationship with India. The video highlights how geography, colonial history, and cultural differences all contributed to Sri Lanka developing its own national identity, separate from its larger neighbor.
it has been less than two minuts since this video has been released. unless you watch it sped 20 time there is no way you have finished it, let alone writing this comment
Lol@@KhalidAlharbi67
@KhalidAlharbi67 People who spend money supporting a channel on Patreon or whatever usually get early access.
The only difference is that Sri Lanka they didn't join the federation. They are not very different from any Indian state of their size. In fact, Uttar Pradesh (an Indian state) is much larger and ethnically diverse than Sri Lanka.
If you are European, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh are different from India to the same extent Austria is different from Germany.
sri lanka never was a part of india at all , even not during british rule, british raj didnt include lanka
lanka and maldives ruled seperately as british ceylon
I'm Sri Lankan and thank you for this video
Didn't quite land the pronunciations of the names of peoples and places, though 😁!
Why isn't Sri Lanka part of India?
Answer: because the Tamils and Sinhalese were able to put aside their differences temporarily to defend their home from Indian invasion.
Do u know why you dont look like your father even a little bit?because your mother was here in india
Really?? The tamils and the sinhalese were able to put aside their differences..? Holy flip I wonder what the civil war in sri lanka was about
@@geraffgurung this guy is idiot he says tamils and sinahlese put aside their differences which did not happen
@@geraffgurung temporarily
@@theawesomeman9821 True!
I am more interested in "Why Bangladesh is not part of India?" I think Sri Lanka was never ever a part of ancient India. But if Bangladesh is part of India it would make India more integrated
First-it was east pakistan
Second- we made it independent
Third-we didnt wanted influx of tens millions of bangladeshi muslims in india.
Not needed now
Bengalis have lawyas fought to be their own nation ahethsr it was the mughals, the british, the delhi sultanate, the marathas. We are nothing like indians
Ceylon was never part of mughal empire and not ruled by british east indian company like india
Chola empire ruled Sri Lanka it was an south Indian kingdom and mughals and Britishers did't ruled all of India. (No hate)
😂@@JetInc.
@@JetInc. not the entire country
@@JetInc.my ass
@@JetInc. That time period is very short,about 55 years. but Maha Prakarambhahu, 1 Gajabahu ruled the south India more than that time period.
sri lanka never was a part of india at all , even not during british rule, british raj didnt include lanka
lanka and maldives ruled seperately as british ceylon
Yeah but indian Kingdoms had relationship with Sri Lanka...from Mahabharata till maratha kingdom.
@@durgeshsss having relationships between Indian Kingdoms doesn't Sri Lanka part of India . according to your logic Rome and China also should be part of India . and also we are talking about actual things. not a things on religious books .
Yeah South Asia was 3 British Colonies: British Raj (colonial government ruled by a English colonial council), British Ceylon (directly administered by the Crown) and the Protectorate of the Sultanate of the Maldives (indirectly administered by the Crown as the Maldives had free say in domestic affairs unlike the British Raj and Ceylon).
Except during the Chola period!
@@veerakumaraandi2801 Cholas ruled Sri Lanka only for 77 years (993-1070 CE). 77 years is small compare to 2500 years history as an independent country. But next problem is Did Cholas ever called themselves Indians? I don't think so.
Sri Lanka also controlled Rameshwaram and near areas of Tamilnadu after Sinhalese king Parakramabahu I's involvement in Pandyan civil war (1169-1182 CE). Sri Lanka ruled Rameshwaram and near areas of Tamilnadu for 30 years (1172-1202 CE). Even a Sinhala inscription which belong to King Nissankamalla has found in Rameshwaram (Source- Epigraphia Indica, volume 36, page 23-32). Do you consider it as a part of Sri Lanka?
As an Interracial person and man who has English,Sri Lankan and Indian through my ancestries,I only fully want Sri Lanka to be a nation ever and never ever merge with India!!!Sri Lanka must ever be a nation and I fully like one of my nations daily and ever despite living in Malaysia,good friends!!!In future,I must work hard to visit this beautiful island nation and the respective people in Sri Lanka must live happily and peacefully ever as well,good friends!!!LONG LIVE SRI LANKA!!!🇱🇰
Srilanka will always be an independent country. God bless srilanka and srilankans
Neither Sinhalese nor Tamil are Indian, they are on the Indian subcontinent and have cultural exchange with Bhārat dynasties to the north but that doesn't make them Indian. Most of today Southern and Northeastern India were seperate kingdoms for most of recorded history and only became India in 1947 after being conquered by the Gandhi-Nehru regime
Sri Lanka is Sri Lanka. Not only culture but even nature and animals are different from India. The Sri Lankan elephant and leopard and other animals are separate subspecies unique to Sri Lanka.
Pakistan: “That is too obvious to ask.”
Lmao
Im too dumb please elaborate 👀
@@Visibleconfusion97 We spent 2000+years telling them to fuck off
Pakistan are just Arabized hindus
Similar to what happened to Indonesia (Greater Sunda Islands), Sahul and ASEAN. It's union between Saka-Yavana-Daha (Sunda-Java), Malaya-Kamboja-Champa (Malay), and other ethnic groups...
Plus there is a reason why Malacca strait is named after 'mleccha' (foreigners) and why the center of agama Buddha for Southeast Asia especially Sunda Islands moved from Nalanda to Borobudur in the past. It's astika-nastika war between Sriwijaya, Mataram and Cholamandala...
Sri lanka was not just a country we were very important part of this world thousand years back and had very unique of its own culture
I wonder how history could have gone on the Indian sub-continent if the British Raj was transformed into a multi-ethnic federation, as opposed to multiple countries. It could have curtailed the worst excesses of all parties involved.
India and Pakistan are both multi-ethnic federations as it is. Presumably a single multi-ethnic federation was the main proposed alternative to partition, but they couldn't get the people involved to agree to that.
Probably the same as they are now except there will be a few super bloody civil wars in between. The Hindu nationalists we are seeing running India today would have tried to assume control and suppress all the Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Jain, Buddhist, Tamil, Sinhalese, Burmese, Thai, Tibetan living in the peripheral areas of British Raj. I cannot imagine minority groups that made up ~40% of the total population would lay down that easily.
Yeah Mann deffo won't have a massive civil war with millions dead and ethnic cleansing and genocide occurring.
Modern India is exactly that. Each of its states are separated along the lines of ethnicity, language and culture. For example, the Tamils predominantly live in Tamil Nadu, the Marathis in Maharashtra, the Biharis in Bihar, the Harayanvis in Harayana, Rajasthanis in Rajasthan, Assamese in Assam, Meitei in Manipur, Nagas in Nagaland, Kashmiris in Kashmir, Ladakhis in Ladakh, Odias in Odisha, Punjabis in Punjab and so on.
ශ්රී ලංකා මාතා අප ශ්රී ලංකා
නමෝ නමෝ නමෝ නමෝ මාතා
සුන්දර සිරිබරිනී
සුරැඳි අති ශෝභමාන ලංකා
ධාන්ය ධනය නෙක
මල් පලතුරු පිරි ජය භුමිය රම්යා
අප හට සැප සිරි සෙත සදනා
ජීවනයේ මාතා
පිළිගනු මැන අප භක්තී පූජා
නමෝ නමෝ මාතා අප ශ්රී ලංකා
නමෝ නමෝ නමෝ නමෝ මාතා
ඔබ වේ අප විද්යා
ඔබ මය අප සත්යා
ඔබ වේ අප ශක්ති
අප හද තුළ භක්තී
ඔබ අප ආලෝකේ
අපගේ අනුප්රාණේ
ඔබ අප ජීවන වේ
අප මුක්තිය ඔබ වේ
නව ජීවන දෙමිනේ
නිතින අප පුබුදු කරන් මාතා
ඥාන වීර්ය වඩවමින රැගෙන
යනු මැන ජය භූමී කරා
එක මවකගෙ දරු කැල බැවිනා
යමු යමු වී නොපමා
ප්රේම වඩා සැම භේද දුරැර දා
නමෝ නමෝ මාතා අප ශ්රී ලංකා
නමෝ නමෝ නමෝ නමෝ මාතා
Loan Lanka
Isn't this your national anthem?
I like it a lot❤❤
Love from India❤
🇱🇰🫡
Indo pak war baby Beggerdesh 😂🇧🇩@@World-fx2sl
@@World-fx2sl shitting india
always love the videos. but i cant help but feel that there was a push to make this unneccesarely long. massive amounts of words that all keep saying the same things.
At one point I thought the video looped
wouldn't be surprised if this script was made by AI, even the narrator sounds kinda strange
The majority of Sri Lankans or Sinhalese has a distinct religious, political and cultural background from India due to Buddhist reformations and relationships like in Burma. Sinhalese culture tends towards Southeast Asia because of this.
Sinhalese give priority to Buddhism even today, as mentioned in the Constitution of Republic. Historically, Sinhalese kings were Buddhist or atleast patronizers of Buddhism like Nayakkar Kings of Kandy. The King of Sinhalese must be a Buddhist as declared by King Nissankamalla of Polonnaruwa (1187-1196) in his stone inscriptions. The sacred Tooth Relic of Buddha was the symbol of royalty in Sinhalese Kingdoms from the reign of King Sirimeghavanna of Anuradhapura. The person who was in possession of the Tooth Relic was considered as the rightful ruler of the country. Some Kings adopted the name of Tooth Relic as a honour, such as King Dhathappabhuti of Anuradhapura (539-540). These religious and cultural requirements were considered even by the British. When the kingdom of Kandy was captured by British in 1815, they signed to a treaty with Kandyan chiefs at the temple of tooth. This proclamation consisted of 12 clauses including,
"The religion of Buddhism is declared inviolable and its rights to be maintained and protected".
India and Sri Lanka have deep cultural connections, but Sri Lankan culture is not identical to India. Even the Gods were unable to escape this cultural difference. Buddhahood is the supreme in Sinahalese culture, Gods don't have a bigger role like in India. Very many Gods of South India are worshipped by Sinhalese as well, but with different names and stories. Few examples are shown below;
Kannagi as Paththini Amma,
Pattani Swami as Gambara deviyo,
Murugan as Kataragama deviyo.
Sinahlese don't have the same social structure as Indians. Sinhalese caste system is also very simple than that of Indians. Sinhalese society is free from Brahmins. These factors have greatly affected the sovereignty of Sri Lanka apart from the colonial history and its impact.
I agree and in an Australia, where I'm from, the cultural connections with Southeast Asians is evident as a result of Buddhism. For example, the big pan-Asian Buddhist temples in Australia attract Sri Lankan, Thai, Malaysian, Vietnamese and other Southeast Asian communities which result in significant overlap like the prevalence of Buddhist monks of different backgrounds living together as well as the celebration of common festivals like the South and Southeast Asian Solar New Year in April. Many Indian and other South Asian groups celebrate this festival too but because most of them are not Buddhists, there is never a chance to celebrate the festival with them and Diwali happens to be more important for them which Sinhalese people do not celebrate. There is definitely cultural interactions with Indians too such as through the South Asian grocery stores but Buddhism is definitely a big difference that separates the Sinhalese and Indian cultures.
Also, after travelling to Sri Lanka, I ended up learning and reading that in the past Sri Lankan historians went through a phase where they wanted to focus on Sri Lanka's cultural interactions with Southeast Asia instead because they believed Sri Lankan history was too Indocentric. While no longer Buddhist, the impact of the Malays and Indonesians (Javanese, Ambonese and Balinese) is evident to see in Sri Lankan culture and history such as the Malay invasions of the 13th century as well as the migration of Malays and Indonesians to Sri Lanka during the Dutch colonial era who ended up leaving such a huge mark on Sri Lankan culture, especially its cuisine. I can't imagine Sri Lankan rice and curry without sambal for example, which came with the Javanese settlement. Genetically they left an impact too through the emergence of a Sri Lankan Malay community who speak a local dialect of Malay and the traces of Malay/Indonesian ancestry among the Sinhalese and Moor populations, as discussed by Sri Lankan Malay historians.
@@user-jt3dw6vv4x True, historically Sinhalese had closer relationships with Java and Sumatra.
Kerala has early migrated sinhalese people now called ezhavas.But they are forced to convert to hindiusm but still have many similar buddist customs
@@amalksuresh2538 There's no confirmation for that though. It's based on a legend that 4 men were sent to Kerala from Sri Lanka at the request of King Bhaskara Ravi Varma. It's these 4 men that are considered the progenitors of the Ezhavas.
Sri Lanka and Maldives have never been part of India and they will never be a part of India.
අනිවාර්යයෙන් 👍
Yes
Loldives are going under water in the next 2-3 decades. I don't know what you achieved by adding that thing here when the video was clearly about India & Sri Lanka
@@indiafirst3676going under the water is better than being part of india 😂
@@anjanarajapaksha3256 Is that why Rajapaksha was throwing Sri Lanka under the water ??
Why didn't Australia become part of Indonesia..
Because British wanted their criminals to be separated from Asian people 😂😂
I can't believe Knowledgia actually did a video on Sri Lanka. This is amazing. Thank you !
They're very different countries with different cultural, social and historical norms. Just because they're next to each other they can't be one country.
As a Tamil from South India. Its just because Srilanka was a dutch colony and it wasn't integrated with the British raj when it was seized during Napoleonic wars. The funny part is that Yemen was a part of British Raj not srilanka which was just stones away.
Sri Lanka didnt entirely become a Dutch colony, only the coast. But the British got it after the Kandyan convention.
No it isn't. It's because we do not want to be part of rapeland and have spend 2000+ years with our fellow Sri Lankan tamils telling you all to fuck off and leave us on our island
Unfortunately Dutch is the dark age of Tamil history. Dutch and Portuguese invaded Tamil parts of srilanka. And Dutch enslaved them.
Srilanka don't have their own religion. Hindu - Buddist is Indian. Islam is Arab. Christian is Mesopotamian.
@@joel12388 Sri Lanka is the world's oldest continually Buddhist country. Buddhism evolved in SL. Not in india. SL has its own Buddhist culture. SL is the predecessor of theravada buddhism. SE countries like Myanmar,thailand,cambodia,laos,vietnam and indonesia practice "mahavihara theravada buddhism" that disseminated from SL. President even mentioned it in a meeting with ASEANs. Also "Thripitaka" was written in SL. World oldest human planted tree is "Sri maha bodhi" which you can find in SL.Tell me any other Ethnicity that served to Buddhism more than SL Sinhalese.
Great video quality. I find it very intriguing that each colinizer period was approx 150 years in length. You can almost divide its periods in history as such. Maybe celebrate the 150th year of independence in 2098?
For reference -
1505-1658: Potugal
1658-1796: Netherlands
1796-1948: UK
It's a strange question, really.
It implies that anyone who has a common culture or history has to be part of the same state.
But the world is full of more examples of that not happening, than happening.
Germany excludes tons of german people. Of course Hitler thought that this shouldn't be the case, which is why he invaded Austria...but he was being silly.
The real question is why to force the rest of India to be a single state, instead of allowing it to separate into more appropriate smaller ones.
Another one is Canada and the United States.
Tell this to Ultranationalist Indian politicians who keep calling for "Akhand Bharat" (Undevided India) by subjecting everything around it and converting people into Hindu to insure the population has gone back to its supposed roots.
@@soybasedjeremy3653 No, Canada is half French. And the US is a melting pot. Its "nation" is a philosophy, that of rugged individualism and consensual cooperation...not some ethnicity.
@@KAZVorpal Canada is a melting pot too fyi, plus the United States has a second language. And that's Spanish, fyi I'm American. We share a common history and culture.
@@soybasedjeremy3653 But not philosophy. Canada is more authoritarian collectivist.
Because we are 2 different nations since like the beginning of time.
You ignorant
It's always the Muslims...
@@KonstantinosPhillippikos Go infront of a mirror and say it.
She said truth. It's your fault, if you can't cope with truth.
@@worlddata8982
You don't even understand the meaning of "Nation" we created it.
Savage barbarians always thinking they are civilized 😆
@@KonstantinosPhillippikos Like Aryans civilized Indians 😜
Without British, You won't have any nation.
Having visited both as a tourist and having ancestry from both places, it seems that this was the right go. Despite being geographically close they are too culturally distinct. SL quote liberal, extremely conservative. They are more culturally distinct from one another as the USA and Mexico are
Interesting topic
And they haven't "shitting on the road" culture😂😂😂
They do
@@ExpertMindCAclasses indians do 😂😂😂
@@Fighter723shut up with stereotypes and nonsense
@@srikrishnak196 ur country is full of shit man try to see it
@@Fighter723You and your mindset. This just tells about you and your community character.
Srilanka not part of india.. From beginning..
Sri Lanka is a Buddhist country with peaceful and friendlier people and very affordable. Only similarity is how they look. Let it be an indendent country.
Fascinating! Thanks!
Sri Lanka was never part of India.
why was even this a question at the first place... its a separate country anyways
8:13 *more than Sri Lanka perhaps, I’ve always wondered why was 🇲🇲Burma (now Myanmar) partitioned from 🇬🇧British India in 1937?*
- as it was not only a part of India already but British India’s largest province!
Myanmar and Northeast India are not only not Indo-Aryan, they are not Hindu / Muslim nor speaks Indo-European languages. The ethnic makeup of Northeast India all the way to Guangxi, China and south to northern Thailand is extremely complicated and I am guessing the British don't know where to draw the administrative line so leave Burma as a huge province but still left many Sino-Tibetan and Kra-Dai groups in India
@@Peichen01 To be fair, Assamese is an Indo-Aryan language that is natively spoken in Assam. Indo-Aryan shouldn't be correlated to culture or anything, it's just a language family. However, the entirety of Northeast India which was known as Assam was its own separate entity.
I also wonder why Australia isn't part of the India since they also the part of British empire.
Even though our country is a small island, as Sri Lankans are really happy being independent❤. We have our own language, culture and natural resources that has been evolved for thousands of years.💯 (We would consider if we are asked to be part of countries like US, Canada, UK, Japan or Australia though 😁)
This is like asking 'why is the UK not a part of France?'
Edit: It's just a Joke
Not really, because both weren't controlled by the same colonial empire. The post colonial carve up had little care for culture, language or ethnicity, typically .
@european-one Yeah this take is explained by your username
@@TheAztecGamer123 whatever you say random racist internet dude
@european-one You generalised based on your opinion. I'm saying your take checks out based on your username as it displays a lack of understanding
@@TheAztecGamer123 no i clarified western empires didn't care much for local desires when drawing borders. To which you started making attributions to race.
What exactly did i say then that's wrong?
Why why what's the problem hah?? Let us live as Sri Lankans...
In addition to these, I'd like to add the fact that since around 600 BCE until the British colonists captured the whole island, no foreign nation managed to gain the control of the whole island. Indians, Portuguese and Dutch only managed to capture the parts of the island. There has always been a ruling monarchy of natives that has diligently protected our culture and fought against the invaders. There is a wide range of sources where you can see how Sri Lanka (Which had been referred in various names such as Thambapanni, Serandib and Taprobana) has been always considered as a separate sovereignty, ranging from the ancient writings of Xuanzang, Strabo and Ibn Battuta to more recent accounts from robert Knox, Fernão de Queiroz and Philippus Baldaeus
Until early 1960's, there was a natural thin strip of land above sea level, linking north of Sri Lanka with the south of India. People could really walk from one land to the other. Sometime in the 1960's, there was a very strong sea storm which flushed / interrupted that thin corridor.
Good video.
Earlier today, I saw a map of India and I wonder why Sri lanka was not a part of it, so thanks a lot for answering the question so quickly
Rawan Island ❤
Next video : Why isn't Taiwan part of China?
INDIAN NATIONALIST ARE GOING TO CRY ABOUT THE MAP 😂😂😂😂😂😂
We don't mind the map. But how about you not be a beggar country that funds terrorism for a change?
I am crying🥲
Indian nationalists cry about everything. They are fragile little snow flakes
I've seen a few western TH-camrs start using the Indian map to get more Indian viewers. I think the video can be blocked in India if people report it
keep your focus on begging more money from the IMF. we are good!
Because? Sri Lanka was established as an independent state after European colonialism. So in other words? The British didn't even want India to be big and powerful. Just like how Pakistan is not part of India after gaining Independence from the British after WW2. And not to mention Religion is still the big problem in the Indian Subcontinent. So there is no way India would get Pakistan and Sri Lanka and other nations in the Subcontinent to join India as one nation.
Sri Lanka established as an independent nation far before European colonization. Monarchy was established in Sri Lanka in 6th century BCE. From then, Sri Lanka was ruled by Sinhalese kingdoms.
•Kingdom of Thambapanni- 543-437 BCE
•Kingdom of Anuradhapura- 437 BCE-1017 CE
•Kingdom of Polonnaruwa- 1070-1215 CE
•Kingdom of Dambadeniya- 1215-1272 CE
•Kingdom of Yapahuwa- 1272-1310 CE
•Kingdom of Kurunegala- 1310-1346 CE
•Kingdom of Gampola- 1346-1410 CE
•Kingdom of Kotte- 1412-1597 CE
•Kingdom of Sitawaka- 1521-1593 CE
•Kingdom of Kandy- 1469-1815 CE
These kingdoms are named after their capital. But actually, Sri Lanka was historically known by names such as 'Sinhala', 'Lanka', 'Thambapanni', etc. Inscriptions of kings and chronicles mostly use 'Sinhala' or 'Lanka'. Also Indian and Chinese sources call Sri Lanka by those names.
Persians and Arabs called 'Hindustan' and 'Hind' to India. But They called Sri Lanka as 'Saheelan' and 'Serendib'. Greeks called India as 'Indica'. But They called Sri Lanka as 'Taprobane'. So, Sri Lanka was always an independent nation.
Pakistan and Bangladesh probably can join India since they have a common history. India, Bangladesh and Eastern part of Pakistan were parts of same empires like Mauryan, Gupta, Delhi Sultanate, Mughals, British Raj, etc.
But other South Asian countries Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Maldives were independent countries in their history. So, We don't want to join India. If We do so, We will become traitors to our country and also to our ancient kings and ancestors who fought for keep sovereignity of our country.
I love my country uniqueness
And why the Bahamas isn't part of USA?
I'm curious, because I hardly know much about the Carribbean geography much, but, why do you came up with this question? Is there a history where Bahamas almost became a part of the US, like Puerto Rico?
@@SiPakRubah yes, in the XIX century, the USA argued for anexation of Cuba and Puerto Rico, as part of your security strategy in the region. But, the Bahamas, whit the same language and geographic proximity, no. Not even one offer to buying the islands.
@@igorhenrique6362 Thanks for the explanation
Also, I ain't from the states tho, but thanks still
Because, it was never part of India, Indian als blame British for the partition. But they should thank Britain, India's current area how they got, because of British Raj.if it was like before, India wouldn't be like this big........
The concept of india was created by British. So yea. Current indians should thanks to British.
@@jackgoodnight22 Not all but significant chunk of indians belive that from iran to philipines belongs to historical indian vikramaditya empire and should be a theocratic united India and one nations
And u think indians will accept that current indian nationalism is british inherited
@@Sirajmahir LMAO. That was a early legends and it's not happen in the real life in the past history. Google search and ask chatgpt. Stop the wet dream.
@@Sirajmahir Legends surrounding Vikramaditya are contradictory, border on the fantastic and are inconsistent with historical facts; no epigraphic, numismatic or literary evidence suggests the existence of a king with the name (or title) of Vikramaditya around the first century BCE.
We had empires you fool. Better read history 😂
Sri Lanka (Ceylon) is an independent country ❤
Your map has a typo - it’s Maratha not Martha
I can speak English, Mandarin, Korean, Japanese, and a little French. If a county was established on culture, ethnic groups and beliefs, countries were going to be the size of Belgium. China, India, Russia and the US are both massive countries with territory and diverse culture. For example, there are nearly 100 different ethnic groups in Russia where people speak common language, Russia, but also speak their own languages to their family members. In China, there is also "Korean Chinese", "Russian Chinese" in its east part. Furthermore, the western part of China shared muslim as the middle Asia. This is also same for India, the northern India and the southern India are different in separate two linguistic groups. The west part is the place for Sikhism.
ironically, belgium is multiethnic country.
If every ethnic group in Russia gained independence in the areas where they are a majority, Russia would still be the largest country on earth
@@rizkyadiyanto7922 Absolutely right, the best answer must be tribes. 🤣
Sri Lanka vs India... Totally Different.. even in the trusts and believes..
Support Sri Lanka from China!!
Tamils already from Tamilnadu .Tamils never part of Sri Lanka History until 1505. Only westerners bring Tamils from India against Sinhales. I know you disagry with this pure trueth but it is the History .
Wickramasinghe, maybe you carry on a South Indian Tamil lineage more than the so-called "Tamils" of Sri Lanka ! Don't forget Kandy and in fact most Sinhalas kingdom close connection and enduring relation with Madurapattuna !
India is a British creation Sri Lanka was a sinhalese nation state even since 5th century BCE
The north of sri Lanka has always been #TamilElam ..google is available
@@cameronpillay8050Who are the tamils??? Is it that south indian group who wishes to have an independent country???😂😂😂
@cameronpillay8050 Nahhhh you tried but we typically had reign over it. It was only during that shitty period I believe post 1300s we never managed to get the North back either due to it being a vassal of a stronger mainland Indian power or Europeans.
Regardless that's the past surely we should not be narrow-minded and move past our history and focus on unity for the betterment of all as we all are Sri Lankan. We shouldn't let these corrupt bastards at the top divide us. Its saddening to think all that we could've achieved had we united like the UK and started an empire we were perfectly placed for it🫠
@@user-rr5mq4em5w yes Tamils are Indians only they love our India. Not you
This land is always called as India. Mughal Empire called this land as Hindustan. Even if British didn't invaded India. It would be Mughal or Maratha India who alredy unify maximum parts.
Im from sri lanka and i ❤️ india, pakistan and nepal ❤️❤️
Paradise on earth 🌎 🇱🇰❤
India is a british creation where as Sri lanka is a nation state of sinhalese people even the word ceylon derived from sinhale which means land of sinhalese
yes
So why was Columbus searching for India in 1492 CE ??
@@indiafirst3676 india was the overall name used to describe the area like europe. Are people of manipur meghlaya same as tamilnadu or karnataka that is why india is a british creation
@@Average_Coder-xy8qx India roughly translates to all the Hindu majority areas in the subcontinent. Indians (in Greek) & Hindus (in Persian) both referred to people living to the East of the Indus River. But later the word "Hindu" came to represent all Dharmic religions which have their roots from the Vedic religion (Jainism, Buddhism & Sikhism). So oversimplified both Manipur & Karnataka are part of India since both of them are Hindu majority states. But of course there are many more indicators to India rather than only religion : Indo-Aryan/Dravidian languages, Brahmi script, Saree (women clothing), Hindustani/Carnatic music and so on
@@indiafirst3676 meghlaya ? nagaland?
Sri Lankans are stronger than Indians.
In begging in front of imf.
@@ShivanshThakur-sh8ub they have toilets in Sri Lanka okay!
@@ahassan5 and so does india, infact the oldest flush toilets are found in india. So if you were trying to troll me know that you failed. lol
@@ShivanshThakur-sh8ub I know Sri Lanka has toilets but I don't know about India
@@ahassan5 if you dont know a country of 1.4 billion have toilets or not then there is something wrong with your brain
I don't want to see any indians claiming SL to be a part of india ever. Its not that we hate india or anything. As a country we were independent like ever and has our own history and customs
Did you know for a brief period, part of India was under Sri Lankan rule during the period of Parakramabahu 1 and Kotte Kingdom.
The title should be - Why India is not a part of Sri Lanka?
Let me see how much hate comment will I get from the dhotis!!😂😂😂
You are dhotis
Call names, then talk about hate comment, the irony.
Also noone gives a F about your country.
Before portuguese came , those Costal places were filled with sinhalese villages it was a part of kingdom of kandy, 90% of socalled sri lankan tamil was Brought here by portuguese , dutch , british to costal aria to work as slave workers time to time from india, for various slave purposes (before they were lower cast tamils in india , sakkiliyar, roddi,.. etc , who later became suicide attackers and were forced to do so by upper cast tamils ) after the massacred of those costal living sinhalese by colonizers then immediately sinhalese villages became tamil villages , after ponnambalam ramathan (also migrated from south india and who didn' t even knew much about ceylon
people or culture and british gave him higher possession in government than sinhalese becouse sinhalese were alway fighting for freedom against the british ) became registar general changed those indian tamils
Identity as a ceylon tamils and nowadays they says they are oldest here , my advice you to read old ceylon gazettes and what was did by
Ponnambalam ramathan and arunachalem🧐 and read old portuguese , dutch colonial records
26 years of civil war was created by british , dutch and portuguese 500 years of colonialism and their slave labours outnumbered native people and disenfranchised the identity of vanni and north-eastern coastal living sinhalese.
Didnt shinhalese came from East indian coastal (bengal and odissha) &( Barishal Bangladesh)?
Like 2500 years ago
@@SirajmahirYou are talking about the Language, Art, etc. only 700 people came from odissa 2500 years ago, and all of them were captured by the Sinhalese. how many people must have been there in the Mannar area alone to capture 700 men?
@@Sirajmahir Those are mythological stories created due to Indocentrism. Cambodians, Thai and various other mainland Southeast Asian groups have mythological stories like the Sinhalese have in which they claim they are also descendants of a prince from India. Due to the greatness of India in the ancient era, people wanted to claim association with India. A modern DNA test however paints a different picture. The average Sinhalese is mostly a mix of AASI, Neolithic Farmer and a small bit of Southeast Asian ancestry. The Sinhalese formed in Sri Lanka in which indigenous groups mixed with an Odia-related migrant group in addition to other groups. If the Sinhalese were truly from Odisha or Bengal, then the Sinhalese would not be genetically closest to Sri Lankan Tamils.
@@Sirajmahir It is a mythical genesis story. how can a 700 ppl capture a country
@@udithnuren6546
Sinhalese have been living in this island for more than 2600 years unbroken with
having inter marriage with "vaddas"
Even today sinhalese language have
many vadda language words ( ex: "ඇත්තො" , "ඇ" word from "vadda language" and only language with having word "ඇ" in the entire world and many more relations,...)
Sinhalese built the Civilization
In this land ..so sinhalese have every rights to claim the country than any other colonial slave migraters who brought by british , portuguese,.. were lower cust tamils from india, muslims , as their slave works as they have beed alway treated in india ,
Sinhalese fought against all those foreign invaders to protect this land
By sacrificing their lives , familys ,... everything they had,
More than anyone had ever done on this land 🙏
Good video
Dude, Sri Lanka is a seperate country. It has been around for a long time. Independent and proud.
Sinhalese have been living in this island for more than 2600 years unbroken with
having inter marriage with "vaddas"
Even today sinhalese language have
many vadda language words ( ex: "ඇත්තො" , "ඇ" word from "vadda language" and only language with having word "ඇ" in the entire world and many more relations,...)
Sinhalese built the Civilization
In this land ..so sinhalese have every rights to claim the country than any other colonial slave migraters who brought by british , portuguese,.. were lower cust tamils from india, muslims , as their slave works as they have beed alway treated in india ,
Sinhalese fought against all those foreign invaders to protect this land
By sacrificing their lives , familys ,... everything they had,
More than anyone had ever done on
this land 🙏
🤣 Sinhalese are invaders came into the Island with 700 thieves from Orrisa, India!
Hi, the specific vadda word which you have written here, how is it pronounced.
Can you write it in English here?
# visitsrilanka
❤ from 🇱🇰 (Sri Lanka)
Your garbage not for nature.
# Protect Land and Sea of Sri Lanka #
8:05 - - What is shown on map is not correct, for that moment in time. When "British" India seceded into independent states, it was not "Pakistan" and "Bangladesh", it was only "Pakistan", with West Pakistan (Pakistan of today) and East Pakistan (Bangladesh). About ten years later, that country seceded into Pakistan and Bangladesh, after the latter wanted to be independent and survived a landing of a Pakistani army (from so-called West Pakistan), because it was helped by the Indian Army.
For the same reason Taiwan isn't part of China!😊
taiwan island government called ROC. This is why education is important. whatsapp student.
Taiwan is literally China from the Chinese civil war. it's as stupid as saying the same reason North Korea isn't a part of south korea. sri lanka was not made out of civil war with India.
Are you saying Sri Lanka used to be the government of China, until there was a revolution and they were pushed out to Sri Lanka? What?
You should make a video why Nepal and Bhutan were not the part of India.
Even if your dream is 1000 years away, it will be just a dream. 🇱🇰🇱🇰🇱🇰💪
Majority of the Sri Lankans speak Sinhalese language which only exists in Sri Lanka. They have their own culture and traditions in the island. So, they would never be a part of India.
Excuse me!! Sri Lankan was never a part of India..it will not happen in future..we are only Sri Lankan 🇱🇰
As Indian 🇮🇳 , we always respect sovereignty of Sri Lanka 🇱🇰
No state of india was a part of india befor 1947
Yes that's what they say in the video, at least watch before you comment. Peace! ✌
This is completely wrong message and Sri Lanka is not belong to India; SL has own cultural and language which doesn’t excite in India. We respect our own minorities whose move from Indian Tamil.
You should comment after you’ve watched the video.
Ceylon or Sri Lanka never been part of India. Sri Lanka is a free and beautiful country
Great report with true facts
Dear Sri Lankans, you are better off without us. Sri Lanka have very less crime, cities are good. Very good healthcare ( I heard). Take advantage of your geography. Just stop your ethnic conflicts.
Hi friend,as an Interracial person has English,Sri Lankan and Indian through my ancestries,almost all of your sentences are ever correct except for the last sentence!!!The number of the ethnic conflicts in Sri Lanka are far lesser than that in India by the way,friend!!!😁
@@depekthegreat359 you can't ignore the bloody past. War is the reason Sri Lanka came under so much dept. You have army of 2L which is almost 1% of entire population which means atleast 4-5% population directly rely on army for revenue. India on the other hand has army of 2.5m ( regular+ reserve) less than 0.2% and except some parts very peaceful overall. So I think it's wrong to compare ethnic conflicts in India and Sri Lanka. India got over 26/11 very quickly on the other hand Sri Lanka still facing aftermath of Easter bombing. Small size has it's benefits and disadvantage as well.
@@depekthegreat359india can sustain its ethnic conflicts unlike Sri Lanka ...
For india...ethnic conflicts is like a cultural...it is normal thing for us 😂
@@james4807MLol!!!Of course,I do not but at least,the nation is reeling from the past incidents which included what you have mentioned and slowly stabilising the economy of the nation,friend!!!At least,a small nation like Sri Lanka rely on a controlled population to develop slowly with a limited army and of course,being a peaceful nation as well!!!So,you can compare the ethnic conflicts between Sri Lanka and my other official nation India where you can see a massive number of them happening to the later than the former,friend!!!😁
@@durgeshsssAlmost daily,I would hear the ethnic conflicts in India more than in Sri Lanka through radio and I read the articles which are related to this topic through social media which of course,unsustainable,friend!!!😁
Tamil as shown in this video is not a historical community in Sri Lanka. In fact, a community called Tamil is a colonial creation. Because ancient Indians did not have linguistic identities but caste identities. Only the Europeans brought linguistic identities to this part of the world. Thanks to british orientalism a community with a linguistic identity called Tamil was created out of disparate caste groups with a mythical history narrative.
Therefore Sinhalese and Tamils disagree about the history of the island. And that is the cause of the Sri Lankan conflict.
Shitalese came from Bangladesh 🤡🔫
So true...
Also the British created the "Sri Lankan Malay" community by merging the Javanese, Ambonese, Balinese and Malays of Sri Lanka together because they all spoke Batavian Malay which later became Sri Lankan Malay. The British couldn't tell the difference between each of the groups. As a result, most people have no idea there are Sri Lankan "Malays" who are actually Christian because they are Ambonese and not Malay Muslim.
Before portuguese came , those Costal places were filled with sinhalese villages it was a part of kingdom of kandy, 90% of socalled sri lankan tamil was Brought here by portuguese , dutch , british to costal aria to work as slave workers time to time from india, for various slave purposes (before they were lower cast tamils in india , sakkiliyar, roddi,.. etc , who later became suicide attackers and were forced to do so by upper cast tamils ) after the massacred of those costal living sinhalese by colonizers then immediately sinhalese villages became tamil villages , after ponnambalam ramathan (also migrated from south india and who didn' t even knew much about ceylon
people or culture and british gave him higher possession in government than sinhalese becouse sinhalese were alway fighting for freedom against the british ) became registar general changed those indian tamils
Identity as a ceylon tamils and nowadays they says they are oldest here , it was recorded in old ceylon gazettes and what was did by
Ponnambalam ramathan and arunachalem🧐 and read old portuguese , dutch colonial records
26 years of civil war was created by british , dutch and portuguese 500 years of colonialism and their slave labours outnumbered native people and disenfranchised the identity of vanni and north-eastern coastal living sinhalese.
No Sri Lankan Tamils are the decendants of Cholas who invaded Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka isn't part of India primarily because of its distinct cultural, historical, and political identity. Despite geographical proximity and historical connections, Sri Lanka has maintained its independence as a separate nation. Factors such as colonial history, ethnic composition, and geopolitical considerations have also contributed to Sri Lanka's status as a sovereign state separate from India. 🇱🇰
Because we are a real nation, we have real history, and lion generation since KING RAAVANA
If u know change MAP official map includes PAK in it 😁 lol just joking great video 🌞
BTW THIS WAS originally INDIA 6:53😭🥲
@@GingleSpherethat is hindu extremists imagination wet dream. Never happen in past history. Keep dreaming.😊
its like why france isnt part of uklmao!!!!!!
More like why isn't Portugal part of Spain, when both were at one time controlled by the romans.
The main reason is all the sri lankan royal families from last 2500 years linked with Indiyan Royals. like Royals of Mauryan(most of Anuradhapura kings), Kalinga(Polonnaruwa), Lambakarana, Pandya, Nayakkar(Thelingu),..and many invasion was done by south and east Indians but no one could colonized the whole country. Sri lankan royala always tried to maintain Friendship with South Indian royals. and had royal marriage between...
Sri Lanka is a separate country from India due to historical, cultural, and geographical reasons. It has its own distinct identity, language, and traditions. While the two nations share some cultural similarities and historical connections, Sri Lanka has its own sovereignty and governance separate from India.as a Sri Lankan we all ways love our Independence
Short Answer: Sri Lanka came from Austronesia (according to me, not him)
Only a small portion of the Sri Lankan population is of full "Austronesian" origin and can speak an Austronesian language, Sri Lankan Malay historians say a larger portion has partial Malay ancestry but no coherent genetic study has been done yet. However, the cultural impact of the "Austronesians" (Malays and Javanese to be specific) on Sri Lanka as a whole is far greater. They contributed a lot to the development of Sri Lankan culture. Sri Lankan culture would be very different if Austronesians never settled in Sri Lanka. I have some Malay ancestry, so I acknowledge the significance of Austronesia.
@@user-jt3dw6vv4x oh okay, thank you for explaining
Why? Because we don't want it.
O chal nikal, don't want it ka bacha! Le ke to dikhaa, wo lanka dhaen gey Tum Tamil se bhi jao gey! 😅
@@user-xj6sk8cx9ccome out of bubble brother.. We don't want to annex an friendly neighbor because we respect their sovereignty as an independent nation
Why is that the case? I'm out of the loop on this one.
@@AnkitYadav-rj8mlAs a Srilankan it is nice to see comments of an educated Indians. Some comments from Indians here are sadening to see.
@@hiran4935same here as a Sri Lankan i came here to check on how our indians comrades comment on this video about our country, some are hilarious per se.😅
this is like "Why isnt South Korea under Kim Jong Un"
Why India isn't a part of Nepal?