Don’t Think There Was a Concept of India Till the British Gave it One : Saif Ali Khan

[suyog chavan]

Saif, in an interview, said, “I don’t think there was a concept of India till perhaps the British gave it one.”
Mumbai| Actor Saif Ali Khan is currently enjoying the success of his recent film ‘Tanhaji: The Unsung Warrior’. While his movie is all set to cross 150 crore mark, he sparked controversy with his comment in an interview. In a clip that outraged netizens, Saif can be seen saying in reference to Tanhaji, “I don’t think this is history.” The actor further added, “I don’t think there was a concept of India till the British gave it one.”

After Saif’s comment, he is being trolled on the internet. Taimur, his son’s name started trending on social media after the video surfaced on the internet.

Talking about politics around Tanhaji and how he didn’t oppose distortion of history in the film, Saif added, “For some reason I didn’t take a stand. Maybe next time I would. I was very excited to play the role because it’s a delicious role. But when people say this is history, I don’t think this is history. I am quite aware of what the history was.”

He went on to say, “I don’t think there was a concept of India till perhaps the British gave it one. I don’t think there is really any constructive point in arguing about loudly, provided you yourself know why you’re doing it.”

Filmmaker Vivek Agnihotri reacted to Saif’s statement by addressing him as a ‘duffer student’.

https://hwnews.in/news/politics/sai...nk-concept-india-till-british-gave-one/123660

yeah yeah
british just translated bharat into india

 

[hussain0216]

yeah yeah
british just translated bharat into india

Bharat is no different to Africa

 

[suyog chavan]

Bharat is no different to Africa

you were too included in bharat before british came

Bharat is no different to Africa

and wasnt hindustan a concept during mughals regime ?

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

Believe I have posted these maps before, but will post again since they are relevant to discussion and have not been refuted.

They sure look a lot like modern India

View attachment 601232 View attachment 601232

Based on Plutarch's evidence, historians state Chandragupta Maurya belonged to the Ashvaka (q.v.) or Assakenoi clan of Swat/Kunar valley (modern Mer-coh or Koh-I-Mor — the Meros of the classical writings).

 

[hussain0216]

you were too included in bharat before british came


and wasnt hindustan a concept during mughals regime ?

Bharat is no different to saying Africa, Asia or the Mediterranean

There was no state, no country, no one flag

Just different people, different cultures who shared some commonality because of close proximity
No different to Africa and Africans
At different times different empires conquered different people and areas

and wasnt hindustan a concept during mughals regime ?

First it was the mughal empire, then the British where idea of one unified India was formed




It is revisionist history by hindutva extremists trying to make up all this bullshit and using obscure crap to prove a point that is making the obvious into a joke

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

I quoted the exact thing you posted, neither added nor removed any content. So where is the cherry picking? You seem to take offence to what I posted. Is it wrong that they scaled great heights due to their hardwork and their skills? So why take offence?


No genocide of Buddhists?? Really... Refer this thread and stop living in denial

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/budd...in-the-land-of-its-birth.509885/#post-9721952

Ok tell me if Hindus wanted to obliterate Buddhists, why did some Hindus consider Lord Buddha as another avatar of Lord Vishnu.
Shouldn't Hindus be hating Buddhism?
And I know about Mihirakula and Pushyamitra Shunga who persecuted Buddhists. But there was no genocide of Buddhists. In fact, kings gave patronage to both Hindus and Buddhists. Look at Nepal and Thailand. It's a syncretism of Hinduism and Buddhism. There is no enmity between Dharmic faiths. The same with Jainism as well.
And whatever persecution there was against Buddhism, I fully condemn it. I don't see Muslims condemning persecution of Hindus. I am a Hindu and I hold Lord Buddha in high standard. Have never even heard of Hindus being taught to hate Buddhists.

Also regarding SRK, you totally ignored my other comments where I clearly mentioned SRK is where he is because of his hard work and just picked my comment where I had failed to mention that. I'm not taking offence, I'm just amused at the cherry picking by you.

Look at my comment on page 2 of this thread.

 

[W.11]

hindustvas dont even know the importance of nanda empire or mahapadma nanda, probably first pan indian empire which stretched all the way to karnataka, mysore and not only reserved at godavari river. these empires were also not ''hindu empires, as major religion propagated by them was buddhism/jainism, they were also based in bihar, and one indian politician/most probably hindutva talked about exchanging bihar with pakistani kashmir.

so pan hindutvaism doesnt do beyond rants etc

regards

 

[The_Showstopper]

Ok tell me if Hindus wanted to obliterate Buddhists, why did some Hindus consider Lord Buddha as another avatar of Lord Vishnu.
Shouldn't Hindus be hating Buddhism?
And I know about Mihirakula and Pushyamitra Shunga who persecuted Buddhists. But there was no genocide of Buddhists. In fact, kings gave patronage to both Hindus and Buddhists. Look at Nepal and Thailand. It's a syncretism of Hinduism and Buddhism. There is no enmity between Dharmic faiths. The same with Jainism as well.
And whatever persecution there was against Buddhism, I fully condemn it. I don't see Muslims condemning persecution of Hindus. I am a Hindu and I hold Lord Buddha in high standard. Have never even heard of Hindus being taught to hate Buddhists.

LOL... You guys hate your own Dalits, forget about other religions. I've posted credible sources which show how Hindu violent onslaught annihilated the Buddhists. Yet, you want to live in denial. Then its up to you...

Your lot moan about few hundred deaths of Kashmiri pandits and call it genocide but you are not even willing to accept the numerous massacres of Buddhists by many hindu kings as genocide. Wow, hypocrisy much...

There are numerous instances of Dharmics fighting out each other violently. So let's not even get into that...

Also regarding SRK, you totally ignored my other comments where I clearly mentioned SRK is where he is because of his hard work and just picked my comment where I had failed to mention that. I'm not taking offence, I'm just amused at the cherry picking by you.

Look at my comment on page 2 of this thread.

I responded to your comment on 1st page so what makes you believe that I must have seen your post in second page. Is it not self-explanatory? 1st page comes first, second comes later. Not the other way round. So your assumptions are illogical and make no sense...

 

[Minho]

Based on Plutarch's evidence, historians state Chandragupta Maurya belonged to the Ashvaka (q.v.) or Assakenoi clan of Swat/Kunar valley (modern Mer-coh or Koh-I-Mor — the Meros of the classical writings).

Can you please show me that "evidence" Megesthenes specificallly described the Mauryan capital as Patiliputra, modern Patna. Maurya is also a common caste in Northern India.

I have heard some fringe theories claiming that Chandragupta was actually from Iran, but this is new to me.

hindustvas dont even know the importance of nanda empire or mahapadma nanda, probably first pan indian empire which stretched all the way to karnataka, mysore and not only reserved at godavari river. these empires were also not ''hindu empires, as major religion propagated by them was buddhism/jainism, they were also based in bihar, and one indian politician/most probably hindutva talked about exchanging bihar with pakistani kashmir.

so pan hindutvaism doesnt do beyond rants etc

regards

I know very well the importance of the Nanda Empire

 

[suyog chavan]

Bharat is no different to saying Africa, Asia or the Mediterranean

There was no state, no country, no one flag

Just different people, different cultures who shared some commonality because of close proximity
No different to Africa and Africans
At different times different empires conquered different people and areas



First it was the mughal empire, then the British where idea of one unified India was formed




It is revisionist history by hindutva extremists trying to make up all this bullshit and using obscure crap to prove a point that is making the obvious into a joke

werent most part of india today because of maratha confederacy,
which led the true idea of unified india rather than the mughals who were busy enjoying royal life and which led to their downfall by the hands of marathas .
and then the british came with just wanna do bussiness card.i.e modern day bangladesh

 

[Minho]

werent most part of india today because of maratha confederacy,
which led the true idea of unified india rather than the mughals who were busy enjoying royal life and which led to their downfall by the hands of marathas .
and them the british came with just wanna do bussiness card

No use trying to reason with him, he will reject any challenges to his false, historically inaccurate narrative.

 

[suyog chavan]

No use trying to reason with him, he will reject any challenges to his false, historically inaccurate narrative.

I wonder from where do this actors like saif ali khan learn history?
was it from a pataudi servant in the house of nawabs.
even his statement corresponds when his forefathers sided with british in second anglo-maratha war.

 

[AmschelHonestvig]

I'll just leave these images as food for thought:

You Disprove your own claim .

The Marathians claim to be a seperate race and from information speaking to some of them they will not tolerate another language in their Bombay state.

If this is so Babur and xixinping are also Sindians ?

 

[suyog chavan]

You Disprove your own claim .

The Marathians claim to be a seperate race and from information speaking to some of them they will not tolerate another language in their Bombay state.

If this is so Babur and xixinping are also Sindians ?

as per my knowledge marathas are stubborn nationalists .
RSS and nationalists movements were mostly started either by marathis or from maharastra.

 

[Minho]

as per my knowledge marathas are stubborn nationalists .
RSS and nationalists movements were mostly started either by marathis or from maharastra.

Maratis have always been proud of their rich heritage, but also believe in the thousand year old idea of a unified Dharmic State encompassing most of South Asia.


That guy must be taking some pretty serious meds, to say the least.