Latest news with #JohnGilchrist
Indian Express
5 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Far before the Language debate, Nathaniel Halhed's 18th-century views shaped the Hindi-Urdu divide
During the colonial past, much had been written about the Hindi-Urdu divide and its cultural fissures. Most accounts trace the origins of this linguistic-political rupture to the mid-19th century, when debates over script, vocabulary, and education began to mirror the sharpening communal distinctions between Hindus and Muslims. Colonial administrators such as John Gilchrist and missionaries like Samuel H Kellogg are often seen as pivotal in solidifying these divisions. However, few recall that the conceptual groundwork for this divide was laid earlier by a British Orientalist scholar, Nathaniel Brassey Halhed. Though better known for his pioneering work on Bengali grammar and his role in translating Hindu legal codes, Halhed's lesser-known remarks on Hindustani, found in his Grammar of the Bengali Language (1778), strikingly reveal early insights that cast language in communal terms. He was perhaps the first colonial figure to construct a narrative in which script, vocabulary, and linguistic purity became closely aligned with religious identity. Long before intensive language politics emerged in North India, Halhed had already begun imagining a Hindu-Muslim linguistic binary, which later generations of colonial and indigenous thinkers would inherit, refine, and politicise. Halhed claimed that, prior to the Muslim conquests, there existed a vernacular he called 'Hindostanic,' which had evolved from Sanskrit and was written in the Nagari script. This language, he believed, had been spoken widely across 'proper Hindostan' and served as the everyday speech of the Hindu population. Drawing on European parallels, he likened Hindostanic's relationship to Sanskrit to that between modern French or Italian and classical Latin, suggesting that although it was a vernacular form, it retained the core grammatical structure of its ancient source. According to Halhed, this linguistic equilibrium was disrupted by the arrival of Muslim rulers, who introduced Persian and Arabic words into the local dialect. These rulers, he argued, needed a practical means of communicating with their Hindu subjects but found Sanskritic terminology too complex and unfamiliar. As a result, they substituted indigenous words with foreign ones, and over time, this gave rise to a hybrid language that Halhed referred to as the 'Moorish,' a vernacular written in the Persian script and spoken primarily by Muslims and Hindus associated with Muslim courts. What made Halhed's interpretation so significant was not just his attention to language change, but the value judgments he attached to these changes. He cast the Persianised vernacular as an adulterated offshoot of a once-pure linguistic tradition, and he portrayed those who adopted this hybrid idiom as having compromised their cultural integrity. In contrast, Brahmins and 'well-educated Gentoos,' who continued to speak what he viewed as the original form of 'Hindostanic', were presented as guardians of linguistic and moral authenticity. Halhed's narrative effectively produced a cultural hierarchy: On the one side, a pure, Sanskrit-derived language used by conservative Hindus; on the other, a hybrid vernacular shaped by foreign elements and aligned with Muslim rule. Though articulated within a philological context, his analysis represented the colonial tendency to essentialise and categorise Indian society along rigid religious and cultural lines. What appears at first as a minor aside in a grammar book was, in fact, a subtle but potent ideological intervention. Halhed's account also reveals something crucial about the intellectual foundations of colonial knowledge. He was writing at a time when there was no organised Hindi movement, no formal advocacy for Urdu, and no government policy privileging one script over another. Yet his description of linguistic contamination and preservation foreshadowed the very arguments that would later animate Hindi and Urdu partisans. He was writing in an intellectual climate shaped by the Orientalist project of recovering and codifying India's ancient heritage. Halhed's immediate influence on colonial language policy was limited, especially compared to the institutional legacy of figures like John Gilchrist. Yet his way of thinking about language endured. In 1868, the Banaras-based advocate of Hindi, Shiv Prasad, also known as 'Sitar-e-Hind', submitted a memorandum to the colonial government arguing that Hindi, written in the Nagari script and rooted in Sanskrit, was the authentic language of the Hindu people. Like Halhed, he suggested that Urdu was a product of foreign rule and therefore lacked historical legitimacy for Hindus. This notion would gain further traction in the late 19th century, as Hindi became a central symbol for Hindu reformers and nationalists in the United Provinces. To recover Halhed's role is not just to adjust the timeline of language history. It invites us to rethink the genealogy of linguistic communalism in India. Far too often, the Hindi-Urdu divide is portrayed as a mid-19th century phenomenon, emerging from immediate political and administrative concerns. But Halhed reminds us that the impulse to read language through the lens of religion and cultural hierarchy began much earlier. His writing also exposes the deeper logic of colonial knowledge production. Grammar books, dictionaries, and linguistic surveys may appear to be technical or apolitical, but they are often steeped in implicit assumptions about culture, identity, and legitimacy. Halhed's treatment of 'Hindostanic' and the 'Moors' dialect' reveals how linguistic description could become a vehicle for ideological encoding. Long before language became a battleground, Halhed had already drawn the lines. The writer teaches History at Bharati College, University of Delhi
National Observer
08-07-2025
- Health
- National Observer
Advocacy group calls court battle over psilocybin-assisted therapy a turning point
A non-profit group that advocates for access to therapy using psychedelic drugs has won a legal battle in a years-long fight with Health Canada — one the organization believes is far from over. "There's an obvious societal turning point here, one where the public, for sure, clinicians and certainly parts of the government are waking up to the reality that psychedelics work," said John Gilchrist, director of communications for Therapsil. Therapsil obtained exemptions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 2020 that allowed 19 health-care workers to undergo experiential training that involved taking mushrooms containing psilocybin, also known as magic mushrooms. In 2022, Therapsil applied for exemptions for 93 more health-care workers as it worked to expand access to psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy. Health Canada denied the application. The case made its way late last fall to the Federal Court of Appeal, which ruled in June that the health minister failed to provide justification for refusing the second round of exemptions. The court ordered the government to make a new decision. The panel of three judges wrote that "the shift in policy between 2020 and 2022 and the minister's appreciation of the relevant factors are significant, if not abrupt, and call for some explanation." Gilchrist said the group is prepared to keep fighting in court if necessary. "People are clamouring to use psychedelics and many Canadians are just doing them in the quote-unquote underground," he said, noting that, along with dozens of online retailers, there are brick-and-mortar stores in many cities selling magic mushrooms. "So it means the patients will go underground, try to solicit the support of practitioners to do psychedelics outside of the scope of (Health Canada's special access program). Or they'll just do it by themselves, which we really, really do not want. And surely Health Canada does not want that either." Health Canada has approved more than 300 exemptions in recent years to allow people to undergo psilocybin-assisted therapy. This form of therapy is being studied in Canada for use in end-of-life care and for treating some mental health conditions, including treatment-resistant depression and substance use disorder. Therapsil believes experiencing the effects of the drug is essential to ensuring their health-care providers can guide people through the experience. A spokesperson for Health Minister Marjorie Michel did not respond to questions about whether the minister has made a new determination in the case or if the government plans to appeal. A spokesperson for Health Canada said in an emailed statement that the decision to grant an exemption "is based on sufficient evidence to support the requested use, including the drug information available to the (special access program) at the time of the request, as well as evidence of how it would benefit the patient based on their clinical history." Gilchrist said the ongoing legal fight has parallels to the legalization of medical cannabis. "First came patients, then came doctors, and then it's courts and then eventually the government just has to cave to this," he said. Canada was one of the first countries to legalize medical cannabis in 2001. Health Canada began granting exemptions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 1999. The industry was tightly regulated, with restrictions on what kind of products could be used and who could grow them. Patients who wanted to use medical cannabis pushed the courts to expand access. A 2015 Supreme Court decision found that it was unconstitutional to only allow patients to access dried cannabis. A 2016 Federal Court case struck down rules limiting access to licensed producers, and led to a new framework allowing people to produce their own cannabis. Former prime minister Justin Trudeau's government made cannabis legal for recreational use in the fall of 2018. Eugene Oscapella, a lawyer who teaches drug policy at the University of Ottawa, said there's been a shift in government policy toward drugs like psilocybin over the last 15 years. He applauded the role that researchers — including those at the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies in the US — have played in making that change happen. "I think what we're seeing now is an increasing willingness to look at other substances that have been, and I use this word deliberately, demonized over the decades as being illegal and dangerous and harmful," he said. Oscapella was part of the coalition that first applied for medical access to cannabis in 1997 and said that was a sort of precursor to the discussion happening now with psychedelics. "The societal goal should be to look at the potential benefits. How do we maximize the potential benefit of access to these substances while minimizing the potential harms?" he said. Therapsil says it has a growing wait-list — for both prospective patients hoping to try psilocybin-assisted therapy and health-care providers hoping to get training. Gilchrist said the court case is "more than a lawsuit for us." "This case is about, is Canada willing to support a safe, legal, and compassionate pathway forward to psychedelic therapy, which is scientifically and ethically backed?" he said.
Global News
08-07-2025
- Health
- Global News
Federal court ruling on psilocybin training a turning point: advocacy group
A non-profit group that advocates for access to therapy using psychedelic drugs has won a legal battle in a years-long fight with Health Canada — one the organization believes is far from over. 'There's an obvious societal turning point here, one where the public, for sure, clinicians and certainly parts of the government are waking up to the reality that psychedelics work,' said John Gilchrist, director of communications for Therapsil. Therapsil obtained exemptions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 2020 that allowed 19 health-care workers to undergo experiential training that involved taking mushrooms containing psilocybin, also known as magic mushrooms. In 2022, Therapsil applied for exemptions for 93 more health-care workers as it worked to expand access to psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy. Health Canada denied the application. The case made its way late last fall to the Federal Court of Appeal, which ruled in June that the health minister failed to provide justification for refusing the second round of exemptions. The court ordered the government to make a new decision. Story continues below advertisement The panel of three judges wrote that 'the shift in policy between 2020 and 2022 and the minister's appreciation of the relevant factors are significant, if not abrupt, and call for some explanation.' Gilchrist said the group is prepared to keep fighting in court if necessary. 3:21 Can psychedelics combat alcohol abuse? University of Calgary launches groundbreaking trial 'People are clamouring to use psychedelics and many Canadians are just doing them in the quote-unquote underground,' he said, noting that, along with dozens of online retailers, there are brick-and-mortar stores in many cities selling magic mushrooms. Get daily National news Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy 'So it means the patients will go underground, try to solicit the support of practitioners to do psychedelics outside of the scope of (Health Canada's special access program). Or they'll just do it by themselves, which we really, really do not want. And surely Health Canada does not want that either.' Story continues below advertisement Health Canada has approved more than 300 exemptions in recent years to allow people to undergo psilocybin-assisted therapy. This form of therapy is being studied in Canada for use in end-of-life care and for treating some mental health conditions, including treatment-resistant depression and substance use disorder. Therapsil believes experiencing the effects of the drug is essential to ensuring their health-care providers can guide people through the experience. A spokesperson for Health Minister Marjorie Michel did not respond to questions about whether the minister has made a new determination in the case or if the government plans to appeal. A spokesperson for Health Canada said in an emailed statement that the decision to grant an exemption 'is based on sufficient evidence to support the requested use, including the drug information available to the (special access program) at the time of the request, as well as evidence of how it would benefit the patient based on their clinical history.' Gilchrist said the ongoing legal fight has parallels to the legalization of medical cannabis. 'First came patients, then came doctors, and then it's courts and then eventually the government just has to cave to this,' he said. Canada was one of the first countries to legalize medical cannabis in 2001. Health Canada began granting exemptions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 1999. Story continues below advertisement The industry was tightly regulated, with restrictions on what kind of products could be used and who could grow them. Patients who wanted to use medical cannabis pushed the courts to expand access. A 2015 Supreme Court decision found that it was unconstitutional to only allow patients to access dried cannabis. A 2016 Federal Court case struck down rules limiting access to licensed producers, and led to a new framework allowing people to produce their own cannabis. 4:52 Clinical study using Psilocybin to treat alcohol use disorder Former prime minister Justin Trudeau's government made cannabis legal for recreational use in the fall of 2018. Eugene Oscapella, a lawyer who teaches drug policy at the University of Ottawa, said there's been a shift in government policy toward drugs like psilocybin over the last 15 years. He applauded the role that researchers — including those at the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies in the U.S. — have played in making that change happen. Story continues below advertisement 'I think what we're seeing now is an increasing willingness to look at other substances that have been, and I use this word deliberately, demonized over the decades as being illegal and dangerous and harmful,' he said. Oscapella was part of the coalition that first applied for medical access to cannabis in 1997 and said that was a sort of precursor to the discussion happening now with psychedelics. 'The societal goal should be to look at the potential benefits. How do we maximize the potential benefit of access to these substances while minimizing the potential harms?' he said. Therapsil says it has a growing wait-list — for both prospective patients hoping to try psilocybin-assisted therapy and health-care providers hoping to get training. Gilchrist said the court case is 'more than a lawsuit for us.' 'This case is about, is Canada willing to support a safe, legal, and compassionate pathway forward to psychedelic therapy, which is scientifically and ethically backed?' he said.
CTV News
08-07-2025
- Health
- CTV News
Advocacy group says court battle over psilocybin-assisted therapy is a turning point
Gared Hansen shows psilocybin mushrooms that are ready for distribution in his Uptown Fungus lab in Springfield, Ore., on Monday, Aug. 14, 2023. (AP Photo/Craig Mitchelldyer) OTTAWA — A non-profit group that advocates for access to therapy using psychedelic drugs has won a legal battle in a years-long fight with Health Canada — one the organization believes is far from over. 'There's an obvious societal turning point here, one where the public, for sure, clinicians and certainly parts of the government are waking up to the reality that psychedelics work,' said John Gilchrist, director of communications for Therapsil. Therapsil obtained exemptions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 2020 that allowed 19 health-care workers to undergo experiential training that involved taking mushrooms containing psilocybin, also known as magic mushrooms. In 2022, Therapsil applied for exemptions for 93 more health-care workers as it worked to expand access to psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy. Health Canada denied the application. The case made its way late last fall to the Federal Court of Appeal, which ruled in June that the health minister failed to provide justification for refusing the second round of exemptions. The court ordered the government to make a new decision. The panel of three judges wrote that 'the shift in policy between 2020 and 2022 and the minister's appreciation of the relevant factors are significant, if not abrupt, and call for some explanation.' Gilchrist said the group is prepared to keep fighting in court if necessary. 'People are clamouring to use psychedelics and many Canadians are just doing them in the quote-unquote underground,' he said, noting that, along with dozens of online retailers, there are brick-and-mortar stores in many cities selling magic mushrooms. 'So it means the patients will go underground, try to solicit the support of practitioners to do psychedelics outside of the scope of (Health Canada's special access program). Or they'll just do it by themselves, which we really, really do not want. And surely Health Canada does not want that either.' Health Canada has approved more than 300 exemptions in recent years to allow people to undergo psilocybin-assisted therapy. This form of therapy is being studied in Canada for use in end-of-life care and for treating some mental health conditions, including treatment-resistant depression and substance use disorder. Therapsil believes experiencing the effects of the drug is essential to ensuring their health-care providers can guide people through the experience. A spokesperson for Health Minister Marjorie Michel did not respond to questions about whether the minister has made a new determination in the case or if the government plans to appeal. A spokesperson for Health Canada said in an emailed statement that the decision to grant an exemption 'is based on sufficient evidence to support the requested use, including the drug information available to the (special access program) at the time of the request, as well as evidence of how it would benefit the patient based on their clinical history.' Gilchrist said the ongoing legal fight has parallels to the legalization of medical cannabis. 'First came patients, then came doctors, and then it's courts and then eventually the government just has to cave to this,' he said. Canada was one of the first countries to legalize medical cannabis in 2001. Health Canada began granting exemptions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 1999. The industry was tightly regulated, with restrictions on what kind of products could be used and who could grow them. Patients who wanted to use medical cannabis pushed the courts to expand access. A 2015 Supreme Court decision found that it was unconstitutional to only allow patients to access dried cannabis. A 2016 Federal Court case struck down rules limiting access to licensed producers, and led to a new framework allowing people to produce their own cannabis. Former prime minister Justin Trudeau's government made cannabis legal for recreational use in the fall of 2018. Eugene Oscapella, a lawyer who teaches drug policy at the University of Ottawa, said there's been a shift in government policy toward drugs like psilocybin over the last 15 years. He applauded the role that researchers — including those at the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies in the U.S. — have played in making that change happen. 'I think what we're seeing now is an increasing willingness to look at other substances that have been, and I use this word deliberately, demonized over the decades as being illegal and dangerous and harmful,' he said. Oscapella was part of the coalition that first applied for medical access to cannabis in 1997 and said that was a sort of precursor to the discussion happening now with psychedelics. 'The societal goal should be to look at the potential benefits. How do we maximize the potential benefit of access to these substances while minimizing the potential harms?' he said. Therapsil says it has a growing wait-list — for both prospective patients hoping to try psilocybin-assisted therapy and health-care providers hoping to get training. Gilchrist said the court case is 'more than a lawsuit for us.' 'This case is about, is Canada willing to support a safe, legal, and compassionate pathway forward to psychedelic therapy, which is scientifically and ethically backed?' he said. This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 8, 2025. Sarah Ritchie, The Canadian Press
Hamilton Spectator
08-07-2025
- Health
- Hamilton Spectator
Advocacy group says court battle over psilocybin-assisted therapy is a turning point
OTTAWA - A non-profit group that advocates for access to therapy using psychedelic drugs has won a legal battle in a years-long fight with Health Canada — one the organization believes is far from over. 'There's an obvious societal turning point here, one where the public, for sure, clinicians and certainly parts of the government are waking up to the reality that psychedelics work,' said John Gilchrist, director of communications for Therapsil. Therapsil obtained exemptions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 2020 that allowed 19 health-care workers to undergo experiential training that involved taking mushrooms containing psilocybin, also known as magic mushrooms. In 2022, Therapsil applied for exemptions for 93 more health-care workers as it worked to expand access to psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy. Health Canada denied the application. The case made its way late last fall to the Federal Court of Appeal, which ruled in June that the health minister failed to provide justification for refusing the second round of exemptions. The court ordered the government to make a new decision. The panel of three judges wrote that 'the shift in policy between 2020 and 2022 and the minister's appreciation of the relevant factors are significant, if not abrupt, and call for some explanation.' Gilchrist said the group is prepared to keep fighting in court if necessary. 'People are clamouring to use psychedelics and many Canadians are just doing them in the quote-unquote underground,' he said, noting that, along with dozens of online retailers, there are brick-and-mortar stores in many cities selling magic mushrooms. 'So it means the patients will go underground, try to solicit the support of practitioners to do psychedelics outside of the scope of (Health Canada's special access program). Or they'll just do it by themselves, which we really, really do not want. And surely Health Canada does not want that either.' Health Canada has approved more than 300 exemptions in recent years to allow people to undergo psilocybin-assisted therapy. This form of therapy is being studied in Canada for use in end-of-life care and for treating some mental health conditions, including treatment-resistant depression and substance use disorder. Therapsil believes experiencing the effects of the drug is essential to ensuring their health-care providers can guide people through the experience. A spokesperson for Health Minister Marjorie Michel did not respond to questions about whether the minister has made a new determination in the case or if the government plans to appeal. A spokesperson for Health Canada said in an emailed statement that the decision to grant an exemption 'is based on sufficient evidence to support the requested use, including the drug information available to the (special access program) at the time of the request, as well as evidence of how it would benefit the patient based on their clinical history.' Gilchrist said the ongoing legal fight has parallels to the legalization of medical cannabis. 'First came patients, then came doctors, and then it's courts and then eventually the government just has to cave to this,' he said. Canada was one of the first countries to legalize medical cannabis in 2001. Health Canada began granting exemptions under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 1999. The industry was tightly regulated, with restrictions on what kind of products could be used and who could grow them. Patients who wanted to use medical cannabis pushed the courts to expand access. A 2015 Supreme Court decision found that it was unconstitutional to only allow patients to access dried cannabis. A 2016 Federal Court case struck down rules limiting access to licensed producers, and led to a new framework allowing people to produce their own cannabis. Former prime minister Justin Trudeau's government made cannabis legal for recreational use in the fall of 2018. Eugene Oscapella, a lawyer who teaches drug policy at the University of Ottawa, said there's been a shift in government policy toward drugs like psilocybin over the last 15 years. He applauded the role that researchers — including those at the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies in the U.S. — have played in making that change happen. 'I think what we're seeing now is an increasing willingness to look at other substances that have been, and I use this word deliberately, demonized over the decades as being illegal and dangerous and harmful,' he said. Oscapella was part of the coalition that first applied for medical access to cannabis in 1997 and said that was a sort of precursor to the discussion happening now with psychedelics. 'The societal goal should be to look at the potential benefits. How do we maximize the potential benefit of access to these substances while minimizing the potential harms?' he said. Therapsil says it has a growing wait-list — for both prospective patients hoping to try psilocybin-assisted therapy and health-care providers hoping to get training. Gilchrist said the court case is 'more than a lawsuit for us.' 'This case is about, is Canada willing to support a safe, legal, and compassionate pathway forward to psychedelic therapy, which is scientifically and ethically backed?' he said. This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 8, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
