Acharya Prashant addresses the controversy surrounding the names 'India' and 'Bharat'. He begins by stating that there is no need to change the name, as the name 'India' also originates from the Sindhu river and has no special connection to the British. He points out a contradiction in wanting to use the name 'Bharat' while continuing to use the English language, suggesting that if one wants to use the name 'Bharat', they should also use Indian languages. He calls those who insist on using English but not the name 'India' clever. The speaker then delves into the origins of both names. He explains that 'Bharat' has three ancient, native sources: the Bharat clan mentioned in the Rigveda, King Bharat from the Mahabharata, and Bharat Chakravarti from Jain tradition. He describes 'Bharat' as a beautiful and glorious name with indigenous roots. The name 'India', he clarifies, comes from the same root as 'Hindu'—the Sindhu river. The Persians, who were western neighbors, pronounced 'Sindhu' as 'Hindu'. This term traveled further west to Greece, where it became 'Indu'. The Greek historian Megasthenes, in the 3rd century BC, wrote a book titled 'Indica' and referred to the region as 'India'. This name then journeyed through Europe to Britain and was brought back to the subcontinent. Therefore, the name 'India' is not a British imposition but is also derived from the Sindhu river. While he welcomes the increased use of the name 'Bharat', he notes that the real issue is not the name but the underlying language and mindset. Acharya Prashant argues that the debate over the name is a distraction from the real issue of mental colonization. He asserts that true decolonization is not a superficial act of changing names but requires freeing the mind from deeper influences. He identifies three types of colonization. The first is philosophical colonization, where India's traditional inward-looking quest for self-knowledge has been replaced by the West's outward-looking, materialistic, and consumerist worldview. The second is psychological colonization, where the Western ideal of 'happiness' has supplanted the Indian spiritual goal of 'Ananda' (bliss), which he defines as liberation from the duality of both happiness and sorrow. The third and most profound is religious colonization. He explains that India's unique, non-dualistic (Advaita) and Truth-centric spiritual path has been influenced by Western dualistic, belief-based religious models that are centered on stories and a personal God. He states that the true Indian path is about inquiry and knowing, not just believing. The real colonization is this shift in ideals, where Indians now aspire to live like Westerners, focusing on consumption and material gain. He concludes by quoting Rabindranath Tagore's poem "Where the mind is without fear," defining true decolonization as the de-fragmentation of the mind, freeing it from narrow domestic walls to attain a state where knowledge is free.