CULTURAL STIGMA AND SHAME-- WEST BENGAL IS CHANGING IT'S NAME-- A Paper On the Imaginary Bengal and the Transgression of the Bangladeshi Cultural Space Presented At The Annual Bengal Studies Conference, 1999, University of North Carolina.
Shomir
> The word "Bengal" is a misnomer. There is no such space in
> our time called "Bengal". Those who consciously or
> unconsciously think, talk, or write about a space called
> "Bengal" -- are either misguiding their own imagination to a
> space that does not exist in the late twentieth century, Or,
> their imaginations are being exogeneously manipulated and
> misguided by a wide range of cultural products and by-products
> to that non-existent imaginary land called "Bengal".
You may wish to call us anything, but that is not going to change the
reality of Bengal and our proud heritage. It is up to you to decide if you
wish to share that with us as equals, or break away from the mainstream of
Bengali culture and establish a quasi Arbi-Bengali-Islamist sect. 40+
million Hindus who speak the Bengali language and whose ancestors were the
pall-bearers of the Bengali culture will not relinquish that honor just
because a Molla wishes so. Sir, just remember, we are not going to allow
you to pollute our bengali culture with the barbaric arabian practices,
which you are very fond of. You can practice it yourself, but do not impose
that "opobhrongsho" upon us.
> Anyone who has difficulty in accepting the historically and
> politically
> evolved boundaries of the ONLY-BENGALI-NATION-STATE in the world
> today, is motivated to live on that non-existent imaginary land
> called "Bengal" in the refuge of his imaginary community.
> Since the reality of historically and politically established
> Nation-State does not allow the imaginary communities to create
> physically the land of their imagination, they tend to
> delegitimize in their mind and imagination, the existence of
> the nation-state that is so real.
Mr. Murshed Ahmed Choudhury aptly described the geo-political context of the
formation of Bangladesh. Bangladesh as you see today was not created by the
"Bengalis". The overwhelming majority of the Muslims of East Bengal in
their zeal to have a separate identity, sacrificed their Bengali heritage
and embraced the Arabic Islamic path. This "awakening" was the driving
force in the creation of East Pakistan. The fact of the matter is, you and
other bigoted Islamic fanatics gladly accepted the "Pakistan" name,
discarding your cherished "Bangladesh" title, that you claim today! You and
majority of your Muslim brothers were the ones who dishonored and disavowed
the Bengali culture and have vainly tried to mimic the Arabs, to please them
and get alms from them. The harder you tried, the more you were rejected
not only by the Arabs but also by the Punjabis..and other Muslim countries,
who considered you all as "lesser" or "lower class" of Muslims.
On the other hand West Bengal which was severely handicapped by the influx
of the millions of Bangladeshi Hindus, gladly accepted them as their own and
enriched itself. Economically and politically there was a heavy price to
pay, but the Bengalis of Indian Bengal were able to proudly carry the
"Bengali" heritage and thrive. For your reminder..even your national
anthem...is a Hindu Bengali gift!
> My paper is about the long cultural history of
> delegitimization of the cultural boundaries of the ONLY-BENGALI-
> NATION-STATE-IN-THE-WORLD (The Peoples Republic of Bangladesh)
> and the transgression of it's cultural boundaries by those who
> consider themselves (in their imagination) the alien cultural
> insiders of Bangladesh from the West bank of the Ganges.
What are you trying to say? It does not make any sense to me...
"delegitimization of cultural boundaries".."transgression of it's
cultural boundaries"..."the alien cultural insiders of Bangladesh"....
This is utter nonsense...
Lamba-lamba Engrazi shobdo byabohar korlei ki saheb howa jai? Kono-matha
mudu nei... jotto-shob abol tabol pechal paDa....
> History, as it is known, is a sequential process
> ordered by time. But the assumptions of History can be
> modified by a theoretical investigation into the structure of
> time.
What bullshit is this.... " theoretical investigation into the
structure of time." ??
> Historical events, structures, or phenomena can be grouped
> into different classes of time which have different qualitative
> properties, different frequencies' and unequal power.
"qualitative properties.. different frequencies'... unequal power..." Jot
shob pagal-ér prolap
> With that in mind, let us ask the question, How do people in
> different
> time periods and different places recognize themselves as being
> part of a common set, whether that set is defined by
> Ethnicity, Language, Religion or Geography ? Or let me ask,
> How do the Ethnic Bengalis of pre-partitioned India and their
> siblings recognize themselves as part of the Republic of
> Bangladesh ?
Very simple answer for that... if a group of people live in the same area,
eat the same food, speak the same language, look similar... then they belong
to the same "set". A geographic boundary created by a political blunder do
not alter the reality of a common Bengali heritage. This contention remains
valid even when fringe elements like you try to make yourself believe that
only you and your kind deserve to carry the "jhanda" of the entire Bengali
people on your weak and rickety shoulders, disregarding the fact that you
don't even have a backbone!
> Is it by their Ethnicity ? By their Language ? Or By their
> Religion ? Or even by Geography ?
None of the above... it is the realization within oneself which is God
given...that tells me that I am a Bengali and I belong to Bengal.
> The fact that they do so, atleast in their imagination and
> as evident in the outpour of their imagination in literature
> and other forms of cultural expression, has never been in any
> doubt. But the principle through which notions of continuity
> and discontinuity, boundaries, and ruptures are established is
> highly complex and variable. It is as variable as Sunil
> Gangopadhay's self-referring utterances of his implied Bangladeshi
> subjects in "Purbo Paschim" to Taslima Nasrin's Focculdian
> "Shame" enchanting and pleasing the smug and complacent Bengali
> Hindus, who have long ceased their active participation in
> Hinduism.
I can only speak for myself, and the reality is..it is my conviction, my
heritage and the genes that I carry in my body that tells me ..I AM A
BENGALI.. It is not my imagination, it is the reality. If you ask yourself
the same question you will probably get the same answer. My question is,
why do you want to deprive me of this identity? I have not asked you for
anything.. I didn't deny you anything.. then why do you act so selfishly?
Is this the Islamic thoughts and leanings that you embraced compelling you
to act in this selfish and brutish manner? The Bengalis I know of are all
quite tolerant, understanding and respectful of each other, regardless of
their place of birth, east or the west of river Ganges. That is another
thing that needs to be highlighted... culture is inherited, it can not be
acquired by reading the Quoran.
> The historian's classic preoccupation, observed Michel
> Foucault, was an overwhelming compulsion to seek out
> continuities and unities so that "discontinuity" was the stigma
> of temporal dislocation that is the historian's task to remove
> from history.
Abar abol-tabol boka shuru hoyeche!! Ki jé bolte chan bhodrolok... Alla-i
jane
> The over-representation of the West Bengalis and Upper-caste
> Hindu Bengalis, both as scholars and as topics for research in
> South Asian Studies world-wide, points out single-handedly to
> the stigma of the temporal dislocation of Bengal, the
> discontinuity of Bengal as a space and the overwhelmingly
> and over-representatively compulsive manner in which the
> West Bengali Hindus have tried to sought the continuity of
> the non-existent and imaginary "Bengal" in research and
> scholarship to skirt their stigma of the temporal dislocation
> of Bengal.
Baap-re... this whole thing is one single sentence! Kaar babar saddhi aché
ér mané bojhar??
Mian Saheb...étar ortho ki?
> "points out single-handedly to
> the stigma of the temporal dislocation of Bengal, the
> discontinuity of Bengal as a space and the overwhelmingly
> and over-representatively compulsive manner in which the..... "
Please explain what you meant by the above statement?
> "West Bengali Hindus have tried to sought the continuity of
> the non-existent and imaginary "Bengal" in research and
> scholarship to skirt their stigma of the temporal dislocation
> of Bengal."
What continuity are you talking about? A survey of the contemporary bengali
literature will clearly show you that the Hindus from East Bengal played a
significant role in not only maintaining but significantly enriching the
language and culture as we dearly call "Bangla". Why should there be a
stigma in in that? Yes Bengal was partitioned, but Bengali Hindus did not
feel any stigma from the dislocation...I can assure you. Most people
started their lives afresh, and in the process achieved new horizons,
enriched themselves form the multi-cultural secular environment of India.
The Bengalis remain fiercely loyal to their culture and heritage, at the
same time share their identity as a proud Indian.
> In the process of doing so, they have all too
> often transgressed and delegitimized the cultural boundaries of
> the Only Bengali Nation State in the world as well evident in
> Nirad Chaudhuri's "BANGreji" notion of "TATHA KAATHITA BANGLADESH".
Citing Nirad Babu as the sole representative of the Hindu Bengalis is
unfair(not that you know the meaning of fairness) ..he is only one among
many Bengali authors who was quite liberal with his choice of words.
Frankly, if he used the phrase "TATHA KAATHITA BANGLADESH", I have to
believe that was probably when he encountered a bigot like yourself.
> The geographic displacement of Bengal by Bangladesh and the
Eké baré murkhér moto kotha éta.... "displacement of Bengal by
Bangladesh"
> unequal transformation of the remaining and incomplete Bengal
> within the Indian state-hood of West Bengal is another reason
> for the compulsive West-Bengali Hindu over-representation in all
> frontiers of South asian Studies.
Molla saheb, the more you talk the more you display your ignorance! Let me
try to see if your statement make any sense... Why would "unequal
transformation of the remaining and incomplete Bengal within the
Indian state-hood of West Bengal" create over-representation in all
frontiers of South asian Studies? What are you trying to say here?
Bhogoban, etaré ni ki korum!!
> This is a concealed effect
> of West Bengal's attempt to a complete and total cultural
> representation by always shifting and switching between two sets
> of identities-- the INDIAN IDENTITY and the IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI
> IDENTITY.
No sir..you are wrong..we do not have any IDENTITY problem, you are the one
that suffer from that! You have discarded your Bengali heritage then you
tried to be a Paki, only when the Punjabis raped and sodomized you, then you
became Bengali. That too..we the Hindus had to sacrifice a lot to free you
and your sorry asses from the brutalities inflicted by your Punjabi
masters. It is then you found out that perhaps.. being a Bengali is more
profitable than being a Paki.
> Both the INDIAN and the IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI
> identities are very effectively used by the West Bengalis for
> different situations and under different circumstances.
> The INDIAN IDENTITY is used to legitimize the place of the
> West-Bengalis in the competitive race of the Nation-States.
> Whereas, the IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI IDENTITY is used by the
> West Bengalis to distinguish the uniqueness of their cultural
> variety among a diverse set of people in India.
> The IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI-IDENTITY is also used by the
> West-Bengalis to stir the imagination of
> "ONCE-A-FIRST-MODERN-STATE-OF-INDIA and of the "BENGAL RENNAISSANCE,
> that can very easily stereotype itself as a progressive
> modernity from an underdeveloped caste-based identity.
This part, I think I understand... and probably I can barely agree with,
minus the slanted inference that somehow the Bengali Hindus of India lack
the real "stuff" and need to "make believe" things, clearly that is not
so..Bengalis are holding their grounds in India quite well in all areas.
Let me sir remind you that the Bengali Hindus of India having gone through
the traumatic experience of partition have no desire to get their house
burnt once again. They have learnt their lessons well, and under no
circumstance will they fall for the "Bengali" trap. We are happy as
Indians, and we are grateful that India accepted us and gave us shelter and
new lives. We love our freedom, we love our heritage, we love our culture,
and we are tremendously proud of it. We remain as we always were proud
Bengalis..of glorious Bangla.
Shomir
================================
csid...@my-deja.com
by my work. But I encourage you to read and enlighten
yourself more on this before you attack the experts like a
bull in a China Shop.
-- Dr. Siddiky.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Shomir
> I can understand a raw nerve of yours has been touched
> by my work. But I encourage you to read and enlighten
> yourself more on this before you attack the experts like a
> bull in a China Shop.
> -- Dr. Siddiky.
Dr., indeed I am overwhelmed by your wisdom and knowledge! I am sure that
other readers of your "masterpiece" will be highly entertained by the
convoluted piece of trash, you call your "work". There is a saying in
Bengali which says "Olpo Bidya Bhoyonkori"... did you ever hear that?
Shomir
==========================================
csid...@my-deja.com
that
> other readers of your "masterpiece" will be highly entertained by the
> convoluted piece of trash, you call your "work". There is a saying in
> Bengali which says "Olpo Bidya Bhoyonkori"... did you ever hear that?
>
> Shomir
>
> ==========================================
of Alexander Pope's famous quote : "Little knowledge is a
dangerous thing" from one of his famous pieces of poetry.
I however believe that it most resembles the action of
the Bengali Hindus from Madhusudan Dutt's aping of the
English in writing his Sonnets to Bankim Chandra Chatterjee's
aping and stealing of Sir Walter Scott's idea of historical
fiction. These two are only two examples from the world of
Bengali-Hindu-Plagiarism where one can find these Bengali Hindus
aping and stealing everything European in the 19th Century.
The choice of your quote as response to my belittled work
therefore justifies the Cultural History of your Group (Bengali
Hindu ! Is it ! I guess so, if I am not wrong.)
Let me end with a joke. The word "ghoti" in Bengali means
a bun watering can or a can that carries water to clean
your buttocks after toilet. By the word "Ghoti" one also
undrstands the Bengali Hindus from West Bengal Proper who last
influxed in the-then-East-Bengal. The joke is :
Ghotis(Bengali-Hindus) are always seen to parade with their
ghotis(bun watering cans) since the British first made them do
so. And Now, in Bangladesh, if we send all the Bengali
Hindus back to India with their Ghotis, they will have no
place to shit but have to shit on top of each other
(something that is happening between the Bangals and the Ghotis
in West Bengal for a long time) despite which they could not
stop parading with their ghotis (bun watering cans).
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury
balance.
Mr. Siddiky does seem irrational and obsessive in his defining, and re-defining,
of what it is to be a Bengali and what exactly the criteria is for an identity
to exist or not to exist.
Regardless, your comments seem to touch upon the very matters which help
perpetuate the Siddiky's of this world.
Hindu OR Muslim, a Bengali is a Bengali. That was my main concern and feeling
when I initially responded to his babblings, it is also my response to your
opportunism.
Hindu Bengalis are not ethnically nor historically different from Muslim
Bengalis, they are the same. To pick and choose our historical forefathers on
the basis of religion is devisive and mendacious.
Kazi Nazrul spoke of Bengalis, Tagore spoke of Bengal - my golden Bengal -
neither divided the land here or there or by the forskin of one's -----!
As a Bengali I feel proud of both - and both incidentally are from the west -
but I do not think aha Kazi Nazrul I like him because he's muslim or dislike
Tagore because he's Hindu. I like them both because they show that there is
beauty and spirite in the Bengali people. That the monsoons, cyclones and
famines cannot wipe away the laughter and joy and love that we can feel. That
Hindu or Muslim, skin off or on - as my local Halal butcher always asks, they
are proof of something GOOD about OUR people.
I can't really say I feel emotionally attached to any country, more than
Bangladesh, but I can't deny that Bangladesh is just part of something greater,
better, more satisfying and ALSO LOST, GONE, FINISHED. My village is in
Bangladesh, my parents grew up there, my children - if and when I get round to
having some - will go there, how on Earth am I supposed to be delegitimising it
by my thoughts of Bengal or my feelings about Bengalis?
It is part and parcel of my thinking when I think of Bengalis or Bengal!
They are not whole without Bangladesh, and Bangladesh is not the whole story in
and of its self!
But Shomir I would say this, so many Bengalis would not have turned to Islam if
there were not problems with the Hindu system. Caste schedules made perfectly
decent folk into sub-standard creatures, class and caste collussion led to the
economic deprivation of large sections of Bengal and opportunistic, calculating
self interest under the Raj led to the formation of an unloved and unprotected
underclass.
If Islam offered anything that the Bengali culture could not, and had not, it
was the possibility and hope of change. That is something you cannot deny the
people access to.
What gets my goat though is that what was essentially a case of class
exploitation turned comunal and played into the hands of the smaller, though
none-the-less greedy and malevolant, Muslim upper class.
This is why I have reservations about your comments, and mr Siddiky's too, they
turn Bengali against Bengali for little other than a narrow self interest.
Islam once offered hope to the downtroden and dissenfranchised, but now it is
not relevant to Bangladesh or to today's downtroden.
In many ways today's exploiters are the religious zealots and leaders who take
the life savings of gullible old women for cures to mysterious illnesses - that
never work, who further degrade the opportunities open to Bangladesh by blocking
trade and by interferring in politics. Who take money from the poor to build
self aggrandising mosques rather than help the poor out of their cycle of famine
and subsistance.
Why do Mullahs attack NGOs and foreign charities in Bangladesh whilst their own
go traipsing about, around the world, looking for finance to build the next big
mosque or madrasa? Will Allah give them blessings or damn them to hell fire?
To suggest that Bengali culture is strictly a Hindu culture is as mnuch folly as
Mr Siddiky's rants were. Bengalis have lived through Bhudism, Jainism, Hinduism
(??) and Islam, they have absored the positive and negative aspects of all these
movements, and more importantly they have BLENDED these aspects into a culture
of traditions, stories, customs and rituals which are far more relevent to
defining Bengali culture than any selective collection of Bengali greats.
Anyway, enough of all this.
Bengalis are Bengalis regardless of faith or location.
That's good enough for me and it should be good enough for you,
Murshed
csid...@my-deja.com
and personal attacks in a forum like this but it does so
to study History or the Anthropology of the People we are
discussing and get an Advanced Degree on it.
I am concluding with an impression that people who do not
have a sufficiently long history of having bread on their
table, have now access to bull-shit over the internet in
different forums with all kinds of ignorance. While it is
true that such people are exported to the West by the same
Nation-States that they try to defend, in Murshed Choudhury,
Shomir, and other such people's cases lack or absence of
protection from a Nation State might give rise to pathological
dislike or hatred for the very nation states where they were
born, as they are repeatedly demonstrating. Signing off.
man...@my-deja.com
csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <38209631...@My-Dejanews.com>,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Response to Dr. CSiddqui:
Although I am preoccupied with some professional commitments for the
last seven days, I thought let me spend a few moments on this thread at
this time. I read your articles on similar themes earlier. To the best
of my recollection, I had posted your Daily Star article in SCBs
through dejanews. I post many articles. However, my posting of someone
else's articles doesn't indicate my agreement or disagreement with the
contents, views or conclusions of the authors. My posting only
indicates that the posted article or topics deserves to be disseminated
for further discussion. When I posted your article last year I
sincerely believed that your article was worth perusing even though my
personal views were, and still are, at sharp variance with your
distorted perceptions and untenable generalizations. I enjoy reading
dissenting viewpoints. Yet, your comments were neither critical nor
objective assessment. I realize now that you are interested to
disseminate fabrication and absurdities.
I saw your write-up, provocatively titled "CULTURAL STIGMA AND SHAME--
WEST BENGAL IS CHANGING IT'S NAME-- A Paper On the Imaginary Bengal and
the Transgression of the Bangladeshi Cultural Space Presented At The
Annual Bengal Studies Conference, 1999, University of North Carolina)."
I was neither shocked nor surprised to see your conclusion on the very
title of your paper. Notwithstanding your untenable title of the paper,
I was hoping that you are interested in scholarly pursuit or exchange.
Initially, I had perused Mr. Morshed's comments. Although I found
several of his comments about Bangladesh too harsh, he raised a lot of
relevant questions and scholarly concerns on your untenable
observations. His response was proper and adequate. I was hoping that
you, Dr. Csiddqui, will also respond appropiately and adequately. To my
utter surprise, you have miserably failed to respond to his legitimate
concerns about Bengali culture. Therefore, I started reading all
responses on the thread responses since day before yesterday. Your
improper and irrelevant responses to Mr Shomir and others have made you
totally naked in front SCB readers. Instead of addressing their
concerns, you have taken the beaten path of communalism. In fact, you
have exposed yourself in public. You have brought shame not only to
yourself but also to the name of Bengal Studies Conference (which I
attended at least one dozen times since my first attendace in 1976 at
the University of Chcago, and the last one that I attended in 1998 at
the Indina University at Bloominton). The year 2000 Bengal Studies
Conference is scheduled to be held in next May at the University of
Wisconsin at Oshkosh. Should you decide to attend and present a paper
on the same theme at UW at Oshkosh, I would love to attend your session.
In the meantime, Dr. CSiddiqui, let me raise the following issues:
i. Why West Bengal will feel "SHAME' and "Stigma" should they decide to
change the name of West Bengal to "Bangla"? I don't speculate on your
response. Let me clearly say: "Shame" is in your mind. "Stigma" is also
in your mind. Both shame and stigma might have been instilled in your
mind due to your communal hatred. Please correct me if I am wrong in my
assessment about your hate-filled state of mind.
ii. Why Bengal has to be "Imaginary Bengal"? It is you who is
imagining, Dr. Siddqui, that "BENGAL" does not exist any more because
Bangladesh is the only "national-state" in the area what used to be
called Bengal. What kind of rationale is this? Your statement is self-
contradictory. You are are just trying to add lies and distortions to
all kinds myths and stereotypes.
I would like to emphasize that during partition in 1947 Bengal was
divided into East Bengal (EB)and West Bengal (WB)--- EB went with
Pakistan and WB with India. That was according to partition plan. East
Bengal was renamed as East Pakistan in 1955. West Bengal has remained
West Bengal since August 15, 1947-- it is one of the Indian states.
People of West Bengalis were (are) "Bangalees", not "West Bengalis".
They are also definitely Indian citizens-- they are "Indians", not
"East Indians". On the other hand, during East Pakistan's 23 years of
shameful association with Pakistan, East Pakistanis were "Pakistanis".
Yet, East Pakistanis were nothing but Bangalees first and then
Pakistanis. We have always remained Bangalees. Yes, we are also
Bangladeshis because we are citizens of an independent nation-state.
The name of the country is "Bangladesh". It is preposterous on your
part to suggest that we have ceased to keep our common Bengali identity
if "Bangalee" identify ourselves as "Bangladeshis."
Our language movements in its all phases-- 1948 and 1952 were directed
against Muhajir and Punjabi-dominated ruling coterie of Pakistan. The
language movement had cracked the Islamic foundation of Pakistan within
four years after independence. The historic Bengali Language Movement
has profound impact on all of the resistance movements in East Bengal.
The language movement was a secular movement for saving Bengali culture
and language. The near elimination of the Muslim League during 1954
election in East Bengal was a clear victory for our quest for Bengali
cultuaral heritage. The Six-Point Movement and 1969 Student-Mass
movement against Ayub's dictatorial regime and finally our liberation
war in 1971 owe their origin to language movement. From East Pakistan,
we have become Bangladesh, not East Pakistan to East Pakista. My
further question: if "Bengal" did not exist, why "Bengali Linguistic
Identity" had become the focal points our nationalist movements. Your
sweeping conclusions are absurd?
iii. Dr. cSiddiqui has claimed that West Bengal has Trangressed
Bangladeshi Cultural Space. He did not even hesitate to characterize
our culturally minded Bangladeshis as "Hinduzed Bangladeshis" of
Bangladesh. This kind of sweeping comments are communally motivated.
These cheap comments have exposed his real agenda.
iv. Dr.CSiddiqui, there are readers who are not scared of your jargons.
Your jargon ridden write-ups are testimonials to your bigotry.
v. How and why did the language movement start in Dhaka on March 26,
1948? Who were the main participants of 1948 phase of language
movement? Who had forcefully demanded Bengali to be one of the State
Languages of Pakistan at the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan (CAP)on
February 25, 1948? Was he (the mover of such a historic Amendment for
Bengali language at CAP)a Pakka Pakistani or a patriotic Bangalee?
Bengal was always there, and Bengal will be always there.
Notwithstanding cSiddiquis, "BENGAL" and "Bengalis" are alive, and
well. Bengalis are still kickin'!
Thanks for reading.
M. Waheeduzzaman Manik (November, 5, 1999]
csid...@my-deja.com
Thanks for taking the time out to read. Since one can not
give academic responses to naive and non-academic observations,
one has no other way than to pitch the intellectual ball
at the wave-length of the naive observer untutored in the
Social Sciences. Often when such observers drag the dialogue
to questions that have a more complex answer, One has two
clear choices : Either to stop the dialogue OR to frame an
answer that is comprehensible. If the answer is beyond the
comprehension of the person asking the question, it might
very well seem absurd to him/her.
I am trained in South Asian Cultural History (I have
a PHD from Yale University, CT, US) and the Paper that I had
put up is purely an academic one ( for example, you need to
know : What an Imaginary Community is ? What Diaspora is in
theory ? What is a Nation-State in theory ? What is a
Subaltern in theory ?
Not what people thinks about them Or Not what their
opinion or popular opinion is of these, but what these
actually mean in Anthropology, History, Political Science and
Sociology. Once these are well understood by all participants,
then there can be an informed discussion or a dialogue.
In the absence of complete academic information on these ideas
one can very well fall into the cragmire of chaos and
confusion as you have perhaps noticed with my posting in
this forum -- a lesson well learnt not to post academic
papers in a non-academic environment of discussion ever again.
I am an academic and not a politician. My job is to try
to educate the people; not to convince them to vote for me.
I have no real stake in trying to convince the people in
this forum to agree with me but to get an idea about Our
(of People of Bangladesh) sense of being in a Nation-State
with cultural boundaries.
Given your interest in my work, I would like to suggest
a few books worth looking into :
"Imagined Community" by Benedict Anderson.
"Nationalism" by Eli Kedouri.
"In Theory" by Aijaz Ahmed.
"Selected Subaltern Studies" by Ranjit Guha
"Nationalism and the Colonial World -- A derivative discourse"
by Partha Chatterjee.
Thank you very much for your feed-back. I wish I could
answer all your questions, something I hope to do so in the
future but now must run to teach a class.
Very Best Wishes to you and All Readers of this forum.
Chowdhury Irad Ahmed Siddiky, PHD.
Arnab Gupta
really agree with the content and style of Mr. Shomir's responses
to your post, let me congratulate him: first, for being much more
honest than you and second, for exposing you.
>Yes. "Alpo Bidday Bhoiyonkori" is a Bengali Hindu translation
>of Alexander Pope's famous quote : "Little knowledge is a
>dangerous thing" from one of his famous pieces of poetry.
> I however believe that it most resembles the action of
>the Bengali Hindus from Madhusudan Dutt's aping of the
>English in writing his Sonnets to Bankim Chandra Chatterjee's
>aping and stealing of Sir Walter Scott's idea of historical
>fiction.
Sadly, all your academic pursuits, it seems, have resulted in creating
a rather closed and narrow mind Doctor. Since when is following a
particlular style of writing or getting inspired by it considered
as "plagiarism" or "stealing"? Think about it...applying your logic
every single author of novels and short stories in Bengal can be
called a plagiarist or thief, since the forms of novel and short story,
as we know them today, were developed in the West.
..[deleted]..
Thanks,
Arnab.
T.H.Sanyal.
> Thanks for taking the time out to read. Since one can not
>give academic responses to naive and non-academic observations,
>one has no other way than to pitch the intellectual ball
>at the wave-length of the naive observer untutored in the
>Social Sciences. Often when such observers drag the dialogue
name. You may have a Ph.D. but that by itself is no assurance that
you have not spouted nonsense. I know folks who live in West Bengal
and listen to Rabindra Sangeet and Nazrul Geeti broadcast from Dhaka,
blissfully unaware of your conjured up cultural boundary.
>to questions that have a more complex answer, One has two
>clear choices : Either to stop the dialogue OR to frame an
>answer that is comprehensible. If the answer is beyond the
>comprehension of the person asking the question, it might
>very well seem absurd to him/her.
boundary exists in your febrile mind.
> I am trained in South Asian Cultural History (I have
>a PHD from Yale University, CT, US) and the Paper that I had
>one can very well fall into the cragmire of chaos and
So you have a Ph.D. in Social Sciences from Yale U., New Haven, CT, USA
and you can't even spell "quagmire". I am impressed, NOT]
>confusion as you have perhaps noticed with my posting in
>this forum -- a lesson well learnt not to post academic
>papers in a non-academic environment of discussion ever again.
let you into their ranks.
>"Selected Subaltern Studies" by Ranjit Guha
>"Nationalism and the Colonial World -- A derivative discourse"
> by Partha Chatterjee.
works that fall outside your "cultural boundary" ?
ths.
Shomir
I appreciate your candid and balanced opinion regarding the issue of
Bengali/Bangladeshi nationalism. It won't surprise you to know that there is hardly
any disagreement between your observations and my thoughts. I wish I could have
responded to the bigoted post of the originator of this thread in a less abrasive
manner. However, I felt compelled to respond the way I did primarily to expose the
pseudo chauvinist attitude displayed by this so called "educator". You will notice
from the subsequent message this vicious fanatic posted regarding "ghoti" Bengalis
how illiterate this impostor is. Having read that piece, I absolve myself of the
thought that I might have been a little too harsh towards a "bhadrolok". Now that
he has chosen to discard his facade of a "bhadrolok", I feel vindicated that my
effort to expose his bigotry, succeeded.
Like most Bengalis, I am not one driven by religious considerations. I consider
religion as a personal choice and prefer to keep it that way. In my opinion,
religion has been the cause of most of the miseries that has been inflicted on
humankind. It divides people and benefit only a very small segment of the
population who lack in their ability to contribute or influence others in a more
meaningful way. Personally, I am an agnostic and approach the religious activities
more from a cultural point of view, rather than for spiritual fulfillment.
You would notice that despite my hard hitting response to the bigot, I tried to draw
a fine line in not making that a Hindu versus Muslim issue. My effort was to
neutralize the claim of this mullah mentality that only the Muslims of Bangladesh
were entitled the Bengali heritage, disregarding the existence of the 40+ million
Hindus who were as much Bengali as anyone else. I did not belittle any contribution
of the people of Bangladesh, neither did I disown them from being Bengalis. I do
not apologize for stating the facts that a segment of the Bengali Muslims did
embrace the Arab culture with a zeal thereby diluting the Bengali culture to a fair
degree. Accepting Islam to free themselves from the oppression of Hindu zamindars
is certainly understandable, but kissing Arab ass is not a Bengali trait. Those who
do that, specially people like our "educator", are the true enemies of Bengalis and
their culture and heritage.
Being a "Bängäl", I do have my prejudices which I acknowledge, but certainly you can
understand that if you consider that we the refugee Bengalis had a tremendous amount
of hardship to bear for no reason other than the fact that politicians decided to
divide Bengal and create a situation where we were the victims of "religious
cleansing", by the majority.
Indeed the Hinduism is burdened with its legacy of caste driven bigotry, and I agree
with your contention that the conversions of the Bengalis were an effort to free
themselves from the oppression of the Hindu zamindars and their surrogates. As you
have so well described, the acceptance of Islam by the Bengalis to free themselves
from the oppression of the Hindu landlords was the only way available to the masses
at the time. However, needless to mention that conversion did not solve the problem
of oppression, because the mere change of religion did not alter the balance of
power, and the Hindu zamindars were able to continue their dominance up until
partition. After the partition, the economic condition of the general people in E.
Pakistan/Bangladesh did not improve, even though almost all the land-owning Hindus
were ousted. The void created by the displaced Hindus were quickly filled up by the
more enterprising E. Pakistanis/Bangladeshis. The sudden elevation of this
neo-class with a higher greed factor, quickly made the situation worse, as the poor
peasants languished deeper into poverty. Truly this is a case of class
exploitation, as you have observed.
In ending, I would like to state that like most Bängäls (Bengali Hindus of E.
Bengal), I have reconciled to the reality of the partition of Bengal, and have no
regrets or remorse about that. However, being burnt once, and the wounds not fully
healed, anytime I hear shrill cry of fundamentalist Mullahs, I am reminded of the
atrocities that my parents and their generation had to go through...in the name of
"Allah Hu Akbar". I just do not want to have to re-live that horror.
Shomir
===============================
Shomir
Arnab Gupta wrote:
> So finally the veneer of academic discourse falls off. Though I don't
> really agree with the content and style of Mr. Shomir's responses
> to your post, let me congratulate him: first, for being much more
> honest than you and second, for exposing you.
>
Arnab Babu:
My response to the fundamentalist bigot was to expose this fake
"educator". I responded to his original post only after reading his follow
up message to Mr. Murshed's first response. It was a despicable response
to a balanced observation, which compelled me to respond in the manner I
did.
Regarding the substance of my message, I would request to know on what
contexts you disagreed with my contentions. What did I say that you do not
agree with? I understand your reservation regarding my style.
Shomir
=================================
Thomas Southton
I've always found B'deshis to be sweet peoples. It would be nice to
see India reunited with B'desh.
In article <38224FA0...@zoom.co.uk>,
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury <mur...@zoom.co.uk> wrote:
--
sout...@mindsprings.SPAM-BE-GONE.aurora.com
Thomas Southton
I've always found B'deshis to be sweet peoples. It would be nice to
see India reunited with B'desh.
In article <38224FA0...@zoom.co.uk>,
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury <mur...@zoom.co.uk> wrote:
--
Manu
>
> Very beautiful.
>
> I've always found B'deshis to be sweet peoples. It would be nice to
> see India reunited with B'desh.
India doesn't need any more muslim terrorists. One day India
will send back all illegal muslims back to Bangla and Paki
Shomir
>
> > I am trained in South Asian Cultural History (I have
> >a PHD from Yale University, CT, US) and the Paper that I had
> >one can very well fall into the cragmire of chaos and
>
> So you have a Ph.D. in Social Sciences from Yale U., New Haven, CT, USA
> and you can't even spell "quagmire". I am impressed, NOT]
>
Mr. Sanyal:
If you visit the site below it will tell you this joker is falsifying his
credentials by claiming to be a Ph.D. from Yale. The link will show you that
he attended the "University of Towa", I presume Univ. of Iowa.
http://www.dailystarnews.com/199807/18/n8071809.htm#BODY2
Further check might produce yet some more interesting information.
Shomir
====================================
Shomir
Here is some further information on this guy from the Univ. of Iowa student
directory. I will keep all posted about his Ph.D. status.
/usr/local/bin/ph -m name=Chowdhury Irad Ahmed Siddiky return all
----------------------------------------
alias: chowdhury-siddiky
name: siddiky chowdhury irad ahmed
address: po box 504, rockville md
home_address: po box 504, rockville md
permanent_address: bangladesh
type: person student
curriculum: a4
left_uiowa: 19990823
----------------------------------------
Shomir
========================================
Shomir wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I am trained in South Asian Cultural History (I have
> > >a PHD from Yale University, CT, US) and the Paper that I had
> > (snip)
> > >one can very well fall into the cragmire of chaos and
T.H.Sanyal.
>I've always found B'deshis to be sweet peoples. It would be nice to
>see India reunited with B'desh.
partition of Bengal remain in effective power in India.
Regards.
ths.
the_virtuous_vulcan
T.H.Sanyal. <TH...@psuvm.psu.edu> wrote:
> Thomas Southton wrote:
>
> >I've always found B'deshis to be sweet peoples. It would be nice to
> >see India reunited with B'desh.
>
> partition of Bengal remain in effective power in India.
>
> Regards.
> ths.
This is just a garbage argument from a liberal moron. The forces
that partitioned India were Moslem League and Congress, and they
are NOT in power at the present time.
*********************************************
The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
!!! ISLAM IS A BARBARIC RELIGION !!!
the_virtuous_vulcan
csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
> The word "Bengal" is a misnomer. There is no such space
> in our time called "Bengal". Those who consciously or
> unconsciously think, talk, or write about a space called
> "Bengal" -- are either misguiding their own imagination to a
> space that does not exist in the late twentieth century, Or,
> their imaginations are being exogeneously manipulated and
> misguided by a wide range of cultural products and by-products
> to that non-existent imaginary land called "Bengal".
Hmmm.... So what does "Bengal" mean ordinarily ? Are you saying that
even if Bengal exists (East and West), a native of that state cannot
and should not think himself/herself as a Bengali ?
> Anyone who has difficulty in accepting the historically and
> politically evolved boundaries of the ONLY-BENGALI-NATION-STATE
> in the world today, is motivated to live on that non-existent
> imaginary land called "Bengal" in the refuge of his imaginary
> community.
So, you are saying that since Bangladesh is the only Bengali-speaking
Nation-State (etc.), it reserves the legitimacy of calling itself as
a Bengal or whatever appellation. Again, this is fine, but what it
seems you are bordering lunacy. For example there can be two persons
having identical first and/or last names. Is it right for one of them
to say that the other should NOT be recognized by his/her given name
- that maybe identical with his/hers ? You are infringing on the
Freedom of Expression and Speech. (Are you familiar with this ?)
> Since the reality of historically and politically established
> Nation-State does not allow the imaginary communities to
> create physically the land of their imagination, they tend to
> delegitimize in their mind and imagination, the existence of
> the nation-state that is so real.
So you are trying to articulate the view that West Bengal is NOT at
all Bengal as it not a NATION by itself. Since Bangladesh is a NATION
(fortunately because of India), so West Bengal calling itself "Bengal"
is an act of illegitimacy. Man you are funny. Before 1971 Bangladesh
was East Pakistan, now this new-fangled Bengalism from across the
border is really arrogant, when Bangladeshi Bengali is just a total
corruption of what Bangla. BTW, have you ever thought that nobody in
West Bengal gives a damn about this stupid chest-beating of yours ?
> My paper is about the long cultural history of delegitimization
> of the cultural boundaries of the
> ONLY-BENGALI-NATION-STATE-IN-THE-WORLD (The Peoples Republic of
> Bangladesh) and the transgression of it's cultural boundaries
> by those who consider themselves (in their imagination) the
> alien cultural insiders of Bangladesh from the West bank of
> the Ganges.
Again you are begining to exhibit total fanaticism that the
Jammat-i-Islam perpetrates. First of all, you have not defined
what is the "culture" of Bangladesh. Is it tbe Islamic culture
that you are defining as the "true" culture ? If that is the case
then your stupid ideas suit better in the tents in Saudi Arabia
where primitivism and fanaticism replace enlightment and emancipation
- as is known.
Bangladesh, if it is filled up by the likes of you, would cease to
exist. That is, you folks (Bangladeshi) have crept across the borders
of India and now there are 8 million illegal Bangladeshi refugees.
Who is transgressing whose borders here ? Cultural transgression and
all that crackpot theories are a hogwash. You folks cannot rule; you
need to be whipped and ruled. Look at Bangladesh now. It is the most
garbage country - poverty sinking its teeth deep into the flesh of the
so called "Bong-culture-purists" who now silently creep across the
borders of India. The liberal press in India, and particularly in
Bengal, who dish out moronic ideas of yours, fail to mention that
whereever creeps like you have survived the eventual reaction is
that they bite the hands that feed them.
During 1971 war, when your Pakistani lords were copulating with your
mothers and sisters - with your "abba" made to see the orgies, most
of your intellectuals & politicians fled to Calcutta, and West Bengal
did not close the borders or did not say that Bangladeshis must look
after themselves. Instead the Indian Army sent its men to wear the
"muktijoddha" outfits at night and beat the shit out of the Pakistani
Moslem Armymen - the same who raped your mother royally, perhaps.
NOTE: This teaches a lesson for all of us. Liberal morons (just like
Tamisra Haran Sanyal [T.H.Sanyal]) may blabber any sort of
factless bullshit but it is a well-known fact that ingratitude
is mounting amongst Bangladeshis. Bangladesh now sends ISI
agents into India's North East to help the ULFA terorists.
Small wonder that we see this Irad Ahmed Chowdhury (Ph.D. ?)
spreading hatred guised like scholastic articulation for the
very existence of West Bengal. This jealousy is remarkable.
When will India (and Bengal) learn the lesson of not supporting
Bangladesh and kicking out the 8 million illegals hiding in our
country using the porous borders of India and Bengal ?
>.....[fanatical crap deleted].....<
> **** This paper was presented by Chowdhury Irad Ahmed
> Siddiky, PHD, at the Annual Bengal Studies Conference, 1999,
> held at the University of North Carolina.
> Email : Csid...@Worldnet.att.net
Manu
>
> This is not possible as long as the forces that engineered the second
> partition of Bengal remain in effective power in India.
on the other hand, it it was left to the forces in power in
Bengal, there won't be any hindus left in India.
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury
I don't think it'll ever happen [the uniting of Bengal] but it's not the
worst thing in the world if it ever did.
I'd like to see Bangladesh make something of it's self. It could do a
lot. There are some really talented and considerate minds there you know.
I mean people who are trying to solve some really serious problems.
Unfortunately Bangladesh will take a long time to over come the problems
of it's birth.
It would be nice to hope to see a co-operative and close South East Asia,
undoing the colonial cancer and repairing the lands once more.
Yours,
Murshed
"T.H.Sanyal." wrote:
> Thomas Southton wrote:
>
> >I've always found B'deshis to be sweet peoples. It would be nice to
> >see India reunited with B'desh.
>
> This is not possible as long as the forces that engineered the second
> partition of Bengal remain in effective power in India.
>
> Regards.
> ths.
Arindam Banerjee
> there were not problems with the Hindu system.
Then why have so many Bengalis or for that matter non-Bengali Hindus
not turned to Islam?
Caste schedules made perfectly
> decent folk into sub-standard creatures,
Nonsense.
class and caste collussion led to the
> economic deprivation of large sections of Bengal and opportunistic,
I would say that those who are Arab or not-Arab when being one or the
other suits them should know a lot about opportunism.
calculating
> self interest under the Raj led to the formation of an unloved and
unprotected
> underclass.
> If Islam offered anything that the Bengali culture could not, and had
not, it
> was the possibility and hope of change.
I think they turned Islamic because they were fooled by Arab traders,
with their tall stories. It was not vicious, only snobbish, to begin
with. Later with foreign fundamentalism it became worse.
Arindam Banerjee
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury
Your first point ?
What is it with the constant refferal to 'Arabs'? why is it that they are
seen as the be all and end all of Islamic influence in Bengal?
The Turks, the Mughal empire, Arab traders and many others over the
centuries helped shape Bengal.
You don't hear Roman Catholics or Protestants reffer to each other as an
Arab religion do you?
It's not about that, people have gotten past that stage, it's about the
message it conveys to each and every follower, the faith.
As to why not EVERY Bengali or EVERY Hindu turned muslim. Well how should I
know, why would I care. Faith in the way they live is perhaps an answer,
their reduced exposure to Muslims another.
This is not about which religion is better than which - something I sense
is the subtext of what you say - but about why a lot of people many have
embraced a religion that was new and radically different.
At present a very vocal section of the Hindu population in India is
decrying the rise of Christianity in India - amongst the LOWER CASTES.
Again does this not show that a large section of the people desire change
and to break free from the particular problems of the Hindu system?
Or would you rather believe that they are all being brainwashed by
secret-agent nuns from the Vatican, utilising the latest Hypnosis
techniques...
Not everybody wants the same thing nor should they. People require
different things from their faith, at different times. Hope, Certainty,
Solice, Guidance...
You second point:
What are the untouchables? What does it mean to be of a lower caste to
someone? Are Human beings made in differing orders of quality?
I don't know about your thinking on this, but my belief is that we are all
as worthy of decent treatment and consideration as each other.
So explain to me why this is nonsense?
No Bengali is 'Arab' - see point one - but a Bengali can be Muslim.
It's is a faith NOT a RACE.
And what precisely are you reffering to?
The Partition of India I presume.
That was and is pretty murky. But that is not to say that there are not
GOOD reasons for Bengalis to want a separate entity. As you'll find in
almost any history or sociology book on the region, the class structures
meant a lot of economic disparity and bias occured.
Under the British, this was one of several devices used to keep Bengal
under their control. Why is it that so many Bengalis, mainly lower castes
and Muslims, fought against the British rule?
It was again partly due to the economic bias in the region. The British
appointed middlemen to extract the revenues and allowed them to cream off
Bengal for their own benefit.
To me the problems of Bengali Muslims were exacerbated at that point by
this course of action. It made them dissengage with the imperial system -
stay away from mainstream education - thereby leaving them in a more
debilitated state on the employment front.
Whilst Upper Class Muslims taught their proginy Urdu, English and such, the
ordinary Bengali had no access to even basic education because of the
antagonistic relationship with the British.
The Upper Castes also managed to thrive under the British, along with their
equivilant Muslims, becoming richer through trade rights, land rights ect.
It is one of the reasons why the most popular - though sadly ineffective -
politicians of the time were attempting to push through land reforms and
anti-Zamindari curbs.
Again you may take all this as a Hindu Vs Muslim thing, but look underneath
the surface. You'll see that the whole matter is rather more simple - it is
bog standard exploitation and opportunism on the part of a privilaged upper
class, whatever religion they may be.
Murshed.
Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> so many Bengalis would not have turned to Islam if
> > there were not problems with the Hindu system.
>
> Then why have so many Bengalis or for that matter non-Bengali Hindus
> not turned to Islam?
>
> Caste schedules made perfectly
> > decent folk into sub-standard creatures,
>
> Nonsense.
>
> class and caste collussion led to the
> > economic deprivation of large sections of Bengal and opportunistic,
>
> I would say that those who are Arab or not-Arab when being one or the
> other suits them should know a lot about opportunism.
>
> calculating
> > self interest under the Raj led to the formation of an unloved and
> unprotected
> > underclass.
> > If Islam offered anything that the Bengali culture could not, and had
> not, it
> > was the possibility and hope of change.
>
the_virtuous_vulcan
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury <mur...@zoom.co.uk> wrote:
> Unfortunately Bangladesh will take a long time to over come the
> problems of it's birth.
> Yours,
> Murshed
There is smoething interesting to observe: look at any Moslem
majority country in this world. All are basket cases. How can
you expect Bangladesh to solve anything ? Dominated by poverty
and the fuel of Islamic fundamentalism, how can India expect to
see B'desh thriving ? The only thing that we may expect is to
see that B'desh importing poor, malnourished, and steeped into
Islamic fundamentalism - Moslems.
*********************************************
The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
!!! ISLAM IS A BARBARIC RELIGION !!!
Shomir
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury wrote:
> Hi,
> Your first point ?
> What is it with the constant refferal to 'Arabs'? why is it that they are
> seen as the be all and end all of Islamic influence in Bengal?
> The Turks, the Mughal empire, Arab traders and many others over the
> centuries helped shape Bengal.
> You don't hear Roman Catholics or Protestants reffer to each other as an
> Arab religion do you?
That is the difference between the Christians and the Muslims. The poor lower
casts of India who became Christians, only accepted Jesus Christ, they did not
accept the social culture of the Italians/British/US missionaries. They did not
try to imitate the western culture, they remained Indians in all respect.
That is however not true of many Muslims in Bangladesh. They pathetically
mimic or better yet, try to appease the ARABs. What is so holy about the Arabs
and their culture (no) ??
Shomir
Shomir
others, I would like to clarify my position regarding this issue. I was not
born in E. Pakistan/Bangladesh but both my parents are Bangladeshi/E. Bengali.
I consider Bangladesh as my ancestral homeland. We are not Brahmins, and our
ancestors were not landlords. Our family had a few "bighas" of land and I have
heard from my parents that they were quite poor in Bangladesh just like
many of our Muslim neighbors. My father had many Muslim friends and he talked
about them with great fondness. He also told me of the sleepless nights and
the horrors the family had to go through during the pre partition days. He
said that most of our neighbors were good people and were non prejudicial, but
there were some who were viciously anti Hindu, and even the good neighbors
suggested that it was better if the family migrated to india, because in the
face of attacks against the Hindus, they would not be able to provide a
meaningful protection for a prolonged period. Based on their advice the family
decided to abandon their ancestral homeland and migrate to India as refugees.
In a way I am thankful that they migrated, and I even hate to think what my
life would have been if our family did not migrate to India. Over the years
like most other refugee Bengali families, our economic conditions improved, and
we as a family did far better than what we could have achieved, if our family
remained in Bangladesh. So, in some respects I am thankful that the partition
liberated us from our family's struggle for survival against abject poverty. I
am also happy that now I can use the internet as my eminent "educator"
suggested, not to "bull-shit" but expose fake "PHDs from Yale University, CT,
US" instead of counting cattle heads and fending off attacks from bigots like
Mr. Siddiki and his brothers and cousins. By the way, I have many friends from
Bangladesh and some of them are TRUE Ph Ds..and I maintain cordial relations
with them even at the family level. That being my background, I can assure
you that I am not a Muslim or a Bangladeshi hater, even as I candidly admit
that I am not free of all prejudices.
Partition is something that happened 52 years ago, and the people of our
generation and Siddiki's and others had no hand in that. What has been done
can not be undone, and also need NOT be undone. It was the result of many
years of mutual distrust and also a certain degree of inevitability in the fact
that both the Hindus and the Muslims clearly understood that they were better
off with the partition. This partition has adversely affected both the
communities, but that is a separate issue better suited for another thread.
The issue here is do the Hindus of East/West Bengal lose their Bengali heritage
on account of this political division? Clearly the answer is no, as most of
the learned readers clearly rendered your opinions. So, as far as I am
concerned, the case is closed.
There are a couple of areas that I would like to elaborate. Conversion of poor
and oppressed Bengalis to Muslim can be understood and accepted, as a way of
redressal of their grievances against the oppressions of the mostly Hindu
zamindars. Like some of you noted, and I concurred that it was more of a class
struggle rather than a communal issue. Unfortunately, the crafty political
leaders of E. Pakistan/Bangladesh were able to use religion as a bait to
antagonize the poor people and make them rise against the so-called
"oppressions" of the "Hindus". This certainly gave the "Brahmins" within the
Muslim society the power to control the destiny of the land we call Bangladesh,
today. My question here is, did the poor Bengali Muslims benefit in any manner
under the neo "Brahmo"-Muslim Leadership? The answer is clearly no. Then why
do people keep harping on the Hindu atrocities, even after 52 years of their
eviction of Bangladesh?
The other issue is related to a segment of the Bangladeshi people as
represented by Mr. Siddiki, who consider that somehow to establish their own
identity as "Bengalis", they have to display more affinity to the Arabic
culture, and distance themselves from the "evil" Hindus. Bengalis cannot be
compared or correlated with the Arabs in any manner. We are socially,
culturally, morally and even structurally different from the Arabs and I
believe that they do not look upon the Bengalis as their equals, correct me, if
I am wrong. They consider themselves as pure Islamic, where the Bangladeshi
Moslems are somehow inferior in in their view. The question is, why then this
affinity of the Mullah class to align themselves with the Arabs? Is their
hatred against the Hindus so visceral?
Shomir
=========================================
csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
> It does not cost anything to type your blissful ignorance
> and personal attacks in a forum like this but it does so
> to study History or the Anthropology of the People we are
> discussing and get an Advanced Degree on it.
May I ask you sir, what is your advanced degree and from what University did
you obtain that?
> I am concluding with an impression that people who do not
> have a sufficiently long history of having bread on their
> table, have now access to bull-shit over the internet in
> different forums with all kinds of ignorance.
What made you believe that I am unable to provide "bread" for my family?
Regarding the bull-shit part, by now everyone in this forum knows who is the
culprit. Thank goodness for the internet, that fake bigots like yourself can
be exposed with a few clicks of the mouse. What a shame, that you have to lie
about your own academic credentials, specially when you probably do not even
have the credentials to be a janitor at "Yale University, CT, US."
csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
> While it is
> true that such people are exported to the West by the same
> Nation-States that they try to defend, in Murshed Choudhury,
> Shomir, and other such people's cases lack or absence of
> protection from a Nation State might give rise to pathological
> dislike or hatred for the very nation states where they were
> born, as they are repeatedly demonstrating. Signing off.
"Such people are exported to the west" !! What audacity... You Mr. Siddiky, you
are a low life! You are ungrateful. It hurts to know that you attended St.
Pauls School in Darjeeling, West Bengal, India and you got your high school
degree in 1989. The hypocrite you are, how easily you forgot that what you are
today, you have acquired through your education in India, in West Bengal. You
have received their love, care and attention, and now you turn around
and say vile and derogatory things about the "ghoti" bengalis. "Je paté khowa,
shei paté h***" ! You tell me, what human being will do that?
csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
> I am trained in South Asian Cultural History (I have a PHD
> from Yale University, CT, US) I am an academic and not a
> politician. My job is to try to educate the people; not to convince
> them to vote for me. I have no real stake in trying to convince
> the people in this forum to agree with me but to get an idea
about
> Our (of People of Bangladesh) sense of being in a Nation-State with
> cultural boundaries.
Sir, you are a disgrace for the Bengalis...from both sides of the Ganges.
Please stop pretending to be an educator and lecturing us about the
anthropology and History of the people of South Asia. You have no credibility,
and you are a foolish crook and a fundamentalist bigot.
Shomir
Arindam Banerjee
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury wrote in message <382583A4...@zoom.co.uk>...
>Hi,
>Your first point ?
>What is it with the constant refferal to 'Arabs'? why is it that they are
>seen as the be all and end all of Islamic influence in Bengal?
Because Arabia is the source of all Islamic culture.
>The Turks, the Mughal empire, Arab traders and many others over the
>centuries helped shape Bengal.
Bangladesh.
>You don't hear Roman Catholics or Protestants reffer to each other as an
>Arab religion do you?
No, they are of Semitic (Jewish) origin, Europeanised now.
>It's not about that, people have gotten past that stage, it's about the
>message it conveys to each and every follower, the faith.
>As to why not EVERY Bengali or EVERY Hindu turned muslim. Well how should I
>know, why would I care.
It is important to many. Otherwise you may blame some Hindu system like
caste
system.
>Faith in the way they live is perhaps an answer,
Why did they acquire a new faith, and why did they give up old ones?
>their reduced exposure to Muslims another.
>This is not about which religion is better than which - something I sense
>is the subtext of what you say - but about why a lot of people many have
>embraced a religion that was new and radically different.
Exactly. They were being fashionable. Like modern Marxists and Maoists.
>At present a very vocal section of the Hindu population in India is
>decrying the rise of Christianity in India - amongst the LOWER CASTES.
>Again does this not show that a large section of the people desire change
>and to break free from the particular problems of the Hindu system?
That is their own business. Hinduism has not been properly propagated
to them in the past because of foreign rule.
>Or would you rather believe that they are all being brainwashed by
>secret-agent nuns from the Vatican, utilising the latest Hypnosis
>techniques...
Their agents have been around for many centuries, without much luck.
>Not everybody wants the same thing nor should they. People require
>different things from their faith, at different times. Hope, Certainty,
>Solice, Guidance...
>
>You second point:
>What are the untouchables?
No one I know.
What does it mean to be of a lower caste to
>someone?
I do not know. All castes are the same from a Hindu point of view.
However each caste may feel itself superior as it has access to
certain functions unique to it.
>Are Human beings made in differing orders of quality?
All human beings are different with both strong and weak points.
>I don't know about your thinking on this, but my belief is that we are all
>as worthy of decent treatment and consideration as each other.
I agree.
>So explain to me why this is nonsense?
How can I?
>No Bengali is 'Arab' - see point one - but a Bengali can be Muslim.
Every Muslim is an Arabphile. To that extent he is Arab. A Bengali Muslim
is a contradiction in terms. Arabs consider everyone else inferior,
including
Bengalis. Being a Bengali Muslim means putting your feet in boats going
in different directions.
>It's is a faith NOT a RACE.
Okay.
>And what precisely are you reffering to?
??
>The Partition of India I presume.
No.
-snip-
Arindam Banerjee
Shomir
> I have no doubt that Arindam Banerjee can learn quite a lot from Murshed Ahmed
> Choudhury. I agree with everything that Mr. Choudhury has written here.
This is a rather condescending statement asking Mr. Banerjee to learn things from
someone with whom he does not agree. This is not a science and there is no
absolute "correctness" of the ideologies presented here. You may agree or disagree
with ones statement, but it is unfair to ask someone to "learn" from someone.
This is Mr. Murshed's statement that you endorsed:
> For example, the fact that there are millions of Hindus that did not convert to
> Islam does not invalidate the thesis that "so many Bengalis would not have
> turned to Islam if there were not problems with the Hindu system." Calling the
> statement "Caste schedules made perfectly decent folk into sub-standard
> creatures", a 'nonsense' is preposterous.
This point needs to be looked closely. Everyone acknowledges that religious
problems exist within Hinduism, the question is why did the lower caste Bengalis of
East Pakistan /Bangladesh convert, and not the lower casts of West Bengal ?..or
majority of the other states of India? Is it because the upper caste Hindus and
landowners treated the lower castes any better than their counter parts in
Bangladesh? Class struggle existed then, as it exists now and remember most of the
poor in India are lower caste people, and they continue to remain Hindus. There
has to be something else other than the "Hindu Oppression" theory why Bengalis
accepted Islam in such large numbers.
> Yes, the Hindu bigots of India need to stop the bashing of Christian
> missionaries. Instead, they do need to work on civilizing themselves, on
> respecting all human beings (including the ones that are known as
> untouchables).
I don't see a great many Hindus bashing Christian Missionaries. I have attended a
Missionary school as millions of Indians have over the years, and never felt there
was any Hindu bigotry against Christian Missionaries. The fact of the matter is
some Missionaries have been more aggressive in converting poor Hindus, taking
advantage of their poverty. Imagine the Missionary Church in a remote village
providing food, clothing, medicine to the poor people.... for some time, and in
some ways making those poor folks dependent on the alms. One day, the Missionary
Holy Father breaks the bad news..."sorry folks, there is not enough money to serve
all, only ones that will belong to our Church will continue to receive our
help".... In light of that ultimatum of sorts, what would the poor people do?
What do you think? Now, tactics like that certainly can arouse a section of the
people who aren't receiving help from the Church. It is not hard to understand why
such people do have grievances against the Church. Now, this may not happen
everywhere, but I am certain such things do happen. Protests under such
circumstances can not be termed "bigotry". Having said that, I will also concede
that there indeed are the true Hindu zealots who will go to any length to see the
Missionaries off, for the fear of loss of their influence. Such people should be
brought to justice.
> Sukhamaya Bain
Shomir
===============================
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury
The ordinary Bengali muslim's idea of Islamic duty is probably no more than pray
5 times a day, fast at Ramadan, do Haj, give Alms and mind what you eat -
Halal/Haram.
I don't think there are many that care to take their faith beyond that. As for
their culture, that is a different matter. I don't think this really qualifies
as being an Arab culture, it's simply exercising your faith.
Arab culture is something of which I know very little, indeed I do not care to
know much of it.
Arabia's relevance to me, and many other muslims, is one of a historical and
contextual nature.
It is where the religion was first revealed and from where it began it's spread
accross the globe, and to all cultures.
Personally I would say it's comparable to the interest a seizemologist would
have in the epicentre of an earthquake. It's where things began.
Unless you believe that the religion is man-made you cannot really be
defferential to the Arabs. After all it is the word of God not the word of an
Arab.
I might one day wish to see the mosque in Medina, but that hardly means I value
Arabs more than Bengalis?
Why would something like that be of so much significance to you?
If you really want to know, the place closest to my heart, outside of
Bangladesh, India & Britain, is Argentina. And that's purely because I fell in
love with their football team in 1986 and still support them fanatically - at a,
financially induced, distance.
It also helps that Argentine women look utterly beautiful...
And this is another very important issue, values and priorities.
I would say that Islam was perhaps the most complete system of social justice
and ethics of all the major, monotheistic, religions. It provided a certainty
that sinners, evil-doers and those that facilitate them, shall be punished come
the day of judgement.
This is enormously important to the weak, the poor, the insecure and the
wronged.
They need a belief in fairness and justice and Islam provided it when society at
large did not seem to do so.
If you look at society now, a lot of the more 'humane' aspects of social justice
are actually in accordance with Islamic laws and directives.
Yes the Hindu system developed right on our doorstep, but that does not mean
that it MUST be the only faith that people can look towards.
You are in severe danger of coming off as a sort of fascist... What people
choose to believe is not down to where it was developed - Islam BTW was not
developed by man but by God - but whether it meets their internal needs - as I
mentioned before these are various and different for all people.
If you still cannot separate a faith from a race then it's not worth writing on
is it?
What you seem to be saying is that Hinduism is proof of 'Bengali-ness' and that
anything else is a rejection of the Bengali identity.
In fact this is rather absurd since Bengal had, prior to Hindu conquest, been a
hotbed for a whole mass of other faiths and belief systems. And post Mughal
conquest, continued to develop the Hindu system along with integrating Islam in
to the 'Bengali way'.
It might not be so clean in reality, as it can be presented in abstraction, but
Bengal adapted each faith/peoples that came to the region, and reinvigotared
itself with the new.
This is precisely my hope for Islam, that it has a positive influence. I do not
want every Bengali to be Muslim, but merely to accept that some Bengalis are and
that they are non-the-less Bengali too.
In fact part of my main arguement is that Bengal was always multi-faith, that a
'Bengali' identity held together the people through many centuries in the face
of ever changing belief systems. That there is a 'Bengali-ness' outside of Hindu
or Muslim, but not completely without their influence and input.
regards,
Murshed
Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> Murshed Ahmed Choudhury wrote in message <382583A4...@zoom.co.uk>...
> >Hi,
> >Your first point ?
> >What is it with the constant refferal to 'Arabs'? why is it that they are
> >seen as the be all and end all of Islamic influence in Bengal?
>
> Because Arabia is the source of all Islamic culture.
>
> >The Turks, the Mughal empire, Arab traders and many others over the
> >centuries helped shape Bengal.
>
> Bangladesh.
>
> >You don't hear Roman Catholics or Protestants reffer to each other as an
> >Arab religion do you?
>
> No, they are of Semitic (Jewish) origin, Europeanised now.
>
> >It's not about that, people have gotten past that stage, it's about the
> >message it conveys to each and every follower, the faith.
> >As to why not EVERY Bengali or EVERY Hindu turned muslim. Well how should I
> >know, why would I care.
>
> It is important to many. Otherwise you may blame some Hindu system like
> caste
> system.
>
> >Faith in the way they live is perhaps an answer,
>
> Why did they acquire a new faith, and why did they give up old ones?
>
> >their reduced exposure to Muslims another.
> >This is not about which religion is better than which - something I sense
> >is the subtext of what you say - but about why a lot of people many have
> >embraced a religion that was new and radically different.
>
> Exactly. They were being fashionable. Like modern Marxists and Maoists.
>
> >At present a very vocal section of the Hindu population in India is
> >decrying the rise of Christianity in India - amongst the LOWER CASTES.
> >Again does this not show that a large section of the people desire change
> >and to break free from the particular problems of the Hindu system?
>
> That is their own business. Hinduism has not been properly propagated
> to them in the past because of foreign rule.
>
> >Or would you rather believe that they are all being brainwashed by
> >secret-agent nuns from the Vatican, utilising the latest Hypnosis
> >techniques...
>
> Their agents have been around for many centuries, without much luck.
>
> >Not everybody wants the same thing nor should they. People require
> >different things from their faith, at different times. Hope, Certainty,
> >Solice, Guidance...
> >
> >You second point:
> >What are the untouchables?
>
> No one I know.
>
> What does it mean to be of a lower caste to
> >someone?
>
> I do not know. All castes are the same from a Hindu point of view.
> However each caste may feel itself superior as it has access to
> certain functions unique to it.
>
> >Are Human beings made in differing orders of quality?
>
> All human beings are different with both strong and weak points.
>
> >I don't know about your thinking on this, but my belief is that we are all
> >as worthy of decent treatment and consideration as each other.
>
> I agree.
>
> >So explain to me why this is nonsense?
>
> How can I?
>
> >No Bengali is 'Arab' - see point one - but a Bengali can be Muslim.
>
> Every Muslim is an Arabphile. To that extent he is Arab. A Bengali Muslim
> is a contradiction in terms. Arabs consider everyone else inferior,
> including
> Bengalis. Being a Bengali Muslim means putting your feet in boats going
> in different directions.
>
> >It's is a faith NOT a RACE.
>
> Okay.
>
> >And what precisely are you reffering to?
>
> ??
>
> >The Partition of India I presume.
>
> No.
>
> -snip-
>
> Arindam Banerjee
Arindam Banerjee
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury wrote in message <382642A7...@zoom.co.uk>...
>Hi,
>The ordinary Bengali muslim's idea of Islamic duty is probably no more than
pray
>5 times a day, fast at Ramadan, do Haj, give Alms and mind what you eat -
>Halal/Haram.
So far as this ng is concerned they seem far too much interested in what
Hindus
do.
>I don't think there are many that care to take their faith beyond that. As
for
>their culture, that is a different matter. I don't think this really
qualifies
>as being an Arab culture, it's simply exercising your faith.
Which is Arab.
>Arab culture is something of which I know very little, indeed I do not care
to
>know much of it.
Really?
>Arabia's relevance to me, and many other muslims, is one of a historical
and
>contextual nature.
>It is where the religion was first revealed and from where it began it's
spread
>accross the globe, and to all cultures.
What happened to those cultures, say in Iran? Won't you say they were
replaced
by Arab culture?
>Personally I would say it's comparable to the interest a seizemologist
would
>have in the epicentre of an earthquake. It's where things began.
So it is very important.
>
>Unless you believe that the religion is man-made you cannot really be
>defferential to the Arabs. After all it is the word of God not the word of
an
>Arab.
It is the dictated word of the Prophet Mohammed, an Arab, as revealed to him
by
the Angel Gabriel. (As I understand)
>I might one day wish to see the mosque in Medina, but that hardly means I
value
>Arabs more than Bengalis?
Perhaps, if they would have you as one of them.
>Why would something like that be of so much significance to you?
Because, unlike us, Muslims want others to be Muslims. So one should know
what
one may get, and what one must give up, and what one must be like, in case
they
are successful.
>If you really want to know, the place closest to my heart, outside of
>Bangladesh, India & Britain, is Argentina. And that's purely because I fell
in
>love with their football team in 1986 and still support them fanatically -
at a,
>financially induced, distance.
>It also helps that Argentine women look utterly beautiful...
Better than Bengali women?
>And this is another very important issue, values and priorities.
>I would say that Islam was perhaps the most complete system of social
justice
>and ethics of all the major, monotheistic, religions. It provided a
certainty
>that sinners, evil-doers and those that facilitate them, shall be punished
come
>the day of judgement.
>This is enormously important to the weak, the poor, the insecure and the
>wronged.
I do not think so. They remain that way in such an expectation, without
finding
out ways to change the existing system. Fatalism is a curse.
>They need a belief in fairness and justice and Islam provided it when
society at
>large did not seem to do so.
I think this is wrong. Pre-Islamic Arabia seems a much better place for
women, by the sole
example Islamists cannot deny, that of the independent lady Khadija.
>If you look at society now, a lot of the more 'humane' aspects of social
justice
>are actually in accordance with Islamic laws and directives.
What?
Our Indian legal system is based upon the British system.
>Yes the Hindu system developed right on our doorstep, but that does not
mean
>that it MUST be the only faith that people can look towards.
Pardon me, the term "faith" is not Hindu at all. Hindus may or may not have
faith
in any of their gods and goddesses. It is a personal affair. Such faith as
you
refer to relates to belief in certain apparently fantastic events, not found
on a
day to day basis, and shared by all who subscribe to such belief. Such a
concept of "faith" does not exist in Hinduism.
>You are in severe danger of coming off as a sort of fascist...
You are in severe danger of name-calling.
What people
>choose to believe is not down to where it was developed - Islam BTW was not
>developed by man but by God - but whether it meets their internal needs -
as I
>mentioned before these are various and different for all people.
But the facts and the rules are the same for all.
>If you still cannot separate a faith from a race then it's not worth
writing on
>is it?
Probably not.
>What you seem to be saying is that Hinduism is proof of 'Bengali-ness' and
that
>anything else is a rejection of the Bengali identity.
Not quite so drastic - but rejecting the Hindu identity, belittling it, is
certainly
not-Bengali. Trashing the caste system, which many Hindus find use for,
amounts
to showing disrespect for the Hindu identity. Using a perverted view of the
caste system to debunk the entirety of Hinduism is plain villainy.
>In fact this is rather absurd since Bengal had, prior to Hindu conquest,
What Hindu conquest?
been a
>hotbed for a whole mass of other faiths and belief systems. And post Mughal
>conquest, continued to develop the Hindu system along with integrating
Islam in
>to the 'Bengali way'.
Yes, that was a golden period. Pity it did not continue. Really, very sad.
>It might not be so clean in reality, as it can be presented in abstraction,
but
>Bengal adapted each faith/peoples that came to the region, and
reinvigotared
>itself with the new.
How has Bangladesh been doing in this regard?
For West Bengal I do say that Communist faith has been a negative influence.
>This is precisely my hope for Islam, that it has a positive influence. I do
not
>want every Bengali to be Muslim, but merely to accept that some Bengalis
are and
>that they are non-the-less Bengali too.
Legally, geographically, racially and linguistically, certainly.
In India we would not like to impose Hinduism upon them, just as in
Bangladesh we
would not like to impose Islam upon Hindus. Since Islam and Hinduism are
completely different, psychologically Bengali Hindus and Muslims are
different,
though that should not matter at all in real life, rather the different
cultures should
enrich each other.
>In fact part of my main arguement is that Bengal was always multi-faith,
that a
>'Bengali' identity held together the people through many centuries in the
face
>of ever changing belief systems. That there is a 'Bengali-ness' outside of
Hindu
>or Muslim, but not completely without their influence and input.
Agreed.
Arindam Banerjee
>regards,
>
>Murshed
>
Shomir
> My response:
>
> Well to do Hindus who do not like this tactics of conversion of Hindus to
> Christians should extend helping hands to the poor before the missionaries do.
> Even the poor Hindus (who do not like this tactics of conversion of Hindus to
> Christians) should go to the rich Hindus to get some compassion for the poor,
> instead of complaining against the missionaries.
> After all, the missionaries are trying to accomplish a mission through
> compassion, not through force or intimidation.
Some of the zealous ones are also there to convert poor Hindus by hook or by crook,
why is that so hard for you to accept? Agreed, many of the Missionaries are
dedicated people, and they are not the ones who are assaulted or threatened.
> No one should be allowed to burn churches or harass the missionaries.
First of all, those incidences were not sanctioned acts by any organized religious
parties, and bad people do not seek anyone's "permission" to perform acts of
vandalism, as such it is not something that is "allowed", those bad things
happened! Besides, how many church burnings did you read about? From your
statement, it almost seems as if hundreds of churches are being burnt down! Now,
several Missionaries have been killed/assaulted and threatened, we have heard of 3
high profile cases, 2 in Orissa and 1 in Bihar.. what other information do you
have? I am not condoning any one of those acts, they are heinous and despicable
acts of cowards/bigots...but that is not a national phenomenon.
> Looks like we are diverting a lot from the subject matter of this thread, and I
> do not see much need for me to comment on the original wothless posting of a
> bigot named Siddiky.
Well, you cannot blame me for that diversion, I have stuck to my original point,
and have tried to stoutly defend my claim for Bengali heritage, in the face of the
bigoted statements by Mr. Siddiki. You responded to Mr. Murshed's comments
regarding Christianity and its Missionaries. I was, and am only trying to show
other plausible reasons for attacks against Missionaries.
It is your choice to participate in a discussion or not, no one here compels anyone
to express their opinions. You may choose to act as you wish, no prior
announcement required.
Regards
Shomir
==================================
>
> So, I do not intend to post any more on this thread.
>
> Sukhamaya Bain
Nalinaksha Bhattacharyya
Murshed Ahmed Choudhury (mur...@zoom.co.uk) wrote:
: What you seem to be saying is that Hinduism is proof of 'Bengali-ness' and th
at
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: anything else is a rejection of the Bengali identity.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: This is precisely my hope for Islam, that it has a positive influence. I do n
ot
: want every Bengali to be Muslim, but merely to accept that some Bengalis are
and
: that they are non-the-less Bengali too.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: In fact part of my main arguement is tha a
: 'Bengali' identity held together the people through many centuries in the fac
e
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: of ever changing belief systems. That there is a 'Bengali-ness' outside of Hi
ndu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: or Muslim, but not completely without their influence and input.
: regards,
: Murshed
Murshed Saheb,
First let me offer my kudos for an eminently sensible post. I intend to
supplement the points made by you.
I think one of the best examples of the composite Hindu and Muslim effect
on Bengali culture is the poem "Bidrohi" by Nazrul. It is replete with
BOTH Hindu and Muslim imagery. Thus it talks about "Khodar Aras Asan
chariya" and "Bidrohi Brigu, Bhagoban buke eke dei podochinno".
Dr. Shahidullah had once said "It is true that we are Hindus and
Muslims. It is also a greater truth that we are all Bengalis. Mother
nature has stamped us with the characteristic of Bengaliness-we cannot
hide those similarities behind Tiki and Dari, Dhuti and Lungi."[Paraphrased and
translated from Bengali]
At the mass level, Hindu and Muslim faiths had found synthesising
influences. The political mobilisation of Muslim consciousness is a
phenomenon of late 19th century. Interested netters might like to consult
Rafiuddin Ahmed's book "Bengal Muslims".
--
Nalinaksha Bhattacharyya
FOKRUL ISLAM
you don't like it, then fuck off!!!
T.H.Sanyal.
> There is smoething interesting to observe: look at any Moslem
> majority country in this world. All are basket cases. How can
the Gulf War was a basket case? Too bad the Indians who gladly work
in those countries don't know that.
ths.
T.H.Sanyal.
>> This is not possible as long as the forces that engineered the second
>> partition of Bengal remain in effective power in India.
> that partitioned India were Moslem League and Congress, and they
> are NOT in power at the present time.
I wrote "effective power". The forces that had the effective power
in India then, continue to have the effective power today.
The electoral "tamasha" has nothing to do with who has the effective
power.
Also, please refrain from name-calling. When you resort to that,
it becomes quite obvious that your argument lacks merit.
ths.
Arindam Banerjee
Ahmed
>> Choudhury. I agree with everything that Mr. Choudhury has written here.
>This is a rather condescending statement asking Mr. Banerjee to learn
things from
>someone with whom he does not agree.
Oh, I do not mind learning anything from anyone. I am always on a learning
curve.
You can learn wisdom from the wise, and stupidity from the stupid, and so
try to
be more like the former, and less like the latter.
This is not a science and there is no
>absolute "correctness" of the ideologies presented here. You may agree or
disagree
>with ones statement, but it is unfair to ask someone to "learn" from
someone.
Basically such a patronising statement amounts to self-boosting, especially
when such
an exercise is sorely needed.
>This is Mr. Murshed's statement that you endorsed:
>
>> For example, the fact that there are millions of Hindus that did not
convert to
>> Islam does not invalidate the thesis that "so many Bengalis would not
have
>> turned to Islam if there were not problems with the Hindu system."
Calling the
>> statement "Caste schedules made perfectly decent folk into sub-standard
>> creatures", a 'nonsense' is preposterous.
What is stupid here is to imply that the caste system in the 12-13th century
was
as bad as anti-Hindus try to make it sound. Actually no one knows what the
social
system in Bengal was in that period. From all available evidence it seems
that
it was very loose caste-wise.
I am saying that the impression of the caste system as bad is a foreign
idea.
Caste system worked perfectly well for thousands of years and satisfied
human needs.
I know that many people will not agree, of course.
My alternative theory is that quintessential Bengali qualities (that do not
change over
centuries) caused the mass conversion to Islam. The same qualities led to
Marxism
and Maoism in our own time.
>This point needs to be looked closely. Everyone acknowledges that
religious
>problems exist within Hinduism,
I do not. There are no religious problems, there are social problems and
economic problems.
No one goes to battle on religious matters as Christian or Muslim sects do.
the question is why did the lower caste Bengalis of
>East Pakistan /Bangladesh convert, and not the lower casts of West Bengal
?..or
>majority of the other states of India? Is it because the upper caste
Hindus and
>landowners treated the lower castes any better than their counter parts in
>Bangladesh? Class struggle existed then, as it exists now and remember
most of the
>poor in India are lower caste people, and they continue to remain Hindus.
There
>has to be something else other than the "Hindu Oppression" theory why
Bengalis
>accepted Islam in such large numbers.
Exactly. The ripe-assed nature of Bengalis, trying to outsmart each other
with new
ways and manners they do not quite understand.
Arindam Banerjee
cere...@my-deja.com
"Arindam Banerjee" <ad...@interphase.aust.com> wrote:
>
> So far as this ng is concerned they seem far too much interested in
what Hindus
> do.
Who are "they". Isn't this stereotyping? What are you implying by "too
much
interested in what Hindus do"? If you are using it in a negative
connotations
that what "bad" are Hindus doing thenm you are dead wrong about me or
Mr. Murshed
any many others. There are some bigots who may do that. If you are
usinh it in a
positive/neutral connoation then obviously you wouldn't be making it
an issue. I am
intetested in learning about all religions and sure I try to read and
understand
Hindu Philosophy and religion and thus what Hindus do (Not necessarily
what wrong
the Hindus do, but what Hindu philosophy says etc), but not out of
hatred, but
out of pure interest just like interest in the works of Hume, Karl
Popper,
Oscar Wilde etc. Of course like in any religion/race there are bad
practices like
Satidha/Sahamaran was once in Bengal. But I never believed that it was
an injunction
of Hindu scripture (Geeta never said that), but just the cultural
practice of certain
bigotted segment at certain time. Same thing is true for Christianity
and Islam where
evil practices have been committed in the name of religion. Buddhists
are relatively
free from this stain.
I guesss everyone has some sort of interest in things other than
practicing religious rituals at home. Thats not wrong is it? Please
don't stereotype.
One stereotype begets a counter stereotype and the cycle can go on
forever.
>
> >I don't think there are many that care to take their faith beyond
that. As for
> >their culture, that is a different matter. I don't think this really
qualifies
> >as being an Arab culture, it's simply exercising your faith.
>
> Which is Arab.
It is factually true that "praying 5 times a day, fast at Ramadan, do
Haj, give
Alms and mind what you eat" as Mr. Murshed said is Arab in origin
(Via Islam). But the
issue of this thread was whether that has anything to do with being
bengaliness. Your
curt answer "Which is Arab" indicates you disagreed with Mr. Murshed
and insist that
since the belief is Arab in origin hence it cannot be compatible with
Bengaliness. Now
what about the large number of Bengali Christians? By your argument
they cannot be
Bengali either, right? If just by believeing/practicing in something
alien disqualifies
one from bengaliness then what about socilaism/Marxism? Then Jyoti
Basu is not a Benagli
by your draconian criterion. And by extension believing/practicing
anything non-Bengali
in origin, like secular humanism, aethism, Taekwondo, Dianetics etc
should disqualify a
Bengali from Bengaliness etc?
>
> >Arab culture is something of which I know very little, indeed I do
not care to
> >know much of it.
>
> Really?
Is "really" a disbelief/surprise. Then maybe its time you did a
reappraisal. maybe
you are so mired in your stereotype that you failed to see the
diversity among the
Muslim born "Bengalis". There are significant number of truly secular
(Mr. Murshed
surely proved he is one) Muslim born bengalis who may not have any
preferentail
interest in rabaic or Arabic culture. The diversity covers the entire
spectrum:
Secular Humnanist, non-secular humanist, outright communal,
non-communal fanatics,
non-religious yet communal.. Do you know Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi,
Assad etc are
aethists yet communal (anti-jew) etc.
>
> >Arabia's relevance to me, and many other muslims, is one of a
historical and
> >contextual nature.
> >It is where the religion was first revealed and from where it began
it's spread
> >accross the globe, and to all cultures.
>
> What happened to those cultures, say in Iran? Won't you say they were
replaced
> by Arab culture?
Yes, it was. The same way that Druid, aztec etc cultures got
invaded by
Christianity. But was it relevant to issue of Bengaliness and
(Islamic) faith?
>
> >Personally I would say it's comparable to the interest a
seizemologist would
> >have in the epicentre of an earthquake. It's where things began.
>
> So it is very important.
Important to whom? And why? It may be important in a pedagogical
sense as to how
and why a religion/faith spreads and evolves. It is important to
those who
expresses interest in such study as in academia in the social
sciences. What
does that meaning of "importance" relevant here? or are you implying
something
else. Please clarify without any prejudgement about Mr. Murshed or
myself.
>
> >I might one day wish to see the mosque in Medina, but that hardly
means I value
> >Arabs more than Bengalis?
>
> Perhaps, if they would have you as one of them.
The "perhaps" was not a logical conclusion. It maay at best reflect
your
predisposed view of Mr. Murshed. Accepting does not automatically
trigger
a preference. I will be gladly accepted in a Mosque and a Church.
That would
never generate a prefernce for them over Bengali(culture). I cannot
speak
on beahlf of Mr. Murshed but I can bet he would say the same. So the
perhaps
was a an unfortunate putting of words in his mouth.
>
> >Why would something like that be of so much significance to you?
>
> Because, unlike us, Muslims want others to be Muslims. So one should
know
> what one may get, and what one must give up, and what one must be
like, in case
> they are successful.
Again stare at your statement "Muslims want others to be Muslims".
It is NOT a
general truth. As I clarified above it may be many Mulsim's desire,
but by no
means by all. There are all assortments of persusasions among the
Muslim borns.
Even the large segment of passive believers (praying, fasting etc)
do not bother
about preaching, activism etc, let alone the secularists. Only the
hard core
ones do. So such a stereotype was unconscionable.
>
> >If you really want to know, the place closest to my heart, outside of
> >Bangladesh, India & Britain, is Argentina. And that's purely because
I fell in
> >love with their football team in 1986 and still support them
fanatically - at a,
> >financially induced, distance.
> >It also helps that Argentine women look utterly beautiful...
>
> Better than Bengali women?
My share of irrelevance: Some Argentinian women are indeed prettier
than
many Bengali women as are some Bengali women than many Brazilian
women.
Does that change tip the logic one way or the other for our thread?
:)
> I think this is wrong. Pre-Islamic Arabia seems a much better place
for
> women, by the sole example Islamists cannot deny, that of the
independent
> lady Khadija.
Again digression (irrelevant to our thread): This may be debatable.
Pre Islamic
Arabia was an abyss of vice. Cases Daughters being buried alive were
common. One
example may not make a rule. Maybe that they were not officially
reduced to a
lower staus as they were in Islam. But in no way they were better
overall. Their
plight just changed form.
>
> But the facts and the rules are the same for all.
Yes, but they are not rigidly adhered to everywhere. Can you equate
Saudi
Arabia with malaysia. There are Chinese Muslims too. Do you have
any issue
with those Chinese Mulsims who just do what Mr. Murshed was
pointing out
above? Indigenous Ingrained cultural traits can modulate the
religious dictums in a
powerful way
>
> >If you still cannot separate a faith from a race then it's not worth
writing on
> >is it?
>
> Probably not.
You mean cannot still separate faith from a race (and hence its
probably not worth
writing..). But sure you should see it now that a passive faith (or
lack of it among
those born in it) at least can be separated from race. Or you will
still disagree
(Because you have to?: Agreeing is not in your book ever ?)
>
> >What you seem to be saying is that Hinduism is proof of
'Bengali-ness' and that
> >anything else is a rejection of the Bengali identity.
>
> Not quite so drastic - but rejecting the Hindu identity, belittling
it, is certainly
> not-Bengali. Trashing the caste system, which many Hindus find use
for, amounts
> to showing disrespect for the Hindu identity. Using a perverted view
of the
> caste system to debunk the entirety of Hinduism is plain villainy.
Here I would agree with you. But Mr. Murshed and many other
secularists would not
trash Hinduism. You will always find someone from religion 'X'
trashing religion
'Y' (Take you pick for X and Y). That does not justify a wholesale
stereotyping.
How much do I need to belabour this point? But sure I have to state
that Satidaha
was inhuman. Progressive Hindus like Rammmohan Roy and Ishwarchandra
Vidyasagar
persuaded the British rulers to outlaw it. Were they trashing
Hindus? There are
always legit issue to gripe about without prejudice. Caste system
may have been
the order of the day but sociteies evolve and we now have universal
declaration
of human rights which is in direct conflict with Caste system and
India is
signatory to it. But that was another digression.
>
> >In fact this is rather absurd since Bengal had, prior to Hindu
conquest,
>
> What Hindu conquest?
I think he his referring to the reclamation of the Hindu dyansty
from
the Buddhist one in early Bengal/India. I am not not sure about the
date and
name. (Shashanka?)
>
> been a
> >hotbed for a whole mass of other faiths and belief systems. And post
Mughal
> >conquest, continued to develop the Hindu system along with
integrating Islam in
> >to the 'Bengali way'.
>
> Yes, that was a golden period. Pity it did not continue. Really,
very sad.
I agree fully here.
>
> >It might not be so clean in reality, as it can be presented in
abstraction, but
> >Bengal adapted each faith/peoples that came to the region, and
reinvigotared
> >itself with the new.
>
> How has Bangladesh been doing in this regard?
> For West Bengal I do say that Communist faith has been a negative
influence.
Communists have been a negative influence on what? religious
harmony? How so?
I thought the context above was religious harmony. I cannot see how
communism
can have negative influence on religious harmony. It can have
serious negative
effect on economy and intellectual and personal freedom though.
> would not like to impose Islam upon Hindus. Since Islam and Hinduism
are
> completely different, psychologically Bengali Hindus and Muslims are
> different,
> though that should not matter at all in real life, rather the
different
> cultures should
> enrich each other.
I disgree with the "psychologically Bengali Hindus and Muslims are
different" part. This statement can only be true if the word
rabid/fanatical
is appended to "hindus" and "Muslims", or to either one of them.
certainly
agree they can enrich each other as has Lalon Fakir, Kabir, etc.
the_virtuous_vulcan
T.H.Sanyal. <TH...@psuvm.psu.edu> wrote:
Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, UAE are barbaric desert kingdoms flourishing
on oil wealth and producing Osama bin Ladens and other varieties of
Islamic terrorists. Of course such cowards have always been looked
up to by their shameless bootlickers such as your noble self. All
Islam countries are basket cases. Where there is no oil, terrorism
shows its ugly face and bloody hand much earlier. East Timor, Kashmir,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kosovo and Chechnya are some prime examples.
(I am sure that Bangladesh will add itself to the list, very soon.)
But then again leftist intellectuals like you have always found much
solace and comfort in rationalizing and glorifying the human rights
and political ideologies of these dagger-dangling/Allah-swearing/bomb
throwing Moslem rascals.
Iraq maybe (?) a lesser exception to the above "rule", but then
again an exception proves the existence of a rule.
> ths.
Oh, BTW, you should not be using the University e-mail facility to
post on the Internet. The University e-mail facility is meant for
University (Penn State Univ.) work and not for posting on this forum.
*********************************************
The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
!!! ISLAM IS A BARBARIC RELIGION !!!
the_virtuous_vulcan
cere...@my-deja.com wrote:
>...[deleted]....<
> Do you know Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Assad etc are
> aethists yet communal (anti-jew) etc.
Being anti-Jewish is actually a part of the Mohammedan Manifesto
(Quran). [I can cite quotes from the Quran which rail Jews.] Also
CNN had a picture of Saddam Hussein praying on Friday (with the
caption stating that he (Hussein) was praying.) Thus Hussein is
not an atheist. Same goes for Gaddafi and Assad - that is they are
NOT atheists. They are believing Moslems and have aligned with the
Communists but not with the ideology of godlessness as preached by
Communist Manifesto.
*********************************************
The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
!!! ISLAM IS A BARBARIC RELIGION !!!
the_virtuous_vulcan
Nalinaksha Bhattacharyya <bhat...@ms.umanitoba.ca> wrote:
>....[deleted]....<
> At the mass level, Hindu and Muslim faiths had found synthesising
> influences. The political mobilisation of Muslim consciousness is a
> phenomenon of late 19th century. Interested netters might like to
> consult Rafiuddin Ahmed's book "Bengal Muslims".
I have not read the book, but your thesis (on Hindu-Moslem symbiosis)
is just garbage as the facts simply state the opposite. When it comes
to defense of Islam (Jihad) a Moslem is a Moslem; he is true to what
his ancestral boss (Prophet Mohammed) said in the hadiths.
Yes, some Moslems are emancipated. In Shantiniketan we had Mujtaba
Ali and also Abu Sayyed Ayub, and today one may cite many Moslems in
India as liberal, emancipated and what not. These are true facts.
The problem is that we have another extreme variety of Osma bin Laden
and other members of Harakat-ul-Ansar and Lashkar-e-Toiba fanatics.
They interpret Islam and religious tolerance much differently than
your hallowed ensemble of emancipated, liberal Moslems. Unless one
accepts Islam they (these groups) would wage a religious war (Jihad)
to wipe out the infidels - as per strict Islamic dictates. The other
group of Wahabi Moslems also behave in such extremes. These lot are
a different breed than the emancipated flock your citation lists.
Both groups follow the same Mohammedan Manifesto [Quran] which does
command violence and genocide against infidels. Which group is correct
in interpreting the Quran, assuming that the book contains *unique*
directives from God (Allah) to mankind via Mohammed ?
> Nalinaksha Bhattacharyya
*********************************************
The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
!!! ISLAM IS A BARBARIC RELIGION !!!
the_virtuous_vulcan
"FOKRUL ISLAM" <b...@drymouth.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> why are there some dirty fuckers trying to bring race into this ng.
>
> you don't like it, then fuck off!!!
FUCK OF FOKRUL AND EAT SHIT
csid...@my-deja.com
lacking in
> balance.
> Mr. Siddiky does seem irrational and obsessive in his defining, and
re-defining,
> of what it is to be a Bengali and what exactly the criteria is for an
identity
> to exist or not to exist.
> Regardless, your comments seem to touch upon the very matters which
help
> perpetuate the Siddiky's of this world.
> Hindu OR Muslim, a Bengali is a Bengali. That was my main concern and
feeling
> when I initially responded to his babblings, it is also my response to
your
> opportunism.
> Hindu Bengalis are not ethnically nor historically different from
Muslim
> Bengalis, they are the same. To pick and choose our historical
forefathers on
> the basis of religion is devisive and mendacious.
> Kazi Nazrul spoke of Bengalis, Tagore spoke of Bengal - my golden
Bengal -
> neither divided the land here or there or by the forskin of one's
-----!
> As a Bengali I feel proud of both - and both incidentally are from the
west -
> but I do not think aha Kazi Nazrul I like him because he's muslim or
dislike
> Tagore because he's Hindu. I like them both because they show that
there is
> beauty and spirite in the Bengali people. That the monsoons, cyclones
and
> famines cannot wipe away the laughter and joy and love that we can
feel. That
> Hindu or Muslim, skin off or on - as my local Halal butcher always
asks, they
> are proof of something GOOD about OUR people.
> I can't really say I feel emotionally attached to any country, more
than
> Bangladesh, but I can't deny that Bangladesh is just part of something
greater,
> better, more satisfying and ALSO LOST, GONE, FINISHED. My village is
in
> Bangladesh, my parents grew up there, my children - if and when I get
round to
> having some - will go there, how on Earth am I supposed to be
delegitimising it
> by my thoughts of Bengal or my feelings about Bengalis?
> It is part and parcel of my thinking when I think of Bengalis or
Bengal!
> They are not whole without Bangladesh, and Bangladesh is not the whole
story in
> and of its self!
> But Shomir I would say this, so many Bengalis would not have turned to
Islam if
> there were not problems with the Hindu system. Caste schedules made
perfectly
> decent folk into sub-standard creatures, class and caste collussion
led to the
> economic deprivation of large sections of Bengal and opportunistic,
> self interest under the Raj led to the formation of an unloved and
unprotected
> underclass.
> If Islam offered anything that the Bengali culture could not, and had
not, it
deny the
> people access to.
> What gets my goat though is that what was essentially a case of class
> exploitation turned comunal and played into the hands of the smaller,
though
> none-the-less greedy and malevolant, Muslim upper class.
> This is why I have reservations about your comments, and mr Siddiky's
too, they
> turn Bengali against Bengali for little other than a narrow self
interest.
> Islam once offered hope to the downtroden and dissenfranchised, but
now it is
> not relevant to Bangladesh or to today's downtroden.
> In many ways today's exploiters are the religious zealots and leaders
who take
> the life savings of gullible old women for cures to mysterious
illnesses - that
> never work, who further degrade the opportunities open to Bangladesh
by blocking
> trade and by interferring in politics. Who take money from the poor to
build
> self aggrandising mosques rather than help the poor out of their cycle
of famine
> and subsistance.
> Why do Mullahs attack NGOs and foreign charities in Bangladesh whilst
their own
> go traipsing about, around the world, looking for finance to build the
next big
> mosque or madrasa? Will Allah give them blessings or damn them to hell
fire?
> To suggest that Bengali culture is strictly a Hindu culture is as
mnuch folly as
> Mr Siddiky's rants were. Bengalis have lived through Bhudism, Jainism,
Hinduism
> (??) and Islam, they have absored the positive and negative aspects of
all these
> movements, and more importantly they have BLENDED these aspects into a
culture
> of traditions, stories, customs and rituals which are far more
relevent to
> defining Bengali culture than any selective collection of Bengali
greats.
> Anyway, enough of all this.
> Bengalis are Bengalis regardless of faith or location.
> That's good enough for me and it should be good enough for you,
> Murshed
>
> Shomir wrote:
>
> > csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > > The word "Bengal" is a misnomer. There is no such
space in
> > > our time called "Bengal". Those who consciously or
> > > unconsciously think, talk, or write about a space called
> > > "Bengal" -- are either misguiding their own imagination to
a
> > > space that does not exist in the late twentieth century,
Or,
> > > their imaginations are being exogeneously manipulated and
> > > misguided by a wide range of cultural products and
by-products
> > > to that non-existent imaginary land called "Bengal".
> >
the
> > reality of Bengal and our proud heritage. It is up to you to decide
if you
> > wish to share that with us as equals, or break away from the
mainstream of
> > Bengali culture and establish a quasi Arbi-Bengali-Islamist sect.
40+
> > million Hindus who speak the Bengali language and whose ancestors
were the
> > pall-bearers of the Bengali culture will not relinquish that honor
just
> > because a Molla wishes so. Sir, just remember, we are not going to
allow
> > you to pollute our bengali culture with the barbaric arabian
practices,
> > which you are very fond of. You can practice it yourself, but do
not impose
> > that "opobhrongsho" upon us.
> >
> > > Anyone who has difficulty in accepting the historically and
> > > politically
> > > evolved boundaries of the ONLY-BENGALI-NATION-STATE in the
world
> > > today, is motivated to live on that non-existent imaginary
land
> > > called "Bengal" in the refuge of his imaginary community.
established
> > > Nation-State does not allow the imaginary communities to
create
> > > physically the land of their imagination, they tend to
> > > delegitimize in their mind and imagination, the existence
of
> > > the nation-state that is so real.
> >
context of the
> > formation of Bangladesh. Bangladesh as you see today was not
created by the
> > "Bengalis". The overwhelming majority of the Muslims of East Bengal
in
> > their zeal to have a separate identity, sacrificed their Bengali
heritage
> > and embraced the Arabic Islamic path. This "awakening" was the
driving
> > force in the creation of East Pakistan. The fact of the matter is,
you and
> > other bigoted Islamic fanatics gladly accepted the "Pakistan" name,
> > discarding your cherished "Bangladesh" title, that you claim today!
You and
> > majority of your Muslim brothers were the ones who dishonored and
disavowed
> > the Bengali culture and have vainly tried to mimic the Arabs, to
please them
> > and get alms from them. The harder you tried, the more you were
rejected
> > not only by the Arabs but also by the Punjabis..and other Muslim
countries,
> > who considered you all as "lesser" or "lower class" of Muslims.
> >
> > On the other hand West Bengal which was severely handicapped by the
influx
> > of the millions of Bangladeshi Hindus, gladly accepted them as their
own and
> > enriched itself. Economically and politically there was a heavy
price to
> > pay, but the Bengalis of Indian Bengal were able to proudly carry
the
> > "Bengali" heritage and thrive. For your reminder..even your
national
> > anthem...is a Hindu Bengali gift!
> >
> > > My paper is about the long cultural history of
> > > delegitimization of the cultural boundaries of the
ONLY-BENGALI-
> > > NATION-STATE-IN-THE-WORLD (The Peoples Republic of Bangladesh)
> > > and the transgression of it's cultural boundaries by those
who
> > > consider themselves (in their imagination) the alien cultural
> > > insiders of Bangladesh from the West bank of the Ganges.
> >
> > "delegitimization of cultural boundaries".."transgression of it's
> > cultural boundaries"..."the alien cultural insiders of
Bangladesh"....
> > This is utter nonsense...
> >
> > Lamba-lamba Engrazi shobdo byabohar korlei ki saheb howa jai?
Kono-matha
> > mudu nei... jotto-shob abol tabol pechal paDa....
> >
> > > History, as it is known, is a sequential process
> > > ordered by time. But the assumptions of History can be
> > > modified by a theoretical investigation into the structure
of
> > > time.
> >
> > What bullshit is this.... " theoretical investigation into the
> > structure of time." ??
> >
> > > Historical events, structures, or phenomena can be grouped
> > > into different classes of time which have different
qualitative
> > > properties, different frequencies' and unequal power.
> >
> > "qualitative properties.. different frequencies'... unequal
power..." Jot
> > shob pagal-ér prolap
> >
> > > With that in mind, let us ask the question, How do people
in
> > > different
> > > time periods and different places recognize themselves as
being
> > > part of a common set, whether that set is defined by
> > > Ethnicity, Language, Religion or Geography ? Or let me ask,
> > > How do the Ethnic Bengalis of pre-partitioned India and
their
> > > siblings recognize themselves as part of the Republic of
> > > Bangladesh ?
> >
> > Very simple answer for that... if a group of people live in the same
area,
> > eat the same food, speak the same language, look similar... then
they belong
> > to the same "set". A geographic boundary created by a political
blunder do
> > not alter the reality of a common Bengali heritage. This contention
remains
> > valid even when fringe elements like you try to make yourself
believe that
> > only you and your kind deserve to carry the "jhanda" of the entire
Bengali
> > people on your weak and rickety shoulders, disregarding the fact
that you
> > don't even have a backbone!
> >
> > > Is it by their Ethnicity ? By their Language ? Or By
their
> > > Religion ? Or even by Geography ?
> >
> > None of the above... it is the realization within oneself which is
God
> > given...that tells me that I am a Bengali and I belong to Bengal.
> >
> > > The fact that they do so, atleast in their imagination
and
> > > as evident in the outpour of their imagination in
literature
> > > and other forms of cultural expression, has never been in
any
> > > doubt. But the principle through which notions of
continuity
> > > and discontinuity, boundaries, and ruptures are established
is
> > > highly complex and variable. It is as variable as Sunil
> > > Gangopadhay's self-referring utterances of his implied
Bangladeshi
> > > subjects in "Purbo Paschim" to Taslima Nasrin's Focculdian
> > > "Shame" enchanting and pleasing the smug and complacent
Bengali
> > > Hindus, who have long ceased their active participation in
> > > Hinduism.
> >
> > I can only speak for myself, and the reality is..it is my
conviction, my
> > heritage and the genes that I carry in my body that tells me ..I AM
A
> > BENGALI.. It is not my imagination, it is the reality. If you ask
yourself
> > the same question you will probably get the same answer. My
question is,
> > why do you want to deprive me of this identity? I have not asked
you for
> > anything.. I didn't deny you anything.. then why do you act so
selfishly?
> > Is this the Islamic thoughts and leanings that you embraced
compelling you
> > to act in this selfish and brutish manner? The Bengalis I know of
are all
> > quite tolerant, understanding and respectful of each other,
regardless of
> > their place of birth, east or the west of river Ganges. That is
another
> > thing that needs to be highlighted... culture is inherited, it can
not be
> > acquired by reading the Quoran.
> >
> > > The historian's classic preoccupation, observed Michel
> > > Foucault, was an overwhelming compulsion to seek out
> > > continuities and unities so that "discontinuity" was the
stigma
> > > of temporal dislocation that is the historian's task to
remove
> > > from history.
> >
> > Abar abol-tabol boka shuru hoyeche!! Ki jé bolte chan bhodrolok...
Alla-i
> > jane
> >
> > > The over-representation of the West Bengalis and
Upper-caste
> > > Hindu Bengalis, both as scholars and as topics for
research in
> > > South Asian Studies world-wide, points out single-handedly
to
> > > the stigma of the temporal dislocation of Bengal, the
> > > discontinuity of Bengal as a space and the overwhelmingly
> > > and over-representatively compulsive manner in which the
> > > West Bengali Hindus have tried to sought the continuity
of
> > > the non-existent and imaginary "Bengal" in research and
> > > scholarship to skirt their stigma of the temporal
dislocation
> > > of Bengal.
> >
> > Baap-re... this whole thing is one single sentence! Kaar babar
saddhi aché
> > ér mané bojhar??
> >
> > Mian Saheb...étar ortho ki?
> >
> > > "points out single-handedly to
> > > the stigma of the temporal dislocation of Bengal, the
> > > discontinuity of Bengal as a space and the overwhelmingly
> > > and over-representatively compulsive manner in which
the..... "
> >
> > Please explain what you meant by the above statement?
> >
> > > "West Bengali Hindus have tried to sought the continuity
of
> > > the non-existent and imaginary "Bengal" in research and
> > > scholarship to skirt their stigma of the temporal
dislocation
> > > of Bengal."
> >
> > What continuity are you talking about? A survey of the contemporary
bengali
> > literature will clearly show you that the Hindus from East Bengal
played a
> > significant role in not only maintaining but significantly enriching
the
> > language and culture as we dearly call "Bangla". Why should there
be a
> > stigma in in that? Yes Bengal was partitioned, but Bengali Hindus
did not
> > feel any stigma from the dislocation...I can assure you. Most
people
> > started their lives afresh, and in the process achieved new
horizons,
> > enriched themselves form the multi-cultural secular environment of
India.
> > The Bengalis remain fiercely loyal to their culture and heritage, at
the
> > same time share their identity as a proud Indian.
> >
> > > In the process of doing so, they have all too
> > > often transgressed and delegitimized the cultural boundaries
of
> > > the Only Bengali Nation State in the world as well
evident in
> > > Nirad Chaudhuri's "BANGreji" notion of "TATHA KAATHITA
BANGLADESH".
> >
> > Citing Nirad Babu as the sole representative of the Hindu Bengalis
is
> > unfair(not that you know the meaning of fairness) ..he is only one
among
> > many Bengali authors who was quite liberal with his choice of words.
> > Frankly, if he used the phrase "TATHA KAATHITA BANGLADESH", I have
to
> > believe that was probably when he encountered a bigot like yourself.
> >
> > > The geographic displacement of Bengal by Bangladesh and
the
> >
> > Eké baré murkhér moto kotha éta.... "displacement of Bengal by
> > Bangladesh"
> >
> > > unequal transformation of the remaining and incomplete
Bengal
> > > within the Indian state-hood of West Bengal is another
reason
> > > for the compulsive West-Bengali Hindu over-representation in
all
> > > frontiers of South asian Studies.
> >
> > Molla saheb, the more you talk the more you display your ignorance!
Let me
> > try to see if your statement make any sense... Why would "unequal
> > transformation of the remaining and incomplete Bengal within
the
> > Indian state-hood of West Bengal" create over-representation in
all
> > frontiers of South asian Studies? What are you trying to say here?
> > Bhogoban, etaré ni ki korum!!
> >
> > > This is a concealed effect
> > > of West Bengal's attempt to a complete and total cultural
> > > representation by always shifting and switching between two
sets
> > > of identities-- the INDIAN IDENTITY and the
IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI
> > > IDENTITY.
> >
> > No sir..you are wrong..we do not have any IDENTITY problem, you are
the one
> > that suffer from that! You have discarded your Bengali heritage
then you
> > tried to be a Paki, only when the Punjabis raped and sodomized you,
then you
> > became Bengali. That too..we the Hindus had to sacrifice a lot to
free you
> > and your sorry asses from the brutalities inflicted by your Punjabi
> > masters. It is then you found out that perhaps.. being a Bengali is
more
> > profitable than being a Paki.
> >
> > > Both the INDIAN and the IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI
> > > identities are very effectively used by the West Bengalis
for
> > > different situations and under different circumstances.
> > > The INDIAN IDENTITY is used to legitimize the place of
the
> > > West-Bengalis in the competitive race of the Nation-States.
> > > Whereas, the IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI IDENTITY is used by
the
> > > West Bengalis to distinguish the uniqueness of their
cultural
> > > variety among a diverse set of people in India.
> > > The IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI-IDENTITY is also used by the
> > > West-Bengalis to stir the imagination of
> > > "ONCE-A-FIRST-MODERN-STATE-OF-INDIA and of the "BENGAL
RENNAISSANCE,
> > > that can very easily stereotype itself as a progressive
> > > modernity from an underdeveloped caste-based identity.
> >
> > This part, I think I understand... and probably I can barely agree
with,
> > minus the slanted inference that somehow the Bengali Hindus of India
lack
> > the real "stuff" and need to "make believe" things, clearly that is
not
> > so..Bengalis are holding their grounds in India quite well in all
areas.
> >
> > Let me sir remind you that the Bengali Hindus of India having gone
through
> > the traumatic experience of partition have no desire to get their
house
> > burnt once again. They have learnt their lessons well, and under no
> > circumstance will they fall for the "Bengali" trap. We are happy as
> > Indians, and we are grateful that India accepted us and gave us
shelter and
> > new lives. We love our freedom, we love our heritage, we love our
culture,
> > and we are tremendously proud of it. We remain as we always were
proud
> > Bengalis..of glorious Bangla.
> >
> > Shomir
> >
> > ================================
>
> Here are a few concluding thoughts by India's 1998 Nobel
Laureate :
Islamic Star Over India
By Amartya Sen
When a Bengali Hindu performs his religious ceremonies according to the
local calendar, he
may not be fully aware that the dates invoked in his Hindu practice is
attuned to
commemorating Mohammad's flight from Mecca to Medina.
The absorption of Islamic influences within the body of Indian
civilisation is resented by some Hindu
activists who look to the pre-Muslim period as the era of purity of the
unalloyed Indian civilisation. This
raises the interesting question as to whether such a purity did, in
fact, exist in the pre-Muslim period. It
also raises the question: How best to view the integration of Islamic
rule and culture In India, and how to
assess its impact on the identity of Indian civilisation itself.
What did the Islamic influence do to India? Did it, in fact, change what
is sometimes characterised, by some
contemporary commentators, as a homogeneous culture - an allegedly
'pure' pre-Islamic culture - into an
inescapably hybrid one? The sense of a loss of Indian pureness in the
early years of this millennium seems
to have some hold in political discussions in contemporary India. How
sound is this way of seeing what
happened in the last millennium?
It is worth recollecting that even pre-Muslim India was not just Hindu
India. Indeed, to begin with the most
obvious, perhaps the greatest Indian emperor in the pre-Muslim period
was a Buddhist, to wit, Ashoka,
and there were other great non-Hindu emperors, including Harsha. Even as
the Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni
raided India, the Buddhist dynasty of the Palas was firmly in command
over eastern India. In fact, Bengal
moved rapidly from Buddhist rule to Muslim rule with only a very brief
period of Hindu monarchy in
between - in the form of the rather hapless Sena kings.
Nearly all the major world religions other than Islam were already well
represented in India well before
the last millennium. Indeed, when Christianity started gaining ground in
Britain in the seventh century,
India had had large and settled communities of Christians for at least
300 years - certainly from the fourth
century. Jews too had been settled in India - in fact from immediately
after the fall of Jerusalem. And of
course, Buddhism and Jainism had been quite well-entrenched in India for
a very long time. The Muslim
arrival merely filled up the spectrum.
Unlike the British rule in India where the rulers remained separate from
the ruled, Muslim rulers in India
were combined with the presence of a large proportion of Muslims in the
population itself. A great many
people in the land embraced Islam, so much so that three of the four
largest Muslim national populations
in the contemporary world are situated in this subcontinent: in India,
Pakistan and Bangladesh. Indeed, the
only non-subcontinental country among the top four Muslim populations in
the world, Indonesia, was also
converted to Islam by Indian Muslims, mostly from Gujarat. Islam was by
then a native Indian religion.
Although Islam remained a separate religion from Hinduism, the roles of
the different communities in the
cultural life of the country were largely integrated. Whether in music
or in painting or in poetry, evidence
of integration is plentifully present. Indeed, it would be impossible to
understand the nature of Indian
culture today without seeing it in integrated terms.
While references to raids from Ghazni and other isolated elements of
divisive history remains tactically
potent and even flammable in the contemporary politics of India, the
nature of present-day Indian
civilization cannot be understood without seeing it as a joint product
of many influences of which the
Islamic component is very strong. The integrated nature of contemporary
Indian culture has been
illustrated by many commentators with reference particularly to the
arts, the literature and music. Let me
choose a different field of illustration.
It is, year 1405 now in the Bengali calendar. What does 1405 stand for?
Its history is a most engaging form
of cultural integration. In the year 963 in the Muslim Heijira calendar
(coinciding with 1556 AD) the Bengali
solar calendar - corresponding to the Shaka system of reckoning - was
"adjusted" to the Hejira number, that
is, the clock was put back, as it were, to 963.
Since then the Hejira has marched ahead, being a lunar calendar, so that
the Bengali "san" has fallen behind
Hejira as well. But when a Bengali Hindu does his religious ceremonies
according to the local calendar, he
may not be fully aware that the dates invoked in his Hindu practice is
attuned to commemorating
Mohammad's flight from Mecca to Medina, albeit in a mixed lunar-solar
representation.
Indian civilisation evolved substantially with the absorption of Islamic
culture as an integral part of it. In
viewing these changes, an attempt is sometimes made to see pre-Islamic
India as being homogeneous and
unmixed in a way it never was. The arrival of the Islamic influences
only furthered a heterogeneity that was
already plentifully present, and the result was an enrichment that can
be seen in the arts, literature, music
and culture in general. The integration is often so consummate that the
internal diversity of many of the
Indian traditions and practice is hardly noticed and can be brought only
by a specific historical scrutiny
This article is excerpted from a UNESCO lecture titled "An Assessment of
the Millennium" delivered by
Amartya Sen in New Delhi recently.
[Home][Contents][Next][Classified][Feedback]
Little India is hosted and maintained by
ASANet.
the_virtuous_vulcan
> You should have read more carefully what I wrote.
> I wrote "effective power". The forces that had the effective power
> in India then, continue to have the effective power today.
No that is false. The effective power today is, thankfully, in the
hands of the Hindutva forces. This composition of "effective power"
is different from the unholy Congress(Nehru)-Moslem League(Jinnah)
nexus. This nexus partitioned India sucking upto pan-Islamism. (What
I mean is appeasement of Moslems.)
Do some reading on history before going ballistic with some of your
arcane comments.
> The electoral "tamasha" has nothing to do with who has the effective
> power.
Clarify your position on "electoral tamasha" or whatever you mean.
> Also, please refrain from name-calling. When you resort to that,
> it becomes quite obvious that your argument lacks merit.
>
> ths.
Your are obviously perturbed and sensitive to such remarks. It is
a part of the "Internet culture", though not pleasant. Try to be
dispassionate when someone (like me) calls you a "liberal moron",
which I believe is an appropriate appellation.
Grow up, dude !
*********************************************
The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
!!! ISLAM IS A BARBARIC RELIGION !!!
ani...@my-deja.com
the_virtuous_vulcan <vulc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> Oh, BTW, you should not be using the University e-mail facility to
> post on the Internet. The University e-mail facility is meant for
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> University (Penn State Univ.) work and not for posting on this
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
forum.
^^^^^^^
>
> *********************************************
> The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
>
Wrong! Universities have a different goal than the private companies.
While private companies frequently restrict their usage of emails,
Universities especially the public universities cannot do so or
wouldn't do so as it runs against the concept of academic freedom.
Prof. Sanyal is well within his rights to post or air his POVs on
any public forums. You're most welcome to challenge his views and
debate him but certainly you cannot gag him!!!
It would be a rather sad day for democracy and a violation of First
Amendment if he wasn't allowed to do so from an academic institution.
A.
T.H.Sanyal.
> Do some reading on history before going ballistic with some of your
> arcane comments.
posts.
> Clarify your position on "electoral tamasha" or whatever you mean.
> Your are obviously perturbed and sensitive to such remarks. It is
> a part of the "Internet culture", though not pleasant. Try to be
of name calling. You clearly wish to live in a gutter. Amen.
In future, I shall ignore posts from you.
ths.
nkdat...@my-deja.com
Yes, "imaginary" Bengalis in West Bengal do indeed follow an era
(Bangabda)that is "attuned to commemorating Mohammad's flight from
Mecca to Medina." I hope Dr. C.I.A Siddiky will have it in his
heart to forgive this "Transgression of the Bangladeshi Cultural
Space" by the "imaginary" Bengalis of India in general and of West
Bengal in particular. In fact I do hope he will go on to forgive
all such "CULTURAL STIGMA AND SHAME" among "imaginary" Bengalis who
do not belong the nation-state of Bangladesh.
cere...@my-deja.com
the_virtuous_vulcan <vulc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> Being anti-Jewish is actually a part of the Mohammedan Manifesto
> (Quran). [I can cite quotes from the Quran which rail Jews.] Also
> CNN had a picture of Saddam Hussein praying on Friday (with the
> caption stating that he (Hussein) was praying.) Thus Hussein is
> not an atheist. Same goes for Gaddafi and Assad - that is they are
> NOT atheists. They are believing Moslems and have aligned with the
> Communists but not with the ideology of godlessness as preached by
> Communist Manifesto.
Taslima Nasreen was wearing a Burkha (Islamic veil) when she
arrived in Dhaka. Why is Saddam Hussein despised by the other
truly Islamic countries? Why if he is a believer in Islam as you
claim he did not declare Iraq an Islamic republic? Anti-Jew does not
automatically translate to Islmaic belief in the same way that it
does not translate to Christian belief (Hitler). After being bombed
to death and merciless sanction by US, and lack of any support from
other Islamic countries some semblance of Islam (Not from heart, but a
ruse) may bring him some succour. At least thats his hope. A drowningh
man will catch any straw.
My point is that one can be aethist/non-religious(at heart) and still
be hateful towards another race. Hope you get the point this time.
Arindam Banerjee
>what Hindus
>> do.
>
> Who are "they". Isn't this stereotyping? What are you implying by "too
>much
> interested in what Hindus do"?
I am implying that Bangladeshi Muslims should mind their own businesses.
There are a thousand other things they could do, instead of remaining
obsessed about Bengali Hindu ways. As for "they", I mean those people
posting their abusive and ignorant views repetitively under pseudonyms.
If you are using it in a negative
>connotations
> that what "bad" are Hindus doing thenm you are dead wrong about me or
>Mr. Murshed
> any many others. There are some bigots who may do that. If you are
>usinh it in a
> positive/neutral connoation then obviously you wouldn't be making it
>an issue. I am
> intetested in learning about all religions and sure I try to read and
>understand
> Hindu Philosophy and religion and thus what Hindus do (Not necessarily
>what wrong
> the Hindus do, but what Hindu philosophy says etc), but not out of
>hatred, but
> out of pure interest just like interest in the works of Hume, Karl
>Popper,
> Oscar Wilde etc.
Excellent. Please read some Hindu authors like Swami Vivekananda and
Aurobindo Ghosh and Gandhi.
Of course like in any religion/race there are bad
>practices like
> Satidha/Sahamaran was once in Bengal.
We view such practices far differently. They have been used to vilify
Hinduism most significantly. Actually they were murders mostly
by in-laws who wanted the property of the dead husband which
would go to the widow. They were the biggest blot on our religion,
and the best thing the British did was to abolish it many generations
ago.
Theoretically satidaha, or the self-immolation of a noble and
virtuous woman, was the ultimate and public show of
conjugal love and extraordinary female courage and devotion.
Tagore has written touchingly about a Rajput princess committing
sati after her husband's death, in a poem in "Katha o Kahini".
So it was a personal issue, not a religious issue by any means.
But I never believed that it was
>an injunction
> of Hindu scripture (Geeta never said that), but just the cultural
>practice of certain
> bigotted segment at certain time. Same thing is true for Christianity
>and Islam where
> evil practices have been committed in the name of religion. Buddhists
>are relatively
> free from this stain.
Just the one issue of satidaha is enough for anti-Hindus to vilify Hinduism,
and equate
it with the far more extraordinary villanies committed in the name of
competing religions.
Today satidaha is illegal. But the example of the maha-satis remain as
extraordinary brave and faithful women who set such standards of courage
that exalt womanhood. If men could kill each other and die, to show how
brave they are, why should women be denied a chance to show their bravery?
According to British eye-witnesses, sati was a completely voluntary affair,
unlike witch-burning to which it has been compared. But often the woman
was drugged by relatives, to overcome the pain, it was given out. Such
cases amounted to murder, most heinous. The fault was certainly there in
the whole system, no denying that. The onlookers thought that watching
such self-immolation would give them spiritual benefit. The element of
snobbery was there for noble families. So the whole practice had become
corrupted. (See Ruth Jhabvala's film "Heat and Dust" for an excellent
treatment of this subject.)
You see, the first thing our Australian friends ask my wife is whether she
would commit sati or not. :)
> I guesss everyone has some sort of interest in things other than
> practicing religious rituals at home. Thats not wrong is it?
Interest is fine, abuse is another. If Bangladeshis have developed superior
systems then they may have a right, for our best interests, perhaps. I do
not think they have, so they should first see to their own affairs.
He is a Bangladeshi agent, who has done immense harm to West Bengal.
As far as I am concerned, those people of Bengal
who do not respect the original culture of Bengal, which is the worship of
the
great mother-goddess Kali, are not Bengalis. That does not mean that
I cannot get along with them - I can get along with anyone. I just do not
think
them Bengali, that is all. Does not mean I cannot be friends with them, or
understand their ways.
And by extension believing/practicing
>anything non-Bengali
> in origin, like secular humanism, aethism, Taekwondo, Dianetics etc
>should disqualify a
> Bengali from Bengaliness etc?
If you respect the great goddess Kali, you are a Bengali. Our greatest
festivals relate to Her worship. On top of that you can do anything and
be anything.
>> >Arab culture is something of which I know very little, indeed I do
>not care to
>> >know much of it.
>>
>> Really?
>
> Is "really" a disbelief/surprise. Then maybe its time you did a
>reappraisal. maybe
> you are so mired in your stereotype that you failed to see the
>diversity among the
> Muslim born "Bengalis". There are significant number of truly secular
>(Mr. Murshed
> surely proved he is one) Muslim born bengalis who may not have any
>preferentail
> interest in rabaic or Arabic culture. The diversity covers the entire
>spectrum:
> Secular Humnanist, non-secular humanist, outright communal,
>non-communal fanatics,
> non-religious yet communal.. Do you know Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi,
>Assad etc are
> aethists yet communal (anti-jew) etc.
I judge only from my point of view. I am aware that others have theirs.
Such is being tolerant. I fail to see any difference between people who
say they are Muslims. They are all subject to the same rules. In fact,
uniting people under the same rules is what Islam is all about. If they
do not agree to that they are not Muslims, according to my logic.
However they may not have the guts or energy to adopt a different
identity based upon name and manners and philosophy, rather like
our Hindu Marxists.
>> >Arabia's relevance to me, and many other muslims, is one of a
>historical and
>> >contextual nature.
>> >It is where the religion was first revealed and from where it began
>it's spread
>> >accross the globe, and to all cultures.
>>
>> What happened to those cultures, say in Iran? Won't you say they were
>replaced
>> by Arab culture?
>
> Yes, it was. The same way that Druid, aztec etc cultures got
>invaded by
> Christianity. But was it relevant to issue of Bengaliness and
>(Islamic) faith?
Yes. There is practically no vibrant Hindu culture in Bangladesh now, as
once
there was. Now why is so?
- snip -
Arindam Banerjee
the_virtuous_vulcan
T.H.Sanyal. <TH...@psuvm.psu.edu> wrote:
> Anonymous scoundrel wrote:
>
> > Do some reading on history before going ballistic with some of your
> > arcane comments.
>
> I do not accept advice from cowards who won't sign their names in
> their posts.
Thank you. But, I have a valid e-mail account and you can verify
its "live" activity by sending me e-mails there. perhaps you don't
understand the Internet culture: no one is obligated to give out his
or her real names/ addresses/ ancestry as your have wished. What is
important is what gets written on the billboard. If you want to
make it personal by asking for more than required info., that is
not to be honored. No one is trespassing into your house here. Thus
what you wish may is not the final word. It is not your property.
Also, it is 1st Amendment (Freedom of Speech and Expression) - as
you have called me a scoundrel. (But, that's OK !)
> > Clarify your position on "electoral tamasha" or whatever you mean.
>
> I have said what I wanted to say.
NO you have not; of course you think you did - but that's your view
which is not necessarily valid.
> > Your are obviously perturbed and sensitive to such remarks. It is
> > a part of the "Internet culture", though not pleasant. Try to be
>
> It may be your "Internet culture". I do not embrace such a culture
> of name calling. You clearly wish to live in a gutter. Amen.
Again, you are exhibiting immaturity Mr. Leftist liberal moron.
Showing distaste for a post and demanding the identity of the poster
be revealed is a sign of emotional fragility.
I suggest you, mr. liberal moron, see a shrink. Also, it is unwise
to use a Penn State Univ. e-mail facility for such postings. Do not
say I did not caution you.
> In future, I shall ignore posts from you.
That proves your incapacity to sift the actual content of a post on
this and any forum from its innate spontaneity of form.
I suggest you first learn the media and then post.
> ths.
*********************************************
The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
!!! ISLAM IS A BARBARIC RELIGION !!!
FOKRUL ISLAM
cere...@my-deja.com
"Arindam Banerjee" <ad...@interphase.aust.com> wrote:
> I am implying that Bangladeshi Muslims should mind their own
businesses.
> There are a thousand other things they could do, instead of remaining
> obsessed about Bengali Hindu ways. As for "they", I mean those people
Everyone should mind everyone's business, thats a tautological
statement. It should apply to all. I don't think being obsessed
by Bengali Hindu ways is at issue. What do you mean by "obsessed?". I
will agree that some Bangladeshis are communal and make very
distasteful and hostile remarks against Hindu/Hinduism. But that goes
the other ways at times.
> posting their abusive and ignorant views repetitively under
pseudonyms.
Posting abusive and ignorant views is bad whether under pseudonym
or real name. Whay should pseudonym be an issue. Isn't it the
message one should be concerned with. What does a name or identity
have anything to do with a discussion with point/logic/information?
> Excellent. Please read some Hindu authors like Swami Vivekananda and
> Aurobindo Ghosh and Gandhi.
Thanks for the suggestion. Any reason why you assumed that I did not
read about them? And may I ask why you chose ME to recommend the
readings? They are indeed great men with great visions and minds.
>
> Theoretically satidaha, or the self-immolation of a noble and
> virtuous woman, was the ultimate and public show of
> conjugal love and extraordinary female courage and devotion.
> Tagore has written touchingly about a Rajput princess committing
> sati after her husband's death, in a poem in "Katha o Kahini".
> So it was a personal issue, not a religious issue by any means.
Voluntary self-immolation (suicide) is not an evil, it is sad
though. So yes, as far as voluntary self-immolation goes, it
is a matter of personal faith and right, not religious.
>
> You see, the first thing our Australian friends ask my wife is whether
she
> would commit sati or not. :)
So I am better than your Australian friends :). I, and many others
would never have asked that.
> Interest is fine, abuse is another. If Bangladeshis have developed
superior
> systems then they may have a right, for our best interests, perhaps.
I do
> not think they have, so they should first see to their own affairs.
Again, you are bringing in the entire nation/religion. Abuse is
not fine. Thats an agreed tautology. Those who abuse are culpable.
> As far as I am concerned, those people of Bengal
> who do not respect the original culture of Bengal, which is the
worship of
> the
> great mother-goddess Kali, are not Bengalis. That does not mean that
Wow, now you have made the crux of the issue clear. This probably
was your main contention, and we spent all this time side tracking!
OK, not let me make my points here. Lets be very careful here. Are
you implying by "respect" above as actual worship of Kali or believing
in her existence as real and not mythological? Or by respect you mean
just respecting (accepting, not opposing or making a disrecpectful
comments/gesture and also participating in Kali Puja as an attendee)
the tradition of Kali Puja itself? If you are implying in the first
sense then you may find a very small number of true bengalis (i.e
passing
your criterion). First let me tell you I respect Kali(Puja) in the
second
sense, as would many other (Not all) non-Hindu Bengalis I know. When
I visited Calcutta few years back I wanted to see the famous
Kalighat Mandir. So I went near the area. I asked a young man if he
could help me lead to kalighat. He (Name was Apu) gladly offered to
lead me but said that he never himslef went there as he never cared
religious beliefs and practices. But having lived in the are he
easily
led me to the Mandir. I did whatever I am supposed to do to show
respect
(Like taking off shoes, followingn the dos and don'ts etc). Now
I was respectful. But I don't believe in the actual existence of
Goddess
kali or the story that the right toe of Kali fell on the banks
of Adi ganga near Kalighat after being cut by Vishnu's wheel. Neither
did Apu. SO by your definition Apu is not a Bengali either. Apu was a
an employee in Eastern railway trying to make aliving. In USA I had a
a friend , a Hindu born bengali who did his PhD in physics and wen
back
home. He also mentioned he did not believe in Hindu Gods and Goddesses
and
treated them as just mythological figures in the same way Greek Gods
and
Goddesses. So he cannot be a Bengali either by your definition. Now
between
these people on two extremes I am sure there are a lot who have similar
views. So the number of true benglis in your first definition would
really be
small. But if you meant "respect" in the first sense, then surely I can
qualify as Bengali (according to your definition) too. But if you go
one
step further and say that you have to be "born" in Hindu family to be
a Bengali, then I cannot logically continue anymore. You can think
and believe anyway you want, thats your personal freedom of thought, I
respect your thought. But I must express my view that the first
criterion
(i.e actually believeing and worshipping Kali) of bengaliness to be
absurd. Even Arobinda, Vivekanada probably would not have taken such a
drastic view.
>
> I judge only from my point of view. I am aware that others have
theirs.
> Such is being tolerant. I fail to see any difference between people
who
> say they are Muslims. They are all subject to the same rules. In
fact,
Again we are going in circles. Yes, orthodox belivers in religion
all
are same. They folow the same rules. But not all are orthodox.
Whatever
Islam says its a fact that thgere exist a broad spectrum of
religious
views among Muslim borns.
> uniting people under the same rules is what Islam is all about. If
they
> do not agree to that they are not Muslims, according to my logic.
Yes, they are not Mulslims according to the fanatic Muslims too.
majority of the poets, writers, artists etc of Bangladesh are not
considered true Muslims by the fanatics. So what?
>
> However they may not have the guts or energy to adopt a different
> identity based upon name and manners and philosophy, rather like
> our Hindu Marxists.
Whay should they have to display guts and energy? personla beliefs
and
faithn can be kept inside. No need to publicise it or make speeches
about it. Very few take their internal beliefs (Like Rushdie,
Nasreen,
Anwar Shaikh etc) to public. A vast majority of aethists, secular
or non-secular humanists don't need to advertize themselves.
>
>
> Yes. There is practically no vibrant Hindu culture in Bangladesh now,
as
> once there was. Now why is so?
This is true (sadly). I know you would like to think its just
communalism.
But its not true, at least not directly. Let me explain how. This
lack of vibrancy
is due to economy and its link to communalism. Communalism, in
the forms of riot, plundering of Hindu properties, rape etc are
committed by criminally
disposed people. Those who have criminal instincts are always on the
lookout for any
pretext to let loose their criminal aspirations. Take the case of
Rape of hindu women.
These rapists would rape ANY women if they felt they could get away
with it, since it is
RAPE they are after. There are countless reports of Muslim women
being raped by Muslim
rapists in the village they would not qualify as communalism. The
fact is Hindus being in
the minority these criminals with rapist instincts would bet on the
fact that they would
face less resistance and retaliation if they raped a Hindu woman.
This is afct which is
true in any society with majority and minority. So here the prime
motive is RAPE and a
religion of the minority is providing a convenient pretext to act on
this instinct. They do it to less protected Muslim woman too. The
same argument applies
to all other crimes. So it is the problem of criminals who are
exploiting the inherent
insecurity of the Minoruty to perpetrate their crimes, not the issue
of Muslims deciding
to commit crimes againsts only Hindus. The governemnt and people are
equally
passive in preventing these crimes against ALL, irrespective of
religion, caste etc
because the minority are so violent and vengeful and they have the
powerful weapon.
The majority are hostage to the evils of the minority. If we open the
newspapers of BD
we read of rampant rape, looting mugging, extortion etc with no
redress. All these are
happenning against Muslims by the way. So BD cannot be accused of
communalism in an
insular way, but should be accused of passivity against crime,
period. In fact BD is very
secular in a perverse way, no body gives a damn against crime, no
matter if it is
committed against a Hindu or a Muslim. They are scared to act, the
majority have become
silent spectators gripped with too much fear to act. Hope this
analysis helps to set the
perspective right
cere...@my-deja.com
the_virtuous_vulcan <vulc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, some Moslems are emancipated. In Shantiniketan we had Mujtaba
> Ali and also Abu Sayyed Ayub, and today one may cite many Moslems in
> India as liberal, emancipated and what not. These are true facts.
I assume you mean "secular/non-fanatic/not taking every word of
scripture literally" by emancipated. Then its not "some" Moslems
that are emancipated but many. Its just that you know only about
the above due to their fame and renown. There are many such
emancipated Muslims who are not that well known or are famous, but
quietly lead their daily life and who despise the fanatic groups
you metioned below as much as you do.
>
> The problem is that we have another extreme variety of Osma bin
Laden
> and other members of Harakat-ul-Ansar and Lashkar-e-Toiba fanatics.
> They interpret Islam and religious tolerance much differently than
> your hallowed ensemble of emancipated, liberal Moslems. Unless one
Hallowed? You really meant that?. Thats a kind word from you at
last:). So that was my point. Not to paint all Muslim borns with same
broad brush. And let me suggest the following revision of your
signature below. That will have much more powerful impact. Instead of
the sentence below reflecting your subjective characterization why not
post a few verses from Islamic scriptures and let the readers decide
if it is barabric or not and stimulate them to pursue further.
>
> !!! ISLAM IS A BARBARIC RELIGION !!!
>
Arindam Banerjee
> Again stare at your statement "Muslims want others to be Muslims".
>It is NOT a
> general truth.
If it is particular for a sub-set, that is enough. I am not saying that
every
Muslim wants every non-Muslim to be Muslim. However Islam is a
faith that believes in converting others to its cause. In that sense it is
a general truth.
As I clarified above it may be many Mulsim's desire,
>but by no
> means by all.
It is enough if some Muslims believe such, and they are unchecked
by the rest.
There are all assortments of persusasions among the
>Muslim borns.
> Even the large segment of passive believers (praying, fasting etc)
>do not bother
> about preaching, activism etc, let alone the secularists. Only the
>hard core
> ones do. So such a stereotype was unconscionable.
It does not matter if 99% of the Muslims are like as you say. What matters
is that the 1% can influence the 99% when occasion so demands by
employing certain slogans. This in fact is the reason for the success of
Talibanic forces.
I am aware that there is a strong fight going on among the moderate and
fanatic Muslims in Afghanistan and Algeria. Naturally I wish the former all
the best. When they truly succeed, you will make more conviction to
non-Muslims.
>> >If you really want to know, the place closest to my heart, outside of
>> >Bangladesh, India & Britain, is Argentina. And that's purely because
>I fell in
>> >love with their football team in 1986 and still support them
>fanatically - at a,
>> >financially induced, distance.
>> >It also helps that Argentine women look utterly beautiful...
>>
>> Better than Bengali women?
>
> My share of irrelevance: Some Argentinian women are indeed prettier
>than
> many Bengali women as are some Bengali women than many Brazilian
>women.
> Does that change tip the logic one way or the other for our thread?
>:)
It shows that despite your love for things Bengali you have an
internationalistic
outlook as an Islamist should. So why bother so much about just Bengali
things.
Leave Bengal to Bengalis.
>> I think this is wrong. Pre-Islamic Arabia seems a much better place
>for
>> women, by the sole example Islamists cannot deny, that of the
>independent
>> lady Khadija.
>
> Again digression (irrelevant to our thread): This may be debatable.
>Pre Islamic
> Arabia was an abyss of vice.
So you must say, if you must show that Islam made things better.
Cases Daughters being buried alive were
>common.
Any evidence?
What about women being killed for just showing some bare skin in
modern Afghanistan?
One
> example may not make a rule.
Oh yes, it does, because that is the one example that cannot be denied.
What is the chance of any lady having such status in modern Afghanistan
which is very purely Islamic, at any rate as per the Islamic theologians?
Maybe that they were not officially
>reduced to a
> lower staus as they were in Islam. But in no way they were better
>overall. Their
> plight just changed form.
I do not think so. I am glad to see that you have accepted that Islam
lowered women's status. Which is the main reason why Bengali Hindus will
not convert to Islam.
>> But the facts and the rules are the same for all.
>
> Yes, but they are not rigidly adhered to everywhere.
Only a matter of timing and entry of fanatics, as I see.
Can you equate
>Saudi
> Arabia with malaysia. There are Chinese Muslims too. Do you have
>any issue
> with those Chinese Mulsims who just do what Mr. Murshed was
>pointing out
> above? Indigenous Ingrained cultural traits can modulate the
>religious dictums in a
> powerful way
Yes, but as the Bangladesh experience shows, some 1% can turn
the tide the other way.
>> >If you still cannot separate a faith from a race then it's not worth
>writing on
>> >is it?
>>
>> Probably not.
>
> You mean cannot still separate faith from a race (and hence its
>probably not worth
> writing..). But sure you should see it now that a passive faith (or
>lack of it among
> those born in it) at least can be separated from race. Or you will
>still disagree
> (Because you have to?: Agreeing is not in your book ever ?)
I simply do not understand. Sorry.
>> >What you seem to be saying is that Hinduism is proof of
>'Bengali-ness' and that
>> >anything else is a rejection of the Bengali identity.
>>
>> Not quite so drastic - but rejecting the Hindu identity, belittling
>it, is certainly
>> not-Bengali. Trashing the caste system, which many Hindus find use
>for, amounts
>> to showing disrespect for the Hindu identity. Using a perverted view
>of the
>> caste system to debunk the entirety of Hinduism is plain villainy.
>
> Here I would agree with you. But Mr. Murshed and many other
>secularists would not
> trash Hinduism. You will always find someone from religion 'X'
>trashing religion
> 'Y' (Take you pick for X and Y). That does not justify a wholesale
>stereotyping.
> How much do I need to belabour this point? But sure I have to state
>that Satidaha
> was inhuman. Progressive Hindus like Rammmohan Roy and Ishwarchandra
>Vidyasagar
> persuaded the British rulers to outlaw it. Were they trashing
>Hindus?
Satidaha has been used to trash Hindus as much as possible. I myself
thought
of changing my religion, so much was the propaganda carried on by
anti-Hindus
who used this to give Hindus a negative self-image. My views changed after
I
visited Chittorgarh, listened to the guide, and read the local books in
Hindi. They
were completely changed under my wife's influence.
There are
> always legit issue to gripe about without prejudice. Caste system
>may have been
> the order of the day but sociteies evolve and we now have universal
>declaration
> of human rights which is in direct conflict with Caste system and
>India is
> signatory to it.
No, there is no conflict with caste system and human rights, unless you
deliberately misinterpret the caste system for the specific purpose of
trashing Hinduism. We value our own reformers, not foreign or alien
abusers.
But that was another digression.
>
>
>>
>> >In fact this is rather absurd since Bengal had, prior to Hindu
>conquest,
>>
>> What Hindu conquest?
>
> I think he his referring to the reclamation of the Hindu dyansty
>from
> the Buddhist one in early Bengal/India. I am not not sure about the
>date and
> name. (Shashanka?)
Main point is that Bengal never had a well developed caste system,
with practically no Brahmins around, when the masses converted
voluntarily to Islam, which means that modern ideas of Brahminic
exploitation of lower castes leading to such conversion is bunkum.
The masses then were Buddhists or tribal-animists, so never low-caste.
>> How has Bangladesh been doing in this regard?
>> For West Bengal I do say that Communist faith has been a negative
>influence.
>
> Communists have been a negative influence on what? religious
>harmony? How so?
They are atheists who have reduced religious functions to mere social shows.
> I thought the context above was religious harmony. I cannot see how
>communism
> can have negative influence on religious harmony.
There is no religion in Communism. They are materialists.
It can have
>serious negative
> effect on economy and intellectual and personal freedom though.
Well, to give them their due, they have not failed that much there. The
economy
is bad, the intellectual level is zero but personal freedom is still there,
I cannot
deny.
>> would not like to impose Islam upon Hindus. Since Islam and Hinduism
>are
>> completely different, psychologically Bengali Hindus and Muslims are
>> different,
>> though that should not matter at all in real life, rather the
>different
>> cultures should
>> enrich each other.
>
> I disgree with the "psychologically Bengali Hindus and Muslims are
> different" part. This statement can only be true if the word
>rabid/fanatical
> is appended to "hindus" and "Muslims", or to either one of them.
>certainly
> agree they can enrich each other as has Lalon Fakir, Kabir, etc.
Well, we will agree to disagree. I will allow that West Bengali Muslims are
far more Bengali that Bangladeshi Muslims, psychologically. Still, they
are different in some ways (which is good, as it gives different
perspectives)
and in any case they are a very valued part of us. Rabidness is not the
issue, culture is.
Enough from me on this topic.
Arindam Banerjee
the_virtuous_vulcan
cere...@my-deja.com wrote:
> I assume you mean "secular/non-fanatic/not taking every word of
> scripture literally" by emancipated. Then its not "some" Moslems
> that are emancipated but many. Its just that you know only about
> the above due to their fame and renown. There are many such
> emancipated Muslims who are not that well known or are famous, but
> quietly lead their daily life and who despise the fanatic groups
> you metioned below as much as you do.
Thanks for the comforting message. But, that's pure fantasy. Because
if these "emancipated" Moslems are large in number, then why these
"Mussulmaans" are subordinated by their more fanatical brethren. Why
do we witness Moslems as a flock being sheperded by gun-toting, bomb
throwing faithfuls - Osama bin Laden types ? What is preventing them
(emancipated) to lead the flock and ostracize the more fanatical ?
Where is the problem in doing this ?
> Hallowed? You really meant that?. Thats a kind word from you at
> last:). So that was my point. Not to paint all Muslim borns with same
> broad brush.
That is naive statement. I am aware that humans are different. So the
same logic goes for Moslems too. But, as a non-Moslem it is not my
obligation to investigate acts attributed (legitimately) to Islamic
fanaticism/ terrorism as if they were committed by radical groups and
that the majority remain emancipated but are unable (for some damn
unknown reason ???) to weed out these pests who are causing sorrow
for the world, and giving the emancipated Moslem flock a bad name. The
lip-service that the cybermoslems (on internet and elsewhere) pay, by
stating that a majority are emancipated and never support terrorism
are thus worthless, vacuous, feel-good statements.
> And let me suggest the following revision of your signature below.
> That will have much more powerful impact. Instead of the sentence
> below reflecting your subjective characterization why not post a few
> verses from Islamic scriptures and let the readers decide
> if it is barabric or not and stimulate them to pursue further.
I agree; thank you.
*********************************************
The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
"Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the
idolaters wherever ye find them ..." [Quran 009:005]
(Pickthall's translation)
Shomir
that siddiky's education would never have been an issue had he not raised
the subject himself. Over and above that he was telling us all that he was
an "educator" and a "thinker". When he wrote that he was a "PHD", (and not
a "Ph. D.) it told me that this guy was fake. I inquired and posted what I
found about him from Yale. Next day he posted another message claiming not
one a second Ph. D. from Univ. of Iowa, this time in Economics. Again I
called the department of Economics, and posted whatever I found out from
them.
Here are some of his quoted statements in these two threads.
"I am trained in South Asian Cultural History (I have
a PHD from Yale University, CT, US) and the Paper that I had
put up is purely an academic one ( for example, you need to
know : What an Imaginary Community is ? What Diaspora is in
theory ? What is a Nation-State in theory ? What is a
Subaltern in theory ?"
"I am an academic and not a politician. My job is to try
to educate the people; not to convince them to vote for me.
I have no real stake in trying to convince the people in
this forum to agree with me but to get an idea about Our
(of People of Bangladesh) sense of being in a Nation-State
with cultural boundaries."
"I did do my PHD in History at Yale and then
went on to do a second one in Economics at Iowa. I am
currently a Research Fellow at a think tank here in the
Nation's Capital."
"It does not cost anything to type your blissful ignorance
and personal attacks in a forum like this but it does so
to study History or the Anthropology of the People we are
discussing and get an Advanced Degree on it."
"But I encourage you to read and enlighten
yourself more on this before you attack the experts like a
bull in a China Shop."
-- Dr. Siddiky.
"The choice of your quote as response to my belittled work
therefore justifies the Cultural History of your Group (Bengali
Hindu ! Is it ! I guess so, if I am not wrong.)"
"One more reason for what has historically happened to your
group (Refugees) is justified."
"Ghotis(Bengali-Hindus) are always seen to parade with their
ghotis(bun watering cans) since the British first made them do
so. And Now, in Bangladesh, if we send all the Bengali
Hindus back to India with their Ghotis, they will have no
place to shit but have to shit on top of each other
(something that is happening between the Bangals and the Ghotis
in West Bengal for a long time) despite which they could not
stop parading with their ghotis (bun watering cans)."
"You are perhaps not realizing
that there are laws here to have your ISP services suspended."
"I am concluding with an impression that people who do not
have a sufficiently long history of having bread on their
table, have now access to bull-shit over the internet in
*****************************
different forums with all kinds of ignorance."
**********************
The last quote was particularly the one that instigated me to pursue his
real identity. If he thought that I was there just to bull shit, using the
internet, I wanted to give him a dose of the same tool which he was using
rather like a novice, to fraudulently misrepresent himself.
Unfortunately, it is people like siddiky who give our community a bad name,
and that include Bengalis from both sides of the river Ganges. It is
surprising that my respected Bengali readers from Bangladesh are silent
regarding this fraud.
Shomir
======================================
SuBain wrote:
> Beware of an Imposter!!
>
> I am writing this to alert the readers against an imposter named siddiky
> (small
> letters are intentional).
>
> This is also to condemn his statement "All readers by now perhaps
> understand
> where you are coming from, your characteristics etc. -- One more reason
> for
> what has historically happened to your group (Refugees) is justified."
> While
> this was written against Shomir, siddiky had no right to insult a group of
>
> people that he called Refugees. As I understand, this group of people were
>
> mostly innocent victims of the religious hatred that gave birth to
> Pakistan. I
> trust that the sensible readers would agree with me that siddiky had no
> right
> to insult any group of people on account of Shomir or any other
> individual.
I do not like this statement "on account of Shomir or any other
individual"...
I did not engage in this discussion to enhance my personal reputation or
something like that. I was responding as a "refugee Bengali" defending our
rightful claim to the Bengali heritage. Please do not belittle my efforts
by that kind of "slanted" statement.
> With certain amount of reluctance, I called the Yale University Alumni
> Records
> office this afternoon for siddiky (last name) and choudhury (first name).
> The
> lady there informed me that someone had called that office couple of days
> back
> for the same person. They do not have any record on siddiky. She also
> clarified
> to me that anyone who gets a degree from Yale would be recorded with the
> Alumni
> Records, even it that person does not become a member of the Alumni
> Association.
>
> The reason for my reluctance in calling Yale University was that I had
> already
> concluded that siddiky was nothing but an idiot, Ph.D. or not. I also have
> had
> the misfortune of knowing quite a few Ph.D.s who are as idiotic as
> siddiky, and
> I do not get shocked when I read absurdity, bigotry, lies, audacity etc.
> from
> people who have degrees as high as the Ph.D.
>
> Sukhamaya Bain
>
> Shomir Sho...@My-Dejanews.com wrote in message
> 38290E70...@My-Dejanews.com....
> >
> >I am amazed at your (csiddiky) audacity! I was verifying your claims
> that you
> >made in public. You think I was provoking you? Hell no, I was exposing
> your
> >fraudulent claims, and does that constitute violating laws? Now you have
>
> >the gall to threaten me with getting my ISP privilege suspended hmm....?
> >Why do you not try that Mr. Siddiky?
> >
> >You did not respond to my charges regarding your fraudulent claims,
> instead
> >of that you have decided to be confrontational and again display your
> >insensitivity towards the Bengali Hindu refugees, suggesting what
> happened
> >with them was justified!!
> >
> >You have misrepresented yourself, and I have checked that out with Yale
> and
> >Univ. of Iowa. You should be ashamed of your falsehood and repent,
> instead
> >you are back with threatening people! What a creep!!
> >
> >This is the last time you are going to insult the Hindu Bengali refugees,
>
> >any further provocation will compel me to notify the authorities at Yale
> and
> >Univ. of Iowa regarding your misrepresentation. You will then regret
> your
> >actions. This is just a friendly reminder.
> >
> >Shomir
> >
> >======================================
>
> >csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> >> > I have no desire to respond to your provocation and
> >> negative statements. All readers by now perhaps understand
> >> where you are coming from, your characteristics etc. --
> >> One more reason for what has historically happened to your
> >> group (Refugees) is justified. You are perhaps not realizing
> >> that there are laws here to have your ISP services suspended.
>
> >> I would advice you to act by the better-angels of your
> >> nature. Peace. :)
>
cere...@my-deja.com
the_virtuous_vulcan <vulc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comforting message. But, that's pure fantasy. Because
> if these "emancipated" Moslems are large in number, then why these
> "Mussulmaans" are subordinated by their more fanatical brethren. Why
> do we witness Moslems as a flock being sheperded by gun-toting, bomb
> throwing faithfuls - Osama bin Laden types ? What is preventing them
> (emancipated) to lead the flock and ostracize the more fanatical ?
For the same reason that you or India can do nothing about it. With
billions of Dollars these fanatic ultra aggressive groups can easily
buy the poor and directionless youths. The majority are always silent
not just in Bangladesh but in most societies. It needs resource and
financial independence to crush extremists like these as is done in
Iraq, Tuyrkey etc. Bangladesh and India are too poor to counter the
billions invested by these groups.
> Where is the problem in doing this ?
Fear, lack of resources, not viweing it as inspiring as war of
independence. Its a cost vs. benefit issue. You are welcome to
do it. The silent majority will appreciate it.
>
> that the majority remain emancipated but are unable (for some damn
> unknown reason ???) to weed out these pests who are causing sorrow
I explained above. Extremely vocal and aggressive can stifle the
voice of majority. Its sad fact of life. If Hindu fanatics became
as powerful as laden and DECIDED (hypothetically) to engage in
similar terrorism against Muslims/Christians/secular Hindus
the majority of Hindus will also take a passive resignatory
posture.
Finally, its because people like you implicate and equate the
"emancipated" Muslims with the fanatics they have no choice but to
feel bitter and be defensive and. Instead of that if
you (metaphorically) only condemned the perpetrators of
terrorosm and
pleaded to the emancipated for support in fighting this at least
they would have been more vocal if not active in denouncing it.
cere...@my-deja.com
"Arindam Banerjee" <ad...@interphase.aust.com> wrote:
> Muslim wants every non-Muslim to be Muslim. However Islam is a
> faith that believes in converting others to its cause. In that sense
it is
> a general truth.
>
> by the rest.
Desire itself may not be evil. Christian missionaries do that. And
its obvious all christians would like others to converst too. Its
only when force is involved its wrong. Many may have the
wishful desire that
others also convert but would still respect law and not approach
it in an activist or coercive way. Many Buddhist groups here in USA
go about attracting converts and devotees in a peaceful
non-coercive manner, that just fine. So condemn the
acts(non-peaceful conversion), not the desire
> It does not matter if 99% of the Muslims are like as you say. What
matters
> is that the 1% can influence the 99% when occasion so demands by
> employing certain slogans. This in fact is the reason for the success
of
> Talibanic forces.
Its not influencing the 99%, but COERCING/FORCING. Brute force can
stifle non-aggressive majority. After all during Najibullah's
regime most Afgjans were secular and peaceful.
>
> I am aware that there is a strong fight going on among the moderate
and
> fanatic Muslims in Afghanistan and Algeria. Naturally I wish the
former all
> the best. When they truly succeed, you will make more conviction to
> non-Muslims.
You don't need to address me above as making more conviction to
Non-Muslims. Liberal Muslims will be happy if they can achieve that
for their own sake and for the righness of it, not to convince
anyone (That may come as a by product).
> It shows that despite your love for things Bengali you have an
> internationalistic
> outlook as an Islamist should. So why bother so much about just
Bengali
> things.
> Leave Bengal to Bengalis.
Lighten up. That was just humour.
>
> Any evidence?
> What about women being killed for just showing some bare skin in
> modern Afghanistan?
Reading, I did not live 1500 years ago in Arabia to witness it.
Again why bring Afghanistan?. Am I defending Afghanistan ?.
This thread started with Csiddiquy's perposterous post and Mr.
Murshed criticised
the original post. Instead of criticizing Csiddiqy you picked on Mr.
Murshed. You are doing the same thing here. My point is that whether
Pre arabia or Post Arabia, women's postion was bad. Lets keep the
perspective right.
> What is the chance of any lady having such status in modern
Afghanistan
> which is very purely Islamic, at any rate as per the Islamic
theologians?
Why bring Afganistan again. Do I disgree with you on Afghanistan.?
> I do not think so. I am glad to see that you have accepted that Islam
> lowered women's status. Which is the main reason why Bengali Hindus
will
> not convert to Islam.
As I said only a fanatic segement of Muslims can think of forcible
conversion. Its not the case with the rest.
>
> Yes, but as the Bangladesh experience shows, some 1% can turn
> the tide the other way.
Yet to be seen. I don't believe bangladesh can ever become
Afghanistan. Its still ruled by an elected secular Government.
Jamat (the main religious party) only gets 3 seats. Its still
not declared officially as an Islamic republic (If the tide did
turn the other way as you say then what could keep BD from
declaring Islamic rep[ublic. This will suer bring lot of
Islamic money. And Islamic countries have exerted pressure on
BD to do just that. BD has always resisted it )
> >>
> >> What Hindu conquest?
> >
> > I think he his referring to the reclamation of the Hindu dyansty
> >from
> > the Buddhist one in early Bengal/India. I am not not sure about
the
> >date and
> > name. (Shashanka?)
>
Just a side note. Actually it was the Hindu Sen dynasty defeating the
Buddhist Pal dynasty that was being referred to above. I have read
in a book from calcutta that it was after the Sen dynasty (Ballal
Sen) that caste sytem (Koulinya prath) took firm hold in Bengal. If that
book is wrong, its different matter.
>
> Well, we will agree to disagree. I will allow that West Bengali
Muslims are
> far more Bengali that Bangladeshi Muslims, psychologically. Still,
they
> are different in some ways (which is good, as it gives different
> perspectives)
Well, let me agree to diasgree a little more :) If you set the
criterion of Bengaliness in an absolute way (Believing in Kali,
being born Hindu) then its a tautology that Bangladeshi Muslims
are not Benglais in your narrow criterion. But "psychology" is a
different matter. Psychology is genetic. Psychology (fear,
hatred,love, compassion, cruelty) can cross religious racial
boundary.
>
> Enough from me on this topic.
Ditto.
Shyamal Pain
"T.H.Sanyal." wrote:
> Thomas Southton wrote:
>
> >I've always found B'deshis to be sweet peoples. It would be nice to
> >see India reunited with B'desh.
>
> This is not possible as long as the forces that engineered the second
> partition of Bengal remain in effective power in India.
>
> Regards.
> ths.
Well, I was under the impression that it was Bengali muslims who wanted
partition .
Congress and other parties were the ones opposing partition. Later, those
bengali
muslims realized their gross blunder and had to form Bangladesh.
In hindsight, it seems that if, what is Bangladesh now, had remained as
part of India
they would be politically better off ( being part of a democracy from the
beginning)
if not economically.
Shyamal Pain
T.H.Sanyal.
Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>Theoretically satidaha, or the self-immolation of a noble and
>virtuous woman, was the ultimate and public show of
>conjugal love and extraordinary female courage and devotion.
an "ultimate and public show of conjugal love and extraordinary male
courage and devotion" from "a noble and virtuous man" ?
>He is a Bangladeshi agent, who has done immense harm to West Bengal.
in BD Intelligence? Is it 007? :-) :-)
>However they may not have the guts or energy to adopt a different
>identity based upon name and manners and philosophy, rather like
>our Hindu Marxists.
ths.
T.H.Sanyal.
>I do not think so. I am glad to see that you have accepted that Islam
>lowered women's status. Which is the main reason why Bengali Hindus will
>not convert to Islam.
them. Much less barbaric than stoning them to death as the Muslims
would want. Bengalis are not that much in the burning game these days,
but they would gladly restrict the food and clothing of a woman whose
husband dies before her.
Fanatics of either brand do not care that women are human,
they view women as property and/or womb carrier.
> My views changed after I
>visited Chittorgarh, listened to the guide, and read the local books in
>Hindi. They
>were completely changed under my wife's influence.
>No, there is no conflict with caste system and human rights, unless you
>deliberately misinterpret the caste system for the specific purpose of
>trashing Hinduism. We value our own reformers, not foreign or alien
>abusers.
rituals (rather than having the Brahmins do those for them) under the
caste system? Why is restricting two people from marrying each other
because they are from different castes not a violation of their human
rights?
ths.
T.H.Sanyal.
>Well, I was under the impression that it was Bengali muslims who wanted
>partition .
than what gets written in school textbooks.
>Congress and other parties were the ones opposing partition. Later, those
of it, Congress would rather have complete authority over truncated
India than allow provincial autonomy in a united India.
>In hindsight, it seems that if, what is Bangladesh now, had remained as
>part of India
>they would be politically better off ( being part of a democracy from the
>beginning)
>if not economically.
other interests.
ths.
hemam...@my-deja.com
in this thread everyday. You should seek psychiatric help
immediately.
--Hm.
T.H.Sanyal.
> Islam countries are basket cases. Where there is no oil, terrorism
> shows its ugly face and bloody hand much earlier. East Timor, Kashmir,
> Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kosovo and Chechnya are some prime examples.
Muslim. But don't let facts ruin your fantasies. :-)
ths.
T.H.Sanyal.
> Thank you. But, I have a valid e-mail account and you can verify
> its "live" activity by sending me e-mails there. perhaps you don't
> understand the Internet culture: no one is obligated to give out his
> or her real names/ addresses/ ancestry as your have wished. What is
seriously.
> important is what gets written on the billboard. If you want to
> you have called me a scoundrel. (But, that's OK ])
Only after you called me a moron.
>> > Clarify your position on "electoral tamasha" or whatever you mean.
>>
>> I have said what I wanted to say.
> NO you have not; of course you think you did - but that's your view
is your problem. If you want clarification, explication and such, it
will cost you money.
> Again, you are exhibiting immaturity Mr. Leftist liberal moron.
> Showing distaste for a post and demanding the identity of the poster
> be revealed is a sign of emotional fragility.
writing the same abuses. Anyway, I do find your posts distasteful
for the contents, but I have not demanded that you reveal your identity.
I have merely asserted my right to treat your pseudonymously posted
advice as trash.
> I suggest you, mr. liberal moron, see a shrink. Also, it is unwise
> to use a Penn State Univ. e-mail facility for such postings. Do not
> say I did not caution you.
2. Since you are not the administrator of the account I use, you have
no business telling me what I can or cannot do with it. Also see 1.
>> In future, I shall ignore posts from you.
> That proves your incapacity to sift the actual content of a post on
> this and any forum from its innate spontaneity of form.
from me to your trash.
> I suggest you first learn the media and then post.
ths.
T.H.Sanyal.
>Wrong] Universities have a different goal than the private companies.
>While private companies frequently restrict their usage of emails,
>Universities especially the public universities cannot do so or
>wouldn't do so as it runs against the concept of academic freedom.
counter to the thought processes of hatemongers. In fact, any form
of free thinking is considered dangerous by these people.
ths.
Raghu Seshadri
:
: I would suggest that the concept of academic freedom runs
: counter to the thought processes of hatemongers. In fact, any form
: of free thinking is considered dangerous by these people.
Exactly right. Which explains why communist
countries do not allow concepts like academic
freedom.
RS
the_virtuous_vulcan
<TH...@psuvm.psu.edu> wrote:
>...[prattle from "Tammy Hilda" (T.H.) Sanyal deleted]....<
> You are doing your part in promoting hate on the internet.
Methinks you are prone to compulsive negationist revisionism -
symptoms of intellectually defunct liberal lefitsts. Yours is a
pathological case. I'm just promoting caution for hypocrites
and treacherous characters like you, by exposing your innate
counter-culturist agenda. Your paranoia is making you to say that
such is a "hate". You're so paranoid that you can't think
rationally.
> > you have called me a scoundrel. (But, that's OK ])
>
> Only after you called me a moron.
You see, I am not offended at all Tammy.
Leftism is the last bastion of liberal morons such as you.
> I HAVE said what I wanted to say. You may not have understood it, that
> is your problem. If you want clarification, explication and such, it
> will cost you money.
Cost money ? :-) You intend making money like this ? Your salary is
not adequate ?
> ths.
Poor Tammy ! Try getting a life !
*=|The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]|=*
"Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the
idolaters whereever ye find them..." [Quran 9:5]
the_virtuous_vulcan
>
> > Islam countries are basket cases. Where there is no oil, terrorism
> > shows its ugly face and bloody hand much earlier. East Timor,
> > Kashmir, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kosovo and Chechnya are some prime
> > examples.
>
> One little problem with your thesis: East Timor has oil and is not
> Muslim.
I know that East Timor has oil; however in your attempt to rebut you
have forgotten that East Timor is Christian majority. All the other
places are Moslem majority and are NOT oil-rich places, like Saudi
Arabia.
Looks like passionate advocacy of leftist liberalism has screwed
you up very well.
> But don't let facts ruin your fantasies. :-)
The fact is that you are too screwed up with leftism.
Oh ?
> ths.
Nice try, Tammy Hilda (T.H.) Sanyal.
the_virtuous_vulcan
hemam...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <99316.12...@psuvm.psu.edu>,
> T.H.Sanyal. <TH...@psuvm.psu.edu> wrote:
> > Shyamal Pain wrote:
> in this thread everyday. You should seek psychiatric help
> immediately.
> --Hm.
The psychiatrist will need medidal help after attending to Tammy
Hilda (T.H.) Sanyal
Arindam Banerjee
>>Theoretically satidaha, or the self-immolation of a noble and
>>virtuous woman, was the ultimate and public show of
>>conjugal love and extraordinary female courage and devotion.
>
>Hmm. Why did we never see
>an "ultimate and public show of conjugal love and extraordinary male
>courage and devotion" from "a noble and virtuous man" ?
If you had read the whole post, you would have read that I had written that
the issue was about feminine courage. Men had ample scope to demonstrate
their courage in the battlefield. Many noble and virtuous men have given
their lives to save what was dear to them.
>
>>He is a Bangladeshi agent, who has done immense harm to West Bengal.
>
>Since you know this, perhaps you could tell us what his code number is
>in BD Intelligence? Is it 007? :-) :-)
What is BD Intelligence? :)
Basically I was trying to say that I do not think Jyoti Basu is Bengali by
my standards.
>>However they may not have the guts or energy to adopt a different
>>identity based upon name and manners and philosophy, rather like
>>our Hindu Marxists.
>
>Hindu Marxist = Sonar Patharbati = Red Herring.
Right. Strange how successful they are.
Arindam Banerjee
Arindam Banerjee
T.H.Sanyal. wrote in message <99316.12...@psuvm.psu.edu>...
>Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>
>>I do not think so. I am glad to see that you have accepted that Islam
>>lowered women's status. Which is the main reason why Bengali Hindus will
>>not convert to Islam.
>
>Right. The Hindus prefer to douse their women with kerosene and burn
>them.
Yes, I am afraid such is the case for a small percentage of Hindus who
want money quickly. Like criminals elsewhere.
Much less barbaric than stoning them to death as the Muslims
>would want.
They stone to death legally, publicly and for good fun. Unlike Hindus.
Bengalis are not that much in the burning game these days,
>but they would gladly restrict the food and clothing of a woman whose
>husband dies before her.
If you know anything about Bengali culture you would know that such
privations were endured for idealistic purposes. Since I suppose you
are a Marxist idealism is not in your vocabulary, materialism is.
>Fanatics of either brand do not care that women are human,
>they view women as property and/or womb carrier.
No, Hindus certainly thought differently about women. They respected
them for their actions. They still do. They are misguided, as I wrote,
and you deleted, but we have to know the reasons for their actions, not
issue blanket condemnation.
>> My views changed after I
>>visited Chittorgarh, listened to the guide, and read the local books in
>>Hindi. They
>>were completely changed under my wife's influence.
>
>So you are now opposed to outlawing of Satidaha?
No. But I understood why they did it.
>>No, there is no conflict with caste system and human rights, unless you
>>deliberately misinterpret the caste system for the specific purpose of
>>trashing Hinduism. We value our own reformers, not foreign or alien
>>abusers.
>
>Are Sudras and untouchables permitted to read the Vedas,
Yes. These days in fact they can and do study the Vedas.
perform worship
>rituals (rather than having the Brahmins do those for them)
Brahmins do their job, other castes do theirs. That is what the caste
system is for. Today there is no restriction. Anyone can do anything
without restriction. Any restriction is illegal.
under the
>caste system?
Under the caste system Brahmins could not do Shudra's work as well.
It was a system which served its purpose. In the modern era its
scope has changed, there has been a broadening of attitudes.
Why is restricting two people from marrying each other
>because they are from different castes not a violation of their human
>rights?
Such restriction is illegal, that is all. In the past parents arranged
their
marriages, and still do in many cases. Today there is a choice. So
many people take it; thus the caste system as a restriction is a non-issue
for all families that I know. I have long ago told my daughters that they
can marry anyone they wish. The caste system makes sense in that
it hold together the culture we may wish to continue. If most Bengalis
become like your Marxist kind, retaining that culture is of course
pointless.
Arindam Banerjee
>
>ths.
the_virtuous_vulcan
> Are Sudras and untouchables permitted to read the Vedas, perform
> worship rituals (rather than having the Brahmins do those for them)
> each other because they are from different castes not a violation of
> their human rights?
Possibly not, Tammy. You got your facts right. But abolishing caste
system, conceptually, is impossible. Yes, the inequitable treatment
from caste system must be brought to court and justice.
However it is only the liberal, morons and stupid Marxists (aka
Stalinists) who survive emotionally and hence politically by appealing
to the excesses of the caste system without having been able since a
long time to eliminate it and/or provide a sustainable alternative.
Reading your posts you sure are a moron of this category. You should
bow down before the glorious principles of Hindutva as propounded by
M.S. Golwalkar, Dattopanth Thengdi and Dr. Keshav Baliram Hegdewar.
Joyti Basu, the leader of the Red Headed League, calls himself - at
least formally a leader of the proletariat yet lives a personal life
of pomp and show. He is nepotist to the core and even if one is too
kind to forgive that, one cannot but ignore that it is he and his
party of scoundrels [CPI(M)] who in the past 22 years have ruined the
state of Bengal, thoroughly.
The major problem with Bongs (Bengalis) is that a large class of the
urban elite (who grew up as a kid in the early 60's and/or late 50's)
have embossed themselves in the slogan-oriented "proletariat" culture
that has shrouded Bengal since the late 50's; yet these "proletariat"
intellectuals have always led a very bourgeois lifestyle - example
being the stalwart Joyti Basu, and his admirers such as late Utpal
Dutta, Ritwik Ghatak, Satyajit Ray and other host of "intellectuals".
Sucking upto the party-line agenda, i.e., to force oneself to see red
when there is none has been the gospel of their beliefs.
To elaborate, it is well known that "human rights violations" are a
hot potato for all netters on this forum. But, these "aantels" have
not guts to acknowledge that the genocide committed by the notorious
Pol Pot in Cambodia is still gloriously upheld by these commie scums.
The Bong commies have never shied away, still, from extending support
to the barbarian Pol Pot - who simply slaughetred all the middle class
just to satisfy some obscurantist dogma of Maoism.
The net result has been that the Bengal of Sir Ashutosh, Rabindranath,
Kazi Nazrul, Rishi Aurobindo does not exist, and to the "glory" of the
Bong these Stalinist bastards rule shamelessly, shouting from the
roofs of the Muzzaffar Ali Bhavan on Alimuddin Street.
> ths.
macdaddy runting
> There is smoething interesting to observe: look at any Moslem
> majority country in this world. All are basket cases.
i have issue with this. may i pont out that most muslim countries are
richers than you hindu piss drinking mud worshipping dick
heads
Arnab Gupta
..[deleted]..
> The major problem with Bongs (Bengalis) is that a large class of the
> urban elite (who grew up as a kid in the early 60's and/or late 50's)
> have embossed themselves in the slogan-oriented "proletariat" culture
> that has shrouded Bengal since the late 50's; yet these "proletariat"
> intellectuals have always led a very bourgeois lifestyle - example
> being the stalwart Joyti Basu, and his admirers such as late Utpal
> Dutta, Ritwik Ghatak, Satyajit Ray and other host of "intellectuals".
> Sucking upto the party-line agenda, i.e., to force oneself to see red
> when there is none has been the gospel of their beliefs.
1. You may be able to "prove" that Utpal Dutta was an admirer of Jyoti
Bose. But take my word, you will have hard time doing the same for
Ritwik Ghatak and Satyajit Ray.
2. The first (UD), AFAIK, was a member of CPI and CPIM. The second (RG)
was a member of CPI cultural squad for a few years before being expelled
from the party. The third (SR) was never a member of CPI/CPIM or any
of their cultural squads.
3. It will be a somewhat difficult task to show that these people were
"Sucking upto the party-line agenda", especially the last two (RG and SR).
They were both too independent minded to do that. But if you still think
they did, I am interested in knowing what in their works lead you to this
conclusion.
Thanks,
Arnab.
..[deleted]..
Srivatsan Seshadri
hemam...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <80ks9i$grk$1...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
> Unlike rest of us in India (particularly North India),
[the rest deleted]
Any reason why you post ALL your articles twice?
cheers
vatsan
hemam...@my-deja.com
culturally and politically, as evident from this routine
dissentual post in this forum, day in and day out.
It is not unknown that in the overall progress of India,
since independence, these so called unproductive intellectual
Bengalis have played little or no role. These unproductive
and talkative bongs fighting among themselves should clearly
know that it is an All-Indian preference to see them stop
the rambling and either follow the rest of India on the
highway of progress in the 21st century, OR, get lost to
bangladesh to join your other fellow bongs in similar
unproductive and counterproductive activities.
--Hm.
hemam...@my-deja.com
the_virtuous_vulcan
GUP...@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu (Arnab Gupta) wrote:
> the_virtuous_vulcan <vulc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> 3. It will be a somewhat difficult task to show that these people were
> "Sucking upto the party-line agenda", especially the last two (RG and
> think they did, I am interested in knowing what in their works lead
> you to this conclusion.
You are mostly right. SR never openly showed his party-love. But,
one of the distinct incidents that come to my mind is the 1976/1977
parade of intellectuals ("padayatra") in Calcutta just before the
eve of Loksabha elections - where SR (with Mrinal Sen) and others
marched to "cajole" the bhadralok to vote in favor of the Left Front
led by the CPI(M). This was in protest of Indira Gandhi's autocratic
rule that was "stifling" the atmosphere of human freedom in India.
This appeared, and I do recall, as a front-page picture in the Ananda
Bazar Patrika. I believe that Ananda Bazar Patrika has the file photos
in their archives.
Did SR suck upto the CPI(M) ? Probably yes, in my view. He was shrewd
media person, who being exceptionally gifted in film and other media
operations, knew that openly projecting his political views would harm
his neutral image - unlike Mrinal Sen. (Of course, Mrinal Sen later
had very negative words for the CPI(M); but that does not mean that
Sen never dissociated himself from the party.) Ray never showed it
very openly. His stature was such that even after the film Hirak Rajar
Deshey, which the Patrika at that time dubbed as an anti-establishment
film, the Left Front never went out "after him" like it had happened
to Tapan Sinha (as far as I know regarding his movie "Antardhaan"). It
is hard to prove/disprove the extent of Ray's association with CPI(M)
elites/stalwarts. [I agree with you that SR was never a member of the
CPI(M).]
My point is that what has been the contribution of these hallowed and
revered intellectuals to the development of Bengal ? Were they quite
oblivious to what CPI(M) was doing ? Why did the culturally-conscious
intellectuals (SR/MS/UD etc.) turn away from "speaking the Truth" of
the mindless depotism, anarchy and eco-destruction that CPI(M) did
between 1977-to date and earlier in 1967-1970 (Jukto Front Govt.) ?
"Amar Sonar Bangla tomarey dhorshon koritey bhalobasi ?"
Regarding RG, as far as I know (with not much documented proof - aha
to the pleasure of his fans), he was a bigtime in latter days with the
Naxalites, and hence was reportedly turned out of the CPI(M) party
during 1969 after the Bardhaman plenum when the CPI(M) split into
CPI(M-l). Again, I do not have papers/documents ready to prove this -
much to the glee of my detractors.
> Thanks,
> Arnab.
*=|The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]|=*
"Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the
idolaters whereever ye find them..." [Quran 9:5]
Arindam Banerjee
> statement. It should apply to all. I don't think being obsessed
> by Bengali Hindu ways is at issue. What do you mean by "obsessed?".
If you are not obsessed, fine. What I mean is too much interest in others
reduces your own ability to develop your strengths.
> Posting abusive and ignorant views is bad whether under pseudonym
> or real name. Whay should pseudonym be an issue. Isn't it the
> message one should be concerned with. What does a name or identity
> have anything to do with a discussion with point/logic/information?
A lot, imo. A person who writes under a pseudonym has much less
credibility.
He has nothing at all to lose.
>> Excellent. Please read some Hindu authors like Swami Vivekananda and
>> Aurobindo Ghosh and Gandhi.
>
> Thanks for the suggestion. Any reason why you assumed that I did not
> read about them? And may I ask why you chose ME to recommend the
> readings? They are indeed great men with great visions and minds.
Because you were at that time talking a lot about Western writers.
> So I am better than your Australian friends :). I, and many others
> would never have asked that.
>> Interest is fine, abuse is another. If Bangladeshis have developed
>superior
>> systems then they may have a right, for our best interests, perhaps.
>I do
>> not think they have, so they should first see to their own affairs.
>
> Again, you are bringing in the entire nation/religion. Abuse is
> not fine. Thats an agreed tautology. Those who abuse are culpable.
>
>> As far as I am concerned, those people of Bengal
>> who do not respect the original culture of Bengal, which is the
>worship of
>> the
>> great mother-goddess Kali, are not Bengalis. That does not mean that
>
> Wow, now you have made the crux of the issue clear. This probably
> was your main contention, and we spent all this time side tracking!
> OK, not let me make my points here. Lets be very careful here. Are
> you implying by "respect" above as actual worship of Kali or believing
> in her existence as real and not mythological?
Kali is the central figure in Bengali thinking. As a feminine
representation
of force, she gives the true Bengali characteristic of hating all hypocrisy
and
evil.
Or by respect you mean
> just respecting (accepting, not opposing or making a disrecpectful
> comments/gesture and also participating in Kali Puja as an attendee)
> the tradition of Kali Puja itself?
No.
If you are implying in the first
> sense then you may find a very small number of true bengalis (i.e
>passing
> your criterion).
I am afraid you are absolutely right. Perhaps there are only few who
truly appreciate the greatest ever art form which is the product of the
Bengali mind. But then, as far as I am concerned, the Bengali culture
is dying, if not quite dead, thanks to Islam and Marxism.
Arindam Banerjee
Shomir
> > Just sick and tired of looking at your obsession of posting
> immediately.
> --Hm.
You have been here for about a week now...it took you about 5 days to
express your first opinion, and then a couple of sick and stupid jokes.
Then you are going around suggesting psychiatric help to everyone, isn't it
evident who needs help? If you don't have an opinion, why don't you shut up
and educate yourself some more before you start commenting?
Shomir
=====================================
prasa...@my-deja.com
Hey you bengali ass hole from the Sunderbans ! if you like
to lick ass, go and lick the shit of your brothers in
Bangaldesh. Not in India.
We will soon push-in you through the borders
with bangladesh with our bsf.
Bastard Refugee !! There is no place for you in India or in
Indian forums. Fuck-off to Bangladesh !!!!
cere...@my-deja.com
"Arindam Banerjee" <ad...@interphase.aust.com> wrote:
>
> If you are not obsessed, fine. What I mean is too much interest in
others
> reduces your own ability to develop your strengths.
I still don't understand who are you pointing your fingers at. If
posting
and responding to articles, debating issues, expressing one's opinion
etc
in this forum are indicative of being "obsessed" then you are no less
"obsessed" than others, if not more. Besides seems like you yourself
are displaying an obsession of/for "perceived" obsession by others.
But
above all what does all this "ill defined" obsession of yours have to
do
with the subjcet under discussion on this thread? What point are you
making
by this clamour of "obsession"?
>
> A lot, imo. A person who writes under a pseudonym has much less
> credibility. He has nothing at all to lose.
Do you judge the merit of a statement by the name of its author
and not by its content/substance?? Truly amazing!! Talking about
credibility, your above mindset doesn't seem to buy it either.
>
> I am afraid you are absolutely right. Perhaps there are only few who
> truly appreciate the greatest ever art form which is the product of
the
> Bengali mind. But then, as far as I am concerned, the Bengali culture
> is dying, if not quite dead, thanks to Islam and Marxism.
^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Then its not dying or dead NOW. Its been dead all along. Let me try
once
again, since the simple logic doesn't seem to sink in. If
worshipping/believeing
in Kali is your criterion then there never were too many true Benglis
ever.
Islam and Marxism are not the main issue here. Many educated and even
uneducated Hindu Bengalis don't blindly believe and worship Kali.
They are not necessarily Marxists as I gave two examples before.
There are
many more. Many posters here also profess their lack of firm belief
in
religion(Hinduism) yet also denounce Marxism. In other words there
are plenty
of examples of a non religious Hindu (Not worshipping Kali) who are
also
not Marxists. Your restrictive and stereotypical view above can never
accomodate that.
Kulbir Singh
: I am afraid you are absolutely right. Perhaps there are only few who
: truly appreciate the greatest ever art form which is the product of the
: Bengali mind. But then, as far as I am concerned, the Bengali culture
: is dying, if not quite dead, thanks to Islam and Marxism.
Two famous Bengalis of recent past who were perhaps least
influenced by Islam or Marxism are Shayama Prasad and
Nirad Chaudhary. What is particularly good about these
personalities? BTW this is a rhetorical question; being
a non-Bengali, it is difficult for me to discuss Bengali
issues with confidence.
regards,
Kulbir Singh
: Arindam Banerjee
Nitin Paul Batra
www.timesofindia.com
16 November
Trinamool Congress calls for President's Rule against Tripura.
----
Nitin Batra
P Chidambaram for PM
the_virtuous_vulcan
Kulbir Singh <kbh...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> In soc.culture.bengali Arindam Banerjee <adda...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> Two famous Bengalis of recent past who were perhaps least
> influenced by Islam or Marxism are Shayama Prasad and
> Nirad Chaudhary. What is particularly good about these
> personalities? BTW this is a rhetorical question; being
> a non-Bengali, it is difficult for me to discuss Bengali
> issues with confidence.
These Bengalis, and their "predecessor" Rabindranath Tagore was also
extremely critical of Islam and Communism. Tagore's visit to Soviet
Union (Land of Bolsheviks) resulted within Tagore a deep apathy for
the philosophy for Leninism and Stalinism.
The good about such class of Bongs is that they, being free from the
spell of fanatical dogmas like Marxism and Islam, could truly and
very correctly appreciate the reality of Bengali culture. (With
respect to Niradbabu, who passed away at 101, I can only say that his
"unflattering" criticism of contemporary and past Bengali culture
acts as a prism.) That the Maxrists in bengal are simply hypocrites
and are there for thuggery and the loot, was predicted by Niradbabu
about 30 years ago. It has, alas, come saddeningly true. Regarding
Shyamaprasad and Tagore all I can say that CPI(M) had banned Tagore's
text that he wrote for toddlers, and Bangladeshi Moslems, posing as
progressives, had banned Tagore's books being taught at Universities
and colleges - as he was a "Hindu" poet. Shyamaprasad contributed to
the formation of the Jana Sangh - and his rise was the result of him
being assassinated by Jawaharlal Nehru (rumored). Again, as we know
Dr. Shyamaprasad Mukherjee (son of Sir Ashutosh Mukherjee) stood for
nationalism, was hated by Moslems (Moslem League) and Pesudo-secular
Congress (Nehruvites) and Communists (CPI(M)).
> regards,
>
> Kulbir Singh
>
> : Arindam Banerjee
*=|The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]|=*
"Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the
idolaters whereever ye find them..." [Quran 9:5]
the_virtuous_vulcan
cere...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <80djhk$49m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> the_virtuous_vulcan <vulc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> I explained above. Extremely vocal and aggressive can stifle the
> voice of majority. Its sad fact of life. If Hindu fanatics became
> as powerful as laden and DECIDED (hypothetically) to engage in
> similar terrorism against Muslims/Christians/secular Hindus
> the majority of Hindus will also take a passive resignatory
> posture.
This is a total baloney. If a community (Moslem) feels that a bunch
of lunatics like Osama bin Laden and his sidekicks are taking the
whole community hostage, and giving it a bad name, then they would
have taken corrective measures. For centuries, since the inception
of Islam by Prophet Mohammed in 622 A.D., this sort of
"hostage-taking-crisis" has always shrouded the Islamic society.
After all, it is due to this fundamentalist nature, that Islam has
not contributed at all to the civilization like other cultures. (We
are of course "trained" to give Islam the benefit of doubt - a pure
product of fanciful, new-fangled liberalism.)
> Finally, its because people like you implicate and equate the
> "emancipated" Muslims with the fanatics they have no choice but to
> feel bitter and be defensive and. Instead of that if you
> (metaphorically) only condemned the perpetrators of terrorism and
> pleaded to the emancipated for support in fighting this at least
> they would have been more vocal if not active in denouncing it.
Rubbish ! If a family has a rogue as one of its members, then it is
incumbent upon the family to hand that rogue to the law-enforcers.
If the family starts patronizing the rogue and gives protection, and
turns a blind eye on the misdeeds of this rogue, then its is but
natural that the patience of the victims of that rogue will wear
down one day. The family will be evaluated on the actions they had
taken. A similar logic applies to the case of the larger body
of "emancipated" Moslems and their being held hostage by the more
fanatic variety. It is also a mendicant mentality to request the
other ethnic communities to "plead" to the Moslem community to rid
itself of these dagger-dangling, bomb-throwing rascals. Why should
that be the norm ? Why the Moslem community is so damn hallowed in
a secular society that other communities have to bow down before it
to "plead" to check its more rabid elements ? Just who the hell are
they ?
I believe that "emancipated" liberal Moslems protect their fanatical
(kafir-baiting) brothers just because from an Islamic point of view
a Moslem who physically hates kafirs and is intolerant of other forms
of religion, other than Islam, is to be lauded not derided. This very
narcissist fixation of Islam with itself, is the root cause of the
perverted psychology why we see Moslem countries as main exporters of
narcotics and/or terrorism.
The terrorist group hamas is lauded by Palestinian Moslems simply
because while its radicals kills Jews, Hamas also protects Moslems
and looks after them.
cere...@my-deja.com
the_virtuous_vulcan <vulc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> text that he wrote for toddlers, and Bangladeshi Moslems, posing as
> progressives, had banned Tagore's books being taught at Universities
> and colleges - as he was a "Hindu" poet. Shyamaprasad contributed to
Thats a falsehood. Nobody poses as progressive if they are. A
fanatic doesn't want to pose as a progressive, he is proud of
being fanatic and advertizes so unmistakably. So posing as
progressive is an oxymoron. Secondly its a falsehood that Tagore is
"banned' in colleges in Bangladesh. You may not be aware of the
fact that tagores' song is the national anthem of bangladesh and
tagore songs are regularly broadcast on radio and TV. Are you
at all interested in facts? Then need to do better homework.
Arindam Banerjee
cere...@my-deja.com wrote in message <80posd$hu9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <n%LX3.19927$we.3...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>,
> "Arindam Banerjee" <ad...@interphase.aust.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> If you are not obsessed, fine. What I mean is too much interest in
>others
>> reduces your own ability to develop your strengths.
>
> I still don't understand who are you pointing your fingers at. If
>posting
> and responding to articles, debating issues, expressing one's opinion
>etc
> in this forum are indicative of being "obsessed" then you are no less
> "obsessed" than others, if not more.
I do not think so. I am not obsessed about others, but I am guilty of
being self-obsessed, perhaps. I rarely post, unlike the kind I am talking
about. The kind who keep on posting ignorant nonsense about others.
The kind who make sweeping statements like low caste Hindus
converted, thereby putting so called high castes on the defensive and
justifying actions against them for the present - such as evicting them
from former East Bengal. I was protesting against such an attitude.
That was all. In reply people started talking about satidaha, an issue
which had nothing to do with the topic, but had to be brought up to put
Hindus on the defensive.
Besides seems like you yourself
> are displaying an obsession of/for "perceived" obsession by others.
>But
> above all what does all this "ill defined" obsession of yours have to
>do
> with the subjcet under discussion on this thread? What point are you
>making
> by this clamour of "obsession"?
I had made just one point. Other points were raised by others, to which
I responded. My point was that Bangladeshi Muslims were not low caste
Hindus when they converted. That is all.
>>
>> A lot, imo. A person who writes under a pseudonym has much less
>> credibility. He has nothing at all to lose.
>
> Do you judge the merit of a statement by the name of its author
> and not by its content/substance?? Truly amazing!! Talking about
> credibility, your above mindset doesn't seem to buy it either.
I do not care for what people with pseudonyms have to say about me.
They do not matter. Really, as a matter of principle I should not
reply to any of them.
>> I am afraid you are absolutely right. Perhaps there are only few who
>> truly appreciate the greatest ever art form which is the product of
>the
>> Bengali mind. But then, as far as I am concerned, the Bengali culture
>> is dying, if not quite dead, thanks to Islam and Marxism.
> ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Then its not dying or dead NOW. Its been dead all along. Let me try
>once
> again, since the simple logic doesn't seem to sink in. If
>worshipping/believeing
> in Kali is your criterion then there never were too many true Benglis
>ever.
I do not think so. You probably cannot understand that by my reckoning
Nazrul was a more Bengali poet than Tagore, though of course Tagore
was a far greater poet.
Anyway so what if modern oversmart Bengalis have given up on Kali,
many other Indian Hindus have not.
Those who have not given up on Kali are far more Bengali, then, by my logic.
> Islam and Marxism are not the main issue here. Many educated and even
> uneducated Hindu Bengalis don't blindly believe and worship Kali.
I seem to have much to learn from anonymous characters! :) :)
Do you think you should learn anything from anonymous professors? :)
- snip -
Arindam Banerjee
mhz...@my-deja.com
>
> >I do not think so. I am glad to see that you have accepted that
Islam
> >lowered women's status. Which is the main reason why Bengali Hindus
will
> >not convert to Islam.
> Right. The Hindus prefer to douse their women with kerosene and burn
> them. Much less barbaric than stoning them to death as the Muslims
> would want.
Just wanted to point out that the "stoning punishment" applies equally
to both men and women, for the crime of adultery, according to original
Islamic law. And that is how it has been practiced, although
application of this punishment has been extremely rare (it is almost
impossible to meet the "four witnesses" requirement; most adulterers
do not commit the act in presence of four live witnesses).
> Bengalis are not that much in the burning game these days,
> but they would gladly restrict the food and clothing of a woman whose
> husband dies before her.
> Fanatics of either brand do not care that women are human,
> they view women as property and/or womb carrier.
You are right about that.
> > My views changed after I
> >visited Chittorgarh, listened to the guide, and read the local books
in
> >Hindi. They
> >were completely changed under my wife's influence.
>
> So you are now opposed to outlawing of Satidaha?
>
> >No, there is no conflict with caste system and human rights, unless
you
> >deliberately misinterpret the caste system for the specific purpose
of
> >trashing Hinduism.
Not everybody that opposes caste system is trying to "trash" Hinduism.
A stalwart Hindu revivalist like Bankim Chatterjee was very critical
of the caste system. In fact, I have been told that there was no caste
system in practice before Manu wrote the "Manushanghita." Am I right?
Anyway, if the caste system is practiced in a way that is consistent
with human rights, there would be a lot less criticism of it, and
there would be little room for "misinterpreting" it. Most people
criticize what they see and not what might have been intended in
Hindu theology. Can you tell us what the correct interpretation of
the caste system is and how it is intended to be practiced?
> We value our own reformers, not foreign or alien
> >abusers.
I can respect your spirit.
> Are Sudras and untouchables permitted to read the Vedas, perform
worship
> rituals (rather than having the Brahmins do those for them) under the
> caste system? Why is restricting two people from marrying each other
> because they are from different castes not a violation of their human
> rights?
>
> ths.
>
M. Harun uz Zaman
The Ohio State University
Arnab Gupta
>> 3. It will be a somewhat difficult task to show that these people were
>> "Sucking upto the party-line agenda", especially the last two (RG and
>> SR).They were both too independent minded to do that. But if you still
>> think they did, I am interested in knowing what in their works lead
>> you to this conclusion.
>
> You are mostly right.
You mean I wrote something wrong ? Please point these out.
SR never openly showed his party-love. But,
> one of the distinct incidents that come to my mind is the 1976/1977
> parade of intellectuals ("padayatra") in Calcutta just before the
> eve of Loksabha elections - where SR (with Mrinal Sen) and others
> marched to "cajole" the bhadralok to vote in favor of the Left Front
> led by the CPI(M). This was in protest of Indira Gandhi's autocratic
> rule that was "stifling" the atmosphere of human freedom in India.
> This appeared, and I do recall, as a front-page picture in the Ananda
> Bazar Patrika. I believe that Ananda Bazar Patrika has the file photos
> in their archives.
>
Are you sure ? Ray rarely became involved in politics. According to
his biographer he once participated in "a huge silent procession in protest
at the Government's imprisonment of demonstrators without trial during the
food movement". The only other time was when he wrote to Mrs. Gandhi
demanding the release of Utpal Datta during emergency. That emergency
"was "stifling" the atmosphere of human freedom in India" is a fact,
which a large section of population felt, irrespective of their
political affiliations (from extreme left to the extreme right).
> Did SR suck upto the CPI(M) ? Probably yes, in my view. He was shrewd
> media person, who being exceptionally gifted in film and other media
> operations, knew that openly projecting his political views would harm
> his neutral image - unlike Mrinal Sen. (Of course, Mrinal Sen later
> had very negative words for the CPI(M); but that does not mean that
> Sen never dissociated himself from the party.) Ray never showed it
> very openly.
May be, but Ray has repeatedly said in his interviews and essays that
he is a very "individual" person. To allege that he sucked upto the CPIM,
you need to show something more concrete - from his works or from his
actions. You cannot just find motives for his non-involvement in direct
politics and allege that he sucked upto the CPIM.
His stature was such that even after the film Hirak Rajar
> Deshey, which the Patrika at that time dubbed as an anti-establishment
> film, the Left Front never went out "after him" like it had happened
> to Tapan Sinha (as far as I know regarding his movie "Antardhaan"). It
> is hard to prove/disprove the extent of Ray's association with CPI(M)
> elites/stalwarts. [I agree with you that SR was never a member of the
> CPI(M).]
>
Once again this is no support for your claim. Inaction on the part of
CPIM can never support your allegations against Ray. However, if actions
of other communists (more detestable types) against Ray help revise your
opinions on him here's one. The Naxalites made life so difficult for him
that at one point he thought of leaving Calcutta. He was repeatedly
"attacked in speech and print". They violently protested against his film
"Pratidwandi".
> My point is that what has been the contribution of these hallowed and
> revered intellectuals to the development of Bengal ?
Now this is a point I will avoid discussing. Intellectuals, I think,
have seldom contributed anything concrete in the development of
any nation. They contribute more to our thinking and our understanding.
Their works enrich our experiences and broaden our mind. I think of
Ray primarily as an artist and a creator.
Were they quite
> oblivious to what CPI(M) was doing ? Why did the culturally-conscious
> intellectuals (SR/MS/UD etc.) turn away from "speaking the Truth" of
> the mindless depotism, anarchy and eco-destruction that CPI(M) did
> between 1977-to date and earlier in 1967-1970 (Jukto Front Govt.) ?
>
Take a fresh look at his Calcutta trilogy (for the period 1967-1970).
You have yourself mentioned "Hirak-Rajar-Deshey" was an anti-establishment
film. He made very few films during the later period (1977 onwards).
Also, can you point out any film of Ray made before Calcutta trilogy
which directly talks about politics or criticises any individual or
political party (Even Calcutta trilogy does that rarely, it concentrates
more on individuals) ? This criticism of yours, I believe, can be made
much strongly against Mrinal Sen, who have made films that deals actively
with politics.
> "Amar Sonar Bangla tomarey dhorshon koritey bhalobasi ?"
>
> Regarding RG, as far as I know (with not much documented proof - aha
> to the pleasure of his fans)
Does it matter really ? Writing from a phoney account has already
discounted any hope of accountability on your part.
, he was a bigtime in latter days with the
> Naxalites, and hence was reportedly turned out of the CPI(M) party
> during 1969 after the Bardhaman plenum when the CPI(M) split into
> CPI(M-l). Again, I do not have papers/documents ready to prove this -
> much to the glee of my detractors.
You are again wrong. Ritwik was thrown out of Communist Party (or
its cultural squad) much earlier. According to some CPI members he
was never a member to begin with and was minorly involved with
the party! (Please refer to Surama Ghatak's "Padma theke Titash").
Other than "Jukti Tokko Goppo" which film of Ritwik points to his
"sucking upto the party-line agenda" ?
Thanks,
Arnab.
cere...@my-deja.com
"Arindam Banerjee" <ad...@interphase.aust.com> wrote:
>
> I do not think so. I am not obsessed about others, but I am guilty of
> being self-obsessed, perhaps. I rarely post, unlike the kind I am
talking
> about. The kind who keep on posting ignorant nonsense about others.
> The kind who make sweeping statements like low caste Hindus
Lets clear it up once for all, shall we? "posting ignorant nonsense
about others, making sweeping statements" etc are not OBSESSIONS, but
simply indicative of prejudice, contempt and insicerity. And both
sides
(If we look at it that way) are guilty of that (may be in different
degrees). The word obsession is misapplied in this context.
>
> I do not care for what people with pseudonyms have to say about me.
> They do not matter. Really, as a matter of principle I should not
> reply to any of them.
Your principle of not not replying to anonymous post was never
challenged or questioned. (That would make no sense anyway). Its
your assertion that "anonymous posts do not carry any credibility
just BECAUSE the posters identity is missing" was questioned. My
point is that it is the content/substance that lends credibility
or not, not the name of the author. I am amazed that I have to
belabour this simple point.
>
> I do not think so. You probably cannot understand that by my
reckoning
> Nazrul was a more Bengali poet than Tagore, though of course Tagore
> was a far greater poet.
Then you are obviously running into a self-inconsistency. On one
hand you are maintaining that only believing and worshipping Kali
makes one a true Bengali and then declaring that Nazrul is a Bengali
(More so than Tagore to boot) is showing a serious
self-contradiction.
Nazrul never "believed" and "worshipped" in Kali (Remember you
clearly
rejected "respect" for Kali as the criterion as Bengaliness). But at
least I am encouraged that you are accepting (Not that it really
matters)
Nazrul as Bengali despite the inconsistency mentioned above.
>
> I seem to have much to learn from anonymous characters! :) :)
> Do you think you should learn anything from anonymous professors? :)
Oh sure, learning is my passion, from anyone, anywhere. To me a truth
spoken by the devil is still sublime. And it is far easier to learn
from anonymous 'X' since then one can concentrate one's full
attention
to the content without being distracted/biased by the identity
of 'X'. :)
And thank you for lightening up :)
antibeng...@my-deja.com
GUP...@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu (Arnab Gupta) wrote:
> So finally the veneer of academic discourse falls off. Though I don't
> really agree with the content and style of Mr. Shomir's responses
> to your post, let me congratulate him: first, for being much more
> honest than you and second, for exposing you.
>
> >Yes. "Alpo Bidday Bhoiyonkori" is a Bengali Hindu translation
> >of Alexander Pope's famous quote : "Little knowledge is a
> >dangerous thing" from one of his famous pieces of poetry.
> > I however believe that it most resembles the action of
> >the Bengali Hindus from Madhusudan Dutt's aping of the
> >English in writing his Sonnets to Bankim Chandra Chatterjee's
> >aping and stealing of Sir Walter Scott's idea of historical
> >fiction.
>
> Sadly, all your academic pursuits, it seems, have resulted in creating
> a rather closed and narrow mind Doctor. Since when is following a
> particlular style of writing or getting inspired by it considered
> as "plagiarism" or "stealing"? Think about it...applying your logic
> every single author of novels and short stories in Bengal can be
> called a plagiarist or thief, since the forms of novel and short
story,
> as we know them today, were developed in the West.
>
> ..[deleted]..
>
> Thanks,
> Arnab.
> antibeng...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
> A NEW REVISION OF GITANJALI
>
> by: Rathindranath Ghost.
> While eating Pepperoni at Jora
Shako.
>
> Where mind is without fear of the
Bengali Muslims
> and the head is held higher than the
Ashoka Pillars,
> Where knowledge, food and cheap wine is
free,
> Where the world of Hinduism and Our
Secular Pretensions
> has not been broken into fragments of
narrow domestic walls,
> Where tireless strivings to be a
Secular-Hindu
> stretches it's arms towards
perfection,
> Where the clear stream of irrationality
has not lost it's
> way into the dreary desert sand of
good reason,
> Where mind is lead backward to thee into
ever widening
> caste-mindedness and
inter-communal hatred,
> In that heaven of freedom, Bhagwan, let
all of us --
> your chosen Bengali Hindus, awake.
>
> *** Dedicated to the Bengali Hindus
of India, their
> Hinducized Bengali Muslim Slaves
and their
> diasporic cousins overseas of
both Bengali Hindu
> and Hinducized Bengali Muslim
Gharana.
>
>
********************************************
antibeng...@my-deja.com
man...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <7vtdoh$p0g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > In article <38209631...@My-Dejanews.com>,
> > Shomir <Sho...@My-Dejanews.com> wrote:
> > > csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > I can understand a raw nerve of yours has been
touched
> > > > by my work. But I encourage you to read and enlighten
> > > > yourself more on this before you attack the experts
> like a
> > > > bull in a China Shop.
> > > > -- Dr. Siddiky.
> > >
> > > Dr., indeed I am overwhelmed by your wisdom and knowledge! I am
> sure
> > that
> > > other readers of your "masterpiece" will be highly entertained by
> the
> > > convoluted piece of trash, you call your "work". There is a
saying
> in
> > > Bengali which says "Olpo Bidya Bhoyonkori"... did you ever hear
> that?
> > >
> > > Shomir
> > >
> > > ==========================================
> > > Yes. "Alpo Bidday Bhoiyonkori" is a Bengali Hindu
> translation
> > of Alexander Pope's famous quote : "Little knowledge is a
> > dangerous thing" from one of his famous pieces of poetry.
> > I however believe that it most resembles the action of
> > the Bengali Hindus from Madhusudan Dutt's aping of the
> > English in writing his Sonnets to Bankim Chandra
Chatterjee's
> > aping and stealing of Sir Walter Scott's idea of historical
> > Bengali-Hindu-Plagiarism where one can find these Bengali
> Hindus
> > aping and stealing everything European in the 19th Century.
> > The choice of your quote as response to my belittled work
> > therefore justifies the Cultural History of your Group
(Bengali
> > Hindu ! Is it ! I guess so, if I am not wrong.)
> > Let me end with a joke. The word "ghoti" in Bengali
means
> > a bun watering can or a can that carries water to clean
> > your buttocks after toilet. By the word "Ghoti" one also
> > undrstands the Bengali Hindus from West Bengal Proper who
last
> > influxed in the-then-East-Bengal. The joke is :
> >
> > Ghotis(Bengali-Hindus) are always seen to parade with
their
> > ghotis(bun watering cans) since the British first made them
do
> > so. And Now, in Bangladesh, if we send all the Bengali
> > Hindus back to India with their Ghotis, they will have no
> > place to shit but have to shit on top of each other
> > (something that is happening between the Bangals and the
> Ghotis
> > in West Bengal for a long time) despite which they could
not
> > stop parading with their ghotis (bun watering cans).
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> My Response to Dr. CSiddqui:
>
> Although I am preoccupied with some professional commitments for the
> last seven days, I thought let me spend a few moments on this thread
at
> this time. I read your articles on similar themes earlier. To the best
> of my recollection, I had posted your Daily Star article in SCBs
> through dejanews. I post many articles. However, my posting of someone
> else's articles doesn't indicate my agreement or disagreement with the
> contents, views or conclusions of the authors. My posting only
> indicates that the posted article or topics deserves to be
disseminated
> for further discussion. When I posted your article last year I
> sincerely believed that your article was worth perusing even though my
> personal views were, and still are, at sharp variance with your
> distorted perceptions and untenable generalizations. I enjoy reading
> dissenting viewpoints. Yet, your comments were neither critical nor
> objective assessment. I realize now that you are interested to
> disseminate fabrication and absurdities.
>
> I saw your write-up, provocatively titled "CULTURAL STIGMA AND SHAME--
> WEST BENGAL IS CHANGING IT'S NAME-- A Paper On the Imaginary Bengal
and
> the Transgression of the Bangladeshi Cultural Space Presented At The
> Annual Bengal Studies Conference, 1999, University of North
Carolina)."
> I was neither shocked nor surprised to see your conclusion on the very
> title of your paper. Notwithstanding your untenable title of the
paper,
> I was hoping that you are interested in scholarly pursuit or exchange.
> Initially, I had perused Mr. Morshed's comments. Although I found
> several of his comments about Bangladesh too harsh, he raised a lot of
> relevant questions and scholarly concerns on your untenable
> observations. His response was proper and adequate. I was hoping that
> you, Dr. Csiddqui, will also respond appropiately and adequately. To
my
> utter surprise, you have miserably failed to respond to his legitimate
> concerns about Bengali culture. Therefore, I started reading all
> responses on the thread responses since day before yesterday. Your
> improper and irrelevant responses to Mr Shomir and others have made
you
> totally naked in front SCB readers. Instead of addressing their
> concerns, you have taken the beaten path of communalism. In fact, you
> have exposed yourself in public. You have brought shame not only to
> yourself but also to the name of Bengal Studies Conference (which I
> attended at least one dozen times since my first attendace in 1976 at
> the University of Chcago, and the last one that I attended in 1998 at
> the Indina University at Bloominton). The year 2000 Bengal Studies
> Conference is scheduled to be held in next May at the University of
> Wisconsin at Oshkosh. Should you decide to attend and present a paper
> on the same theme at UW at Oshkosh, I would love to attend your
session.
>
> In the meantime, Dr. CSiddiqui, let me raise the following issues:
>
> i. Why West Bengal will feel "SHAME' and "Stigma" should they decide
to
> change the name of West Bengal to "Bangla"? I don't speculate on your
> response. Let me clearly say: "Shame" is in your mind. "Stigma" is
also
> in your mind. Both shame and stigma might have been instilled in your
> mind due to your communal hatred. Please correct me if I am wrong in
my
> assessment about your hate-filled state of mind.
>
> ii. Why Bengal has to be "Imaginary Bengal"? It is you who is
> imagining, Dr. Siddqui, that "BENGAL" does not exist any more because
> Bangladesh is the only "national-state" in the area what used to be
> called Bengal. What kind of rationale is this? Your statement is
self-
> contradictory. You are are just trying to add lies and distortions to
> all kinds myths and stereotypes.
>
> I would like to emphasize that during partition in 1947 Bengal was
> divided into East Bengal (EB)and West Bengal (WB)--- EB went with
> Pakistan and WB with India. That was according to partition plan. East
> Bengal was renamed as East Pakistan in 1955. West Bengal has remained
> West Bengal since August 15, 1947-- it is one of the Indian states.
> People of West Bengalis were (are) "Bangalees", not "West Bengalis".
> They are also definitely Indian citizens-- they are "Indians", not
> "East Indians". On the other hand, during East Pakistan's 23 years of
> shameful association with Pakistan, East Pakistanis were "Pakistanis".
> Yet, East Pakistanis were nothing but Bangalees first and then
> Pakistanis. We have always remained Bangalees. Yes, we are also
> Bangladeshis because we are citizens of an independent nation-state.
> The name of the country is "Bangladesh". It is preposterous on your
> part to suggest that we have ceased to keep our common Bengali
identity
> if "Bangalee" identify ourselves as "Bangladeshis."
>
> Our language movements in its all phases-- 1948 and 1952 were directed
> against Muhajir and Punjabi-dominated ruling coterie of Pakistan. The
> language movement had cracked the Islamic foundation of Pakistan
within
> four years after independence. The historic Bengali Language Movement
> has profound impact on all of the resistance movements in East Bengal.
> The language movement was a secular movement for saving Bengali
culture
> and language. The near elimination of the Muslim League during 1954
> election in East Bengal was a clear victory for our quest for Bengali
> cultuaral heritage. The Six-Point Movement and 1969 Student-Mass
> movement against Ayub's dictatorial regime and finally our liberation
> war in 1971 owe their origin to language movement. From East Pakistan,
> we have become Bangladesh, not East Pakistan to East Pakista. My
> further question: if "Bengal" did not exist, why "Bengali Linguistic
> Identity" had become the focal points our nationalist movements. Your
> sweeping conclusions are absurd?
>
> iii. Dr. cSiddiqui has claimed that West Bengal has Trangressed
> Bangladeshi Cultural Space. He did not even hesitate to characterize
> our culturally minded Bangladeshis as "Hinduzed Bangladeshis" of
> Bangladesh. This kind of sweeping comments are communally motivated.
> These cheap comments have exposed his real agenda.
>
> iv. Dr.CSiddiqui, there are readers who are not scared of your
jargons.
> Your jargon ridden write-ups are testimonials to your bigotry.
>
> v. How and why did the language movement start in Dhaka on March 26,
> 1948? Who were the main participants of 1948 phase of language
> movement? Who had forcefully demanded Bengali to be one of the State
> Languages of Pakistan at the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan (CAP)on
> February 25, 1948? Was he (the mover of such a historic Amendment for
> Bengali language at CAP)a Pakka Pakistani or a patriotic Bangalee?
>
> Bengal was always there, and Bengal will be always there.
> Notwithstanding cSiddiquis, "BENGAL" and "Bengalis" are alive, and
> well. Bengalis are still kickin'!
>
> Thanks for reading.
>
> M. Waheeduzzaman Manik (November, 5, 1999]
antibeng...@my-deja.com
T.H.Sanyal. <TH...@psuvm.psu.edu> wrote:
> csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > Thanks for taking the time out to read. Since one can
not
> >give academic responses to naive and non-academic
observations,
> >one has no other way than to pitch the intellectual ball
> >at the wave-length of the naive observer untutored in the
> >Social Sciences. Often when such observers drag the dialogue
>
> Your jargon-laden hate-filled tract gives the Social Sciences a bad
> name. You may have a Ph.D. but that by itself is no assurance that
> you have not spouted nonsense. I know folks who live in West Bengal
> and listen to Rabindra Sangeet and Nazrul Geeti broadcast from Dhaka,
> blissfully unaware of your conjured up cultural boundary.
>
> >to questions that have a more complex answer, One has two
> >clear choices : Either to stop the dialogue OR to frame an
> >answer that is comprehensible. If the answer is beyond the
> >comprehension of the person asking the question, it might
> >very well seem absurd to him/her.
>
> And it seems to be beyond your comprehension that your cultural
> boundary exists in your febrile mind.
>
> > I am trained in South Asian Cultural History (I have
> >a PHD from Yale University, CT, US) and the Paper that I
had
> (snip)
> >one can very well fall into the cragmire of chaos and
> ********
>
> So you have a Ph.D. in Social Sciences from Yale U., New Haven, CT,
USA
> and you can't even spell "quagmire". I am impressed, NOT]
>
> >confusion as you have perhaps noticed with my posting in
> >this forum -- a lesson well learnt not to post academic
> >papers in a non-academic environment of discussion ever
again.
>
> Yes, take your bigoted message elsewhere, too bad the KKK will not
> let you into their ranks.
>
> >"Selected Subaltern Studies" by Ranjit Guha
>
> >"Nationalism and the Colonial World -- A derivative discourse"
> > by Partha Chatterjee.
>
> Ranajit Guha and Partha Chatterjee are Hindus. Why are you citing
> works that fall outside your "cultural boundary" ?
>
> ths.
antibeng...@my-deja.com
antibeng...@my-deja.com
Thomas Southton <t_n_so...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Very beautiful.
>
> I've always found B'deshis to be sweet peoples. It would be nice to
> see India reunited with B'desh.
>
> In article <38224FA0...@zoom.co.uk>,
> Murshed Ahmed Choudhury <mur...@zoom.co.uk> wrote:
> > I'm afraid my reply to Mr Siddiky may have become too one sided, or
> lacking in
> > balance.
> > Mr. Siddiky does seem irrational and obsessive in his defining, and
> re-defining,
> > of what it is to be a Bengali and what exactly the criteria is for
an
> identity
> > to exist or not to exist.
> > Regardless, your comments seem to touch upon the very matters which
> help
> > perpetuate the Siddiky's of this world.
> > Hindu OR Muslim, a Bengali is a Bengali. That was my main concern
and
> feeling
> > when I initially responded to his babblings, it is also my response
> to your
> > opportunism.
> > Hindu Bengalis are not ethnically nor historically different from
> Muslim
> > Bengalis, they are the same. To pick and choose our historical
> forefathers on
> > the basis of religion is devisive and mendacious.
> > Kazi Nazrul spoke of Bengalis, Tagore spoke of Bengal - my golden
> Bengal -
> > neither divided the land here or there or by the forskin of one's
----
> -!
> > As a Bengali I feel proud of both - and both incidentally are from
> the west -
> > but I do not think aha Kazi Nazrul I like him because he's muslim or
> dislike
> > Tagore because he's Hindu. I like them both because they show that
> there is
> > beauty and spirite in the Bengali people. That the monsoons,
cyclones
> and
> > famines cannot wipe away the laughter and joy and love that we can
> feel. That
> > Hindu or Muslim, skin off or on - as my local Halal butcher always
> asks, they
> > are proof of something GOOD about OUR people.
> > I can't really say I feel emotionally attached to any country, more
> than
> > Bangladesh, but I can't deny that Bangladesh is just part of
> something greater,
> > better, more satisfying and ALSO LOST, GONE, FINISHED. My village is
> in
> > Bangladesh, my parents grew up there, my children - if and when I
get
> round to
> > having some - will go there, how on Earth am I supposed to be
> delegitimising it
> > by my thoughts of Bengal or my feelings about Bengalis?
> > It is part and parcel of my thinking when I think of Bengalis or
> Bengal!
> > They are not whole without Bangladesh, and Bangladesh is not the
> whole story in
> > and of its self!
> > But Shomir I would say this, so many Bengalis would not have turned
> to Islam if
> > there were not problems with the Hindu system. Caste schedules made
> perfectly
> > decent folk into sub-standard creatures, class and caste collussion
> led to the
> > economic deprivation of large sections of Bengal and opportunistic,
> calculating
> > self interest under the Raj led to the formation of an unloved and
> unprotected
> > underclass.
> > If Islam offered anything that the Bengali culture could not, and
had
> not, it
> > was the possibility and hope of change. That is something you cannot
> deny the
> > people access to.
> > What gets my goat though is that what was essentially a case of
class
> > exploitation turned comunal and played into the hands of the
smaller,
> though
> > none-the-less greedy and malevolant, Muslim upper class.
> > This is why I have reservations about your comments, and mr
Siddiky's
> too, they
> > turn Bengali against Bengali for little other than a narrow self
> interest.
> > Islam once offered hope to the downtroden and dissenfranchised, but
> now it is
> > not relevant to Bangladesh or to today's downtroden.
> > In many ways today's exploiters are the religious zealots and
leaders
> who take
> > the life savings of gullible old women for cures to mysterious
> illnesses - that
> > never work, who further degrade the opportunities open to Bangladesh
> by blocking
> > trade and by interferring in politics. Who take money from the poor
> to build
> > self aggrandising mosques rather than help the poor out of their
> cycle of famine
> > and subsistance.
> > Why do Mullahs attack NGOs and foreign charities in Bangladesh
whilst
> their own
> > go traipsing about, around the world, looking for finance to build
> the next big
> > mosque or madrasa? Will Allah give them blessings or damn them to
> hell fire?
> > To suggest that Bengali culture is strictly a Hindu culture is as
> mnuch folly as
> > Mr Siddiky's rants were. Bengalis have lived through Bhudism,
> Jainism, Hinduism
> > (??) and Islam, they have absored the positive and negative aspects
> of all these
> > movements, and more importantly they have BLENDED these aspects into
> a culture
> > of traditions, stories, customs and rituals which are far more
> relevent to
> > defining Bengali culture than any selective collection of Bengali
> greats.
> > Anyway, enough of all this.
> > Bengalis are Bengalis regardless of faith or location.
> > That's good enough for me and it should be good enough for you,
> > Murshed
> >
> > Shomir wrote:
> >
> > > csid...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > The word "Bengal" is a misnomer. There is no such
> space in
> > > > our time called "Bengal". Those who consciously or
> > > > unconsciously think, talk, or write about a space called
> > > > "Bengal" -- are either misguiding their own imagination to
> a
> > > > space that does not exist in the late twentieth
> century, Or,
> > > > their imaginations are being exogeneously manipulated and
> > > > misguided by a wide range of cultural products and by-
> products
> > > > to that non-existent imaginary land called "Bengal".
> > >
> > > You may wish to call us anything, but that is not going to change
> the
> > > reality of Bengal and our proud heritage. It is up to you to
> decide if you
> > > wish to share that with us as equals, or break away from the
> mainstream of
> > > Bengali culture and establish a quasi Arbi-Bengali-Islamist sect.
> 40+
> > > million Hindus who speak the Bengali language and whose ancestors
> were the
> > > pall-bearers of the Bengali culture will not relinquish that honor
> just
> > > because a Molla wishes so. Sir, just remember, we are not going
to
> allow
> > > you to pollute our bengali culture with the barbaric arabian
> practices,
> > > which you are very fond of. You can practice it yourself, but do
> not impose
> > > that "opobhrongsho" upon us.
> > >
> > > > Anyone who has difficulty in accepting the historically
and
> > > > politically
> > > > evolved boundaries of the ONLY-BENGALI-NATION-STATE in the
> world
> > > > today, is motivated to live on that non-existent
> imaginary land
> > > > called "Bengal" in the refuge of his imaginary
community.
> > > > Since the reality of historically and politically
> established
> > > > Nation-State does not allow the imaginary communities to
> create
> > > > physically the land of their imagination, they tend to
> > > > delegitimize in their mind and imagination, the existence
> of
> > > > the nation-state that is so real.
> > >
> > > Mr. Murshed Ahmed Choudhury aptly described the geo-political
> context of the
> > > formation of Bangladesh. Bangladesh as you see today was not
> created by the
> > > "Bengalis". The overwhelming majority of the Muslims of East
> Bengal in
> > > their zeal to have a separate identity, sacrificed their Bengali
> heritage
> > > and embraced the Arabic Islamic path. This "awakening" was the
> driving
> > > force in the creation of East Pakistan. The fact of the matter
is,
> you and
> > > other bigoted Islamic fanatics gladly accepted the "Pakistan"
name,
> > > discarding your cherished "Bangladesh" title, that you claim
> today! You and
> > > majority of your Muslim brothers were the ones who dishonored and
> disavowed
> > > the Bengali culture and have vainly tried to mimic the Arabs, to
> please them
> > > and get alms from them. The harder you tried, the more you were
> rejected
> > > not only by the Arabs but also by the Punjabis..and other Muslim
> countries,
> > > who considered you all as "lesser" or "lower class" of Muslims.
> > >
> > > On the other hand West Bengal which was severely handicapped by
the
> influx
> > > of the millions of Bangladeshi Hindus, gladly accepted them as
> their own and
> > > enriched itself. Economically and politically there was a heavy
> price to
> > > pay, but the Bengalis of Indian Bengal were able to proudly carry
> the
> > > "Bengali" heritage and thrive. For your reminder..even your
> national
> > > anthem...is a Hindu Bengali gift!
> > >
> > > > My paper is about the long cultural history of
> > > > delegitimization of the cultural boundaries of the ONLY-
> BENGALI-
> > > > NATION-STATE-IN-THE-WORLD (The Peoples Republic of
Bangladesh)
> > > > and the transgression of it's cultural boundaries by
> those who
> > > > consider themselves (in their imagination) the alien
cultural
> > > > insiders of Bangladesh from the West bank of the
Ganges.
> > >
> > > What are you trying to say? It does not make any sense to me...
> > > "delegitimization of cultural boundaries".."transgression of
it's
> > > cultural boundaries"..."the alien cultural insiders of
> Bangladesh"....
> > > This is utter nonsense...
> > >
> > > Lamba-lamba Engrazi shobdo byabohar korlei ki saheb howa jai?
Kono-
> matha
> > > mudu nei... jotto-shob abol tabol pechal paDa....
> > >
> > > > History, as it is known, is a sequential process
> > > > ordered by time. But the assumptions of History can be
> > > > modified by a theoretical investigation into the
> structure of
> > > > time.
> > >
> > > What bullshit is this.... " theoretical investigation into the
> > > structure of time." ??
> > >
> > > > Historical events, structures, or phenomena can be
grouped
> > > > into different classes of time which have different
> qualitative
> > > > properties, different frequencies' and unequal power.
> > >
> > > "qualitative properties.. different frequencies'... unequal
> power..." Jot
> > > shob pagal-ér prolap
> > >
> > > > With that in mind, let us ask the question, How do
> people in
> > > > different
> > > > time periods and different places recognize themselves as
> being
> > > > part of a common set, whether that set is defined by
> > > > Ethnicity, Language, Religion or Geography ? Or let me
ask,
> > > > How do the Ethnic Bengalis of pre-partitioned India and
> their
> > > > siblings recognize themselves as part of the Republic of
> > > > Bangladesh ?
> > >
> > > Very simple answer for that... if a group of people live in the
> same area,
> > > eat the same food, speak the same language, look similar... then
> they belong
> > > to the same "set". A geographic boundary created by a political
> blunder do
> > > not alter the reality of a common Bengali heritage. This
> contention remains
> > > valid even when fringe elements like you try to make yourself
> believe that
> > > only you and your kind deserve to carry the "jhanda" of the entire
> Bengali
> > > people on your weak and rickety shoulders, disregarding the fact
> that you
> > > don't even have a backbone!
> > >
> > > > Is it by their Ethnicity ? By their Language ? Or By
> their
> > > > Religion ? Or even by Geography ?
> > >
> > > None of the above... it is the realization within oneself which is
> God
> > > given...that tells me that I am a Bengali and I belong to Bengal.
> > >
> > > > The fact that they do so, atleast in their imagination
> and
> > > > as evident in the outpour of their imagination in
> literature
> > > > and other forms of cultural expression, has never been
> in any
> > > > doubt. But the principle through which notions of
> continuity
> > > > and discontinuity, boundaries, and ruptures are
> established is
> > > > highly complex and variable. It is as variable as Sunil
> > > > Gangopadhay's self-referring utterances of his implied
> Bangladeshi
> > > > subjects in "Purbo Paschim" to Taslima Nasrin's
Focculdian
> > > > "Shame" enchanting and pleasing the smug and complacent
> Bengali
> > > > Hindus, who have long ceased their active participation
in
> > > > Hinduism.
> > >
> > > I can only speak for myself, and the reality is..it is my
> conviction, my
> > > heritage and the genes that I carry in my body that tells me ..I
AM
> A
> > > BENGALI.. It is not my imagination, it is the reality. If you ask
> yourself
> > > the same question you will probably get the same answer. My
> question is,
> > > why do you want to deprive me of this identity? I have not asked
> you for
> > > anything.. I didn't deny you anything.. then why do you act so
> selfishly?
> > > Is this the Islamic thoughts and leanings that you embraced
> compelling you
> > > to act in this selfish and brutish manner? The Bengalis I know of
> are all
> > > quite tolerant, understanding and respectful of each other,
> regardless of
> > > their place of birth, east or the west of river Ganges. That is
> another
> > > thing that needs to be highlighted... culture is inherited, it can
> not be
> > > acquired by reading the Quoran.
> > >
> > > > The historian's classic preoccupation, observed Michel
> > > > Foucault, was an overwhelming compulsion to seek out
> > > > continuities and unities so that "discontinuity" was the
> stigma
> > > > of temporal dislocation that is the historian's task to
> remove
> > > > from history.
> > >
> > > Abar abol-tabol boka shuru hoyeche!! Ki jé bolte chan
bhodrolok...
> Alla-i
> > > jane
> > >
> > > > The over-representation of the West Bengalis and Upper-
> caste
> > > > Hindu Bengalis, both as scholars and as topics for
> research in
> > > > South Asian Studies world-wide, points out single-handedly
> to
> > > > the stigma of the temporal dislocation of Bengal, the
> > > > discontinuity of Bengal as a space and the
overwhelmingly
> > > > and over-representatively compulsive manner in which the
> > > > West Bengali Hindus have tried to sought the continuity
> of
> > > > the non-existent and imaginary "Bengal" in research and
> > > > scholarship to skirt their stigma of the temporal
> dislocation
> > > > of Bengal.
> > >
> > > Baap-re... this whole thing is one single sentence! Kaar babar
> saddhi aché
> > > ér mané bojhar??
> > >
> > > Mian Saheb...étar ortho ki?
> > >
> > > > "points out single-handedly to
> > > > the stigma of the temporal dislocation of Bengal, the
> > > > discontinuity of Bengal as a space and the
overwhelmingly
> > > > and over-representatively compulsive manner in which
> the..... "
> > >
> > > Please explain what you meant by the above statement?
> > >
> > > > "West Bengali Hindus have tried to sought the continuity
> of
> > > > the non-existent and imaginary "Bengal" in research and
> > > > scholarship to skirt their stigma of the temporal
> dislocation
> > > > of Bengal."
> > >
> > > What continuity are you talking about? A survey of the
> contemporary bengali
> > > literature will clearly show you that the Hindus from East Bengal
> played a
> > > significant role in not only maintaining but significantly
> enriching the
> > > language and culture as we dearly call "Bangla". Why should there
> be a
> > > stigma in in that? Yes Bengal was partitioned, but Bengali Hindus
> did not
> > > feel any stigma from the dislocation...I can assure you. Most
> people
> > > started their lives afresh, and in the process achieved new
> horizons,
> > > enriched themselves form the multi-cultural secular environment of
> India.
> > > The Bengalis remain fiercely loyal to their culture and heritage,
> at the
> > > same time share their identity as a proud Indian.
> > >
> > > > In the process of doing so, they have all too
> > > > often transgressed and delegitimized the cultural
> boundaries of
> > > > the Only Bengali Nation State in the world as well
> evident in
> > > > Nirad Chaudhuri's "BANGreji" notion of "TATHA KAATHITA
> BANGLADESH".
> > >
> > > Citing Nirad Babu as the sole representative of the Hindu Bengalis
> is
> > > unfair(not that you know the meaning of fairness) ..he is only one
> among
> > > many Bengali authors who was quite liberal with his choice of
words.
> > > Frankly, if he used the phrase "TATHA KAATHITA BANGLADESH", I
> have to
> > > believe that was probably when he encountered a bigot like
yourself.
> > >
> > > > The geographic displacement of Bengal by Bangladesh and
> the
> > >
> > > Eké baré murkhér moto kotha éta.... "displacement of Bengal by
> > > Bangladesh"
> > >
> > > > unequal transformation of the remaining and incomplete
> Bengal
> > > > within the Indian state-hood of West Bengal is another
> reason
> > > > for the compulsive West-Bengali Hindu over-representation
> in all
> > > > frontiers of South asian Studies.
> > >
> > > Molla saheb, the more you talk the more you display your
> ignorance! Let me
> > > try to see if your statement make any sense... Why would "unequal
> > > transformation of the remaining and incomplete Bengal within
> the
> > > Indian state-hood of West Bengal" create over-representation
in
> all
> > > frontiers of South asian Studies? What are you trying to say
here?
> > > Bhogoban, etaré ni ki korum!!
> > >
> > > > This is a concealed effect
> > > > of West Bengal's attempt to a complete and total
cultural
> > > > representation by always shifting and switching between
> two sets
> > > > of identities-- the INDIAN IDENTITY and the IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-
> BENGALI
> > > > IDENTITY.
> > >
> > > No sir..you are wrong..we do not have any IDENTITY problem, you
are
> the one
> > > that suffer from that! You have discarded your Bengali heritage
> then you
> > > tried to be a Paki, only when the Punjabis raped and sodomized
you,
> then you
> > > became Bengali. That too..we the Hindus had to sacrifice a lot to
> free you
> > > and your sorry asses from the brutalities inflicted by your
Punjabi
> > > masters. It is then you found out that perhaps.. being a Bengali
> is more
> > > profitable than being a Paki.
> > >
> > > > Both the INDIAN and the IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI
> > > > identities are very effectively used by the West
> Bengalis for
> > > > different situations and under different circumstances.
> > > > The INDIAN IDENTITY is used to legitimize the place of
> the
> > > > West-Bengalis in the competitive race of the
Nation-States.
> > > > Whereas, the IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI IDENTITY is used
> by the
> > > > West Bengalis to distinguish the uniqueness of their
> cultural
> > > > variety among a diverse set of people in India.
> > > > The IMAGINARY-BENGAL'S-BENGALI-IDENTITY is also used by
the
> > > > West-Bengalis to stir the imagination of
> > > > "ONCE-A-FIRST-MODERN-STATE-OF-INDIA and of the "BENGAL
> RENNAISSANCE,
> > > > that can very easily stereotype itself as a progressive
> > > > modernity from an underdeveloped caste-based identity.
> > >
> > > This part, I think I understand... and probably I can barely agree
> with,
> > > minus the slanted inference that somehow the Bengali Hindus of
> India lack
> > > the real "stuff" and need to "make believe" things, clearly that
is
> not
> > > so..Bengalis are holding their grounds in India quite well in all
> areas.
> > >
> > > Let me sir remind you that the Bengali Hindus of India having gone
> through
> > > the traumatic experience of partition have no desire to get their
> house
> > > burnt once again. They have learnt their lessons well, and under
no
> > > circumstance will they fall for the "Bengali" trap. We are happy
as
> > > Indians, and we are grateful that India accepted us and gave us
> shelter and
> > > new lives. We love our freedom, we love our heritage, we love our
> culture,
> > > and we are tremendously proud of it. We remain as we always were
> proud
> > > Bengalis..of glorious Bangla.
> > >
> > > Shomir
> > >
> > > ================================
> >
> >
>
> --
> sout...@mindsprings.SPAM-BE-GONE.aurora.com
antibeng...@my-deja.com
the_virtuous_vulcan <vulc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <99310.10...@psuvm.psu.edu>,
> T.H.Sanyal. <TH...@psuvm.psu.edu> wrote:
> > Thomas Southton wrote:
> >
> > >I've always found B'deshis to be sweet peoples. It would be nice
to
> > >see India reunited with B'desh.
> >
second
> > partition of Bengal remain in effective power in India.
> >
> > Regards.
> > ths.
>
> This is just a garbage argument from a liberal moron. The forces
> that partitioned India were Moslem League and Congress, and they
> are NOT in power at the present time.
>
> *********************************************
> The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
>
> !!! ISLAM IS A BARBARIC RELIGION !!!
antibeng...@my-deja.com
ani...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <808f6b$akk$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> the_virtuous_vulcan <vulc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Oh, BTW, you should not be using the University e-mail facility to
> > post on the Internet. The University e-mail facility is meant for
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > University (Penn State Univ.) work and not for posting on this
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> forum.
> ^^^^^^^
> >
> > *********************************************
> > The Virtuous Vulcan [vulc...@hotmail.com]
> >
>
> While private companies frequently restrict their usage of emails,
> Universities especially the public universities cannot do so or
> wouldn't do so as it runs against the concept of academic freedom.
> Prof. Sanyal is well within his rights to post or air his POVs on
> any public forums. You're most welcome to challenge his views and
> debate him but certainly you cannot gag him!!!
> It would be a rather sad day for democracy and a violation of First
> Amendment if he wasn't allowed to do so from an academic institution.
>
> A. antibengalihindu <antibeng...@my-deja.com>
Posting History Member Profile
antibeng...@my-deja.com
Arindam Banerjee <arin...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> so many Bengalis would not have turned to Islam if
> > there were not problems with the Hindu system.
>
> not turned to Islam?
>
> Caste schedules made perfectly
> > decent folk into sub-standard creatures,
>
>
> class and caste collussion led to the
> > economic deprivation of large sections of Bengal and opportunistic,
>
> other suits them should know a lot about opportunism.
>
> calculating
> > self interest under the Raj led to the formation of an unloved and
> unprotected
> > underclass.
> > If Islam offered anything that the Bengali culture could not, and
had
> not, it
> > was the possibility and hope of change.
>
> with their tall stories. It was not vicious, only snobbish, to begin
> with. Later with foreign fundamentalism it became worse.
>
> Arindam Banerjee