Akbar and other Mughals

[toxic_pus]

It appears that the key to the puzzle is diversity of of the haplogroups, for two reasons:

1. Diversity within a tribe or caste indicates how long back the genetic input into that tribe or caste occured.

2. Diversity also determines the direction of migrations: The migration must have happened from regions of higher diversity to regions of lower diversity.

Not necessarily. And that is precisely what I meant by 'immaturity of techniques'. Sengupta et al. bases their conclusion on these two factors and also another one. They have assumed that mutation rate is slow. There is evidence, that this is not necessarily true. The diversity can also be explained as a reason of multiple founders.

For example, Watkins et. al. argue that:

Genetic data from Y-chromosome, mtDNA, and autosomal STRs are in accord with historical accounts of northwest to southeast population movements in India. The influence of ancient and historical population movements and caste social structure can be detected and replicated in South Indian caste populations from two different geographic regions.

That is why I am so skeptical that 'Aryan' influence can be explained adequately via genetics.

My apologies if I have been rude.

 

[eastwatch]

That article relies on the Aryan invasion/migration theory, which has now been discredited by modern genetic studies. See The peopling of India - Pragati

You cannot just discard Aryas, think of the word ARYABARTA in old Hindu scriptures. North India was called Arybarta, and this word was not coined by a British or a German. Whether they came from the central asia or through west asia is a matter of debate. But, just because there is a debate on the matter, it is not a good logic to refuse the main content of an article.

Issue here is the caste infested Hinduism, where the Brahmins wielded too much of power that they used to persecue the local Bangali Budhists. Bengal was more Budhist than it was Hindu. Until the end of Pal Dynasty, Budhism remained strong here. But after its demise in 1095 by Vijay SENA, State patronage for Budhism was revised to the patronage of Hinduism. Obviously, the caste system was incorporated in it. During the next hundred years until the arrival of Turkic Muslims in 1203, Brahmanism had been fully restored in Bengal.

However, this was not accepted by the Budhists of Bengal. During many centuries of Budhist teaching many high caste and low caste Hindus accepted this religion, which was not infested with a caste system. These people were forced to accept a lower place in the Hindu society during the Sena rule of more than a hundred years.

When the Muslims migrated to Bengal, these people welcomed the adventurers. I have read a poem written in those days that appreciates these foreign Muslims as their saviours. In the long run, many of these Budhists accepted Islam, which also does not believe in the JAT PAT system.

In old days, a lower caste Hindu was not even allowed to visit a temple, he was not even allowed to hear the Sanskrit MANTRA read by those Hindu Brahmins. A Sudra would have been killed by pouring MOLTEN LEAD in their ears for a simple offence like that, such was the harsh punishment. The Sudras were taught since their childhood to be content with their lives as SUDRA, because if they do so they would be re-born in a higher caste next time.

Sudras were fully illiterate, therefore, they were not enlightened. For them to accept their present faith as SUDRAS was the best way to go to paradise. They had been totured into such a corner by the Brahmins that they had no alternative vision which can change their fate. How they can change their religion when they were just a dumb group of people forced into believing in superstitions?

They used to think, probably the presnt day Sudras too, that the Brahmins can destroy everything by blowing out fire from their mouths. Can someone think that these were the people most ripe to change their religion? Only the enlightened ones have the inner knowledge to understand the difference between a bad and a good religion.

This is why there established a BRAHMA SAMAJ in India during the British Raj, which was composed of the most learned families of the Hindu society. Rabindranath Thakur's family was one of them. Do you know, that this family had been branded as 'PIRALI' (Pir Ali) Brahmin and was made the social outcaste in the Hindu society? Why? Because one of their ancestors had shown the audacity of accepting the invitation of one Muslim Pir named Ali during the Muslim period. This Tagore family could not even marry their daughters off to any Brahmin family. So, they used to adopt a Brahmin child from a poor family and then marry off one of their daughters with him at adulthood.

In an atmosphere like this when the Hindu society was ready to discard Hindus to protect the Hindu religion, one can expect the gradual conversion of enlightened people to a different faith where they do not have to bear such inhuman stigma and insult by the religious leaders. I must note one thing here. Muslims were more worriors than administrators. Law and Defence departments were under the Muslims, but all other govt Departments were either captured by the educated Hindus or Budhists.

Many of these govt servants also ultimately accepted Islam. Can an illiterate person, Brahmin or Sudra, can hold such a position? Since they were literate, therefore, it is a certainty that they were the higher caste people, and not Sudras, who were not allowed to get education.

So, it is preposterous to think that the educated Budhists or the higher caste educated Hindus did not accept Islam, but the illiterate Sudras accepted it. It was just the opposite. I know many Muslim families near my ancestral village with family titles of Thakur, Pal, Biswas, Singh and some others. My question is if Sudras had accepted Islam in Bengal, then why it is that there are so many Sudras among the Hindu Bangalis and why there is almost no Budhists among the Bangalis?

After the Turkish Muslim migration to Bengal, the Budhists here flocked to that faith. This Muslim group became so strong a core that not only that they were the dominating force in the eastern part of india, but also that these Muslims resisted Delhi subjugation for many centuries. At one time, they even took over Delhi under the leadership of Sher Shah Suri.

The truth is, all the Budhists and many of the high caste Hindus in Bengal had accepted Islam and the Sudras remained in their old religion, where they are still suffering at the hands of so-called high caste Hindus. What a religion is this Hinduism? When all other religions try to unite people under one banner, Hinduism is the only religion that makes divisions among themselves, creates barriers and teaches to hate each other.

 

[Khajur]

You cannot just discard Aryas, think of the word ARYABARTA in old Hindu scriptures. North India was called Arybarta, and this word was not coined by a British or a German. Whether they came from the central asia or through west asia is a matter of debate. But, just because there is a debate on the matter, it is not a good logic to refuse the main content of an article.

Issue here is the caste infested Hinduism, where the Brahmins wielded too much of power that they used to persecue the local Bangali Budhists. Bengal was more Budhist than it was Hindu. Until the end of Pal Dynasty, Budhism remained strong here. But after its demise in 1095 by Vijay SEN, State patronage for Budhism was revised to the patronage of Hinduism. Obviously, the caste system was incorporated in it. During the next hundred years until the arrival of Turkic Muslims in 1203, Brahmanism had been fully restored in Bengal.

However, this was not accepted by the Budhists of Bengal. During many centuries of Budhist teaching many high caste and low caste Hindus accepted this religion, which was not infested with a caste system. These people were forced to accept a lower place in the Hindu society during the Sena rule of more than a hundred years.

When the Muslims migrated, these people welcomed the adventurers. I have read a poem written in those days that appreciates these foreign Muslims as their saviours. In the long run, many of these Budhists accepted Islam, which also does not believe in the JAT PAT system.

In old days, a lower caste Hindu was not even allowed to visit a temple, he was not even allowed to hear the Sanskrit MANTRA read by those Hindu Brahmins. A Sudra would have been killed by pouring MOLTEN LEAD in their ears for a simple offence like that, such was the harsh punishment. The Sudras were taught since their childhood to be content with their lives as SUDRA, because if they do so they would be re-born in a higher caste next time.

Sudras were fully illiterate, therefore, they were not enlightened. For them to accept their present faith as SUDRAS was the best way to go to paradise. They had been totured into such a corner by the Brahmins that they had no alternate vision which can change their fate. How they can change their religion when they were just a dumb group of people forced into believing in superstitions?

They used to think, probably the presnt day Sudras too, that the Brahmins can destroy everything by blowing out fire from their mouths. Can someone think that these were the people most ripe to change their religion? Only the enlightened ones have the inner knowledge to understand the difference between a bad and a good religion.

This is why there was a BRAHMA SAMAJ in India during the British Raj, which was composed of the most learned families of the Hindu society. Rabindranath Thakur's family was one of them. Do you know, that this family had been branded as 'PIRALI' (Pir Ali) Brahman and were made the social outcaste in the Hindu society? Why? Because one of their ancestors had shown the audacity of accepting the invitation of one Muslim Pir named Ali during the Muslim period. This Tagore family could not even marry their daughters to any Brahman family.

In an atmosphere like this when the Hindu society was ready to discard Hindus to protect the Hindu religion, one can expect the gradual conversion of enlightened people to a different faith where they do not have to bear such inhuman stigma and insult by the religious leaders. I must note one thing here. Muslims were more worriors than administrators. Law and Defence departments were under the Muslims, but all other govt Departments were either captured by the Hindus or by the Budhists.

Many of these govt servants also ultimately accepted Islam. Were these people illiterate? Or, an illiterate person, Brahmin or Sudra, can hold such a position? Since they were literate, therefore, it is a certainty that they were the higher caste people, and not Sudras. Because, Sudras were all illiterate.

So, it is preposterous to think that the educated Budhists or the higher caste Hindus did not accept Islam, but the illiterate Sudras accepted it. It was just the opposite. I know many Muslim families near my ancestral village with family titles of Thakur, Pal, Biswas, Singh and some others. My question is if Sudras had accepted Islam in Bengal, then why it is that there are so many Sudras among the Hindu Bangalis and why there is almost no Budhists among the Bangalis?

After the Turkish Muslim migration to Bengal, the Budhists here flocked to that faith. This Muslim group became so strong a core that not only that they were the dominating force in the eastern part of india, but also that these Muslims resisted Delhi subjugation for many centuries. At one time, they even took over Delhi under the leadership of Sher Shah Suri.

The truth is, all the Budhists and many of the high caste Hindus in Bengal had accepted Islam and the Sudras remained in their old religion, where they are still suffering at the hands of so-called high caste Hindus. What a religion is this Hinduism? When all other religions try to unite people under one banner, Hinduism is the only religion that makes divisions among themselves, creates barriers and teaches to hate each other.

wow...as usual u have amazed us with ur sense of humour. and deep penchant for fiction...

One hand u say all buddists happlily(??) accepted islam ...But u never explained by why left their many centuri old traditional way of Buddism to become muslims...what were the compelling reasons behind it??

Again where are all the signs Buddist monastery and stupas gone in Banladesh??
Who destroyed them??
Dont tell us another story how Buddists choose burn them down themselves before taking islamic vows.

If they were presecuated by hindus after the fal of pala dynasty...they should've continued with their old Buddist ways after they muslim invaders or as u called adventurers??

No,u are suggesting those buddist who were supposedly presecuted by hindus,but still managed to keep their religion alive all the while.... choosed merrily to join a totally new alien religion clalled islam as soon as muslims appearded in the scene....

On other hand u suggest even higher caste hindus also converted to islam ...why??But sudras who have been presecuted for ever by hindus neither choose to become Buddist nor converted to islam...

Leaving aside ur stupid pinhead snide remarks about Sanatana hindu dharma...a way life for more than 80 crores people around world that remain unhinged for last several thousand years practiced in same traditional way generation after generation aganist myriads challenges ...i would suggest u not try to manufacture history as u'll only gonna fail miserably and also it would reflect how ur culture, upbringing and religion failed to Inculcate a thirst for knowledge,fairness or simple decency like respecting others religion.

 

[Halaku Khan]

They have assumed that mutation rate is slow. There is evidence, that this is not necessarily true.

They have referred to a reputable and highly cited paper to estimate the mutation rate. If someone challenges that, we can certainly look at the validity of that challenge.

The diversity can also be explained as a reason of multiple founders.

That can be resolved by looking at the haplogroup tree. By looking at the oldest node present in a population, and by looking at its descendants, one can put a lower bound on how many mutations have occurred in that population.

And of course, there is the important issue of relative diversities of the alleged source population and the alleged recipient population.

Added later: First, determine which is the source population and which is the recipient population based on relative diversity. Once that is done, look at the oldest nodes in the haplogroup tree of the recipient population which are not present in the source population. That ought to give an estimate for the time of migration.

That is why I am so skeptical that 'Aryan' influence can be explained adequately via genetics.

We shall see, we shall see.

My apologies if I have been rude.

No problem, man. Take it easy.

 

[eastwatch]

wow...as usual u have amazed us with ur sense of humour. and deep penchant for fiction...

One hand u say all buddists happlily(??) accepted islam ...But u never explained by why left their many centuri old traditional way of Buddism to become muslims...what were the compelling reasons behind it??

Again where are all the signs Buddist monastery and stupas gone in Banladesh??
Who destroyed them??
Dont tell us another story how Buddists choose burn them down themselves before taking islamic vows.

If they were presecuated by hindus after the fal of pala dynasty...they should've continued with their old Buddist ways after they muslim invaders or as u called adventurers??

No,u are suggesting those buddist who were supposedly presecuted by hindus,but still managed to keep their religion alive all the while.... choosed merrily to join a totally new alien religion clalled islam as soon as muslims appearded in the scene....

On other hand u suggest even higher caste hindus also converted to islam ...why??But sudras who have been presecuted for ever by hindus neither choose to become Buddist nor converted to islam...

Leaving aside ur stupid pinhead snide remarks about Sanatana hindu dharma...a way life for more than 80 crores people around world that remain unhinged for last several thousand years practiced in same traditional way generation after generation aganist myriads challenges ...i would suggest u not try to manufacture history as u'll only gonna fail miserably and also it would reflect how ur culture, upbringing and religion failed to Inculcate a thirst for knowledge,fairness or simple decency like respecting others religion.

Hi mister, a person needs a lot of time and energy to write a post. But, with your light talking you are sending it to your HINDU garbage. Don'T do it for the sake of history. If you have nothing positive to write, then do not write. If you have something that I can learn from, then write, but do not send your rubbish. So, this is the level of your Indian education!

This is how you teach your children to talk in a class room! Not to learn, but only to argue with their teachers? It is no wonder, the Hindu India remains a JAT PAT infested country of social ills, where a person is not seen as a human, but is seen in the light of his complexion and caste.

 

[Halaku Khan]

The word "Arya" means "noble" - there is nothing in Sanskrit literature to suggest that it refers to settlers from elsewhere.

There is the concept of the Varnas - but the Varnas are not supposed to be hereditary. They refer to evolutionary status. A person is a Shudra, a Vaishya, a Kshatriya or a Brahmana depending on whether his principal goal in life is Kaama (sensual desire), Artha (prosperity), Dharma (natural righteousness) or Moksha (enlightenment). Each soul is supposed to through a process of evolution over many incarnations, before reaching perfection. It's not that somebody is a Brahmana because his father is a Brahmana.

Now, in practice, there may have been various social evils in say 600 BC, the time of the Buddha. Buddhism has to be seen as a movement for purification and renewal in society - there have been several such movements in Sanatana Dharma over the millenia. However, the fundamentals of Buddhism are fully in harmony with the fundamentals of Sanatana Dharma (i.e. the Upanishads or the Advaita philosophy).

You cannot just discard Aryas, think of the word ARYABARTA in old Hindu scriptures. North India was called Arybarta, and this word was not coined by a British or a German. Whether they came from the central asia or through west asia is a matter of debate. But, just because there is a debate on the matter, it is not a good logic to refuse the main content of an article.

Issue here is the caste infested Hinduism, where the Brahmins wielded too much of power that they used to persecue the local Bangali Budhists. Bengal was more Budhist than it was Hindu. Until the end of Pal Dynasty, Budhism remained strong here. But after its demise in 1095 by Vijay SEN, State patronage for Budhism was revised to the patronage of Hinduism. Obviously, the caste system was incorporated in it. During the next hundred years until the arrival of Turkic Muslims in 1203, Brahmanism had been fully restored in Bengal.

However, this was not accepted by the Budhists of Bengal. During many centuries of Budhist teaching many high caste and low caste Hindus accepted this religion, which was not infested with a caste system. These people were forced to accept a lower place in the Hindu society during the Sena rule of more than a hundred years.

When the Muslims migrated, these people welcomed the adventurers. I have read a poem written in those days that appreciates these foreign Muslims as their saviours. In the long run, many of these Budhists accepted Islam, which also does not believe in the JAT PAT system.

In old days, a lower caste Hindu was not even allowed to visit a temple, he was not even allowed to hear the Sanskrit MANTRA read by those Hindu Brahmins. A Sudra would have been killed by pouring MOLTEN LEAD in their ears for a simple offence like that, such was the harsh punishment. The Sudras were taught since their childhood to be content with their lives as SUDRA, because if they do so they would be re-born in a higher caste next time.

Sudras were fully illiterate, therefore, they were not enlightened. For them to accept their present faith as SUDRAS was the best way to go to paradise. They had been totured into such a corner by the Brahmins that they had no alternate vision which can change their fate. How they can change their religion when they were just a dumb group of people forced into believing in superstitions?

They used to think, probably the presnt day Sudras too, that the Brahmins can destroy everything by blowing out fire from their mouths. Can someone think that these were the people most ripe to change their religion? Only the enlightened ones have the inner knowledge to understand the difference between a bad and a good religion.

This is why there was a BRAHMA SAMAJ in India during the British Raj, which was composed of the most learned families of the Hindu society. Rabindranath Thakur's family was one of them. Do you know, that this family had been branded as 'PIRALI' (Pir Ali) Brahman and were made the social outcaste in the Hindu society? Why? Because one of their ancestors had shown the audacity of accepting the invitation of one Muslim Pir named Ali during the Muslim period. This Tagore family could not even marry their daughters to any Brahman family.

In an atmosphere like this when the Hindu society was ready to discard Hindus to protect the Hindu religion, one can expect the gradual conversion of enlightened people to a different faith where they do not have to bear such inhuman stigma and insult by the religious leaders. I must note one thing here. Muslims were more worriors than administrators. Law and Defence departments were under the Muslims, but all other govt Departments were either captured by the Hindus or by the Budhists.

Many of these govt servants also ultimately accepted Islam. Were these people illiterate? Or, an illiterate person, Brahmin or Sudra, can hold such a position? Since they were literate, therefore, it is a certainty that they were the higher caste people, and not Sudras. Because, Sudras were all illiterate.

So, it is preposterous to think that the educated Budhists or the higher caste Hindus did not accept Islam, but the illiterate Sudras accepted it. It was just the opposite. I know many Muslim families near my ancestral village with family titles of Thakur, Pal, Biswas, Singh and some others. My question is if Sudras had accepted Islam in Bengal, then why it is that there are so many Sudras among the Hindu Bangalis and why there is almost no Budhists among the Bangalis?

After the Turkish Muslim migration to Bengal, the Budhists here flocked to that faith. This Muslim group became so strong a core that not only that they were the dominating force in the eastern part of india, but also that these Muslims resisted Delhi subjugation for many centuries. At one time, they even took over Delhi under the leadership of Sher Shah Suri.

The truth is, all the Budhists and many of the high caste Hindus in Bengal had accepted Islam and the Sudras remained in their old religion, where they are still suffering at the hands of so-called high caste Hindus. What a religion is this Hinduism? When all other religions try to unite people under one banner, Hinduism is the only religion that makes divisions among themselves, creates barriers and teaches to hate each other.

 

[Khajur]

Hi mister, a person needs a lot of time and energy to write a post. But, with your light taliking you are sending it to your HINDU garbage. DOn'T do it for the sake of history. If you have nothing positive to writ, then do not write. If you have something that I can learn from, then write, but do not send your rubbish. So, this is the level of your Indian education! This is how you teach your children to talk in a class room!

My rubbish is far more rational than ur false propaganda ****!

Do u ever back up ur claims??

Show me one credible source that says all Buddists of Bengal converted to islam ...yaa just by kicking off age old religion of Buddism, as soon muslim invaders appeared in the scene...why??because they suffered at the hands of high caste hindus before that...

 

[eastwatch]

My rubbish is far more rational than ur false propaganda ****!

Do u ever back up ur claims??

Show me one credible source that says all Buddists of Bengal converted to islam ...yaa just by kicking off age old religion of Buddism, as soon muslim invaders appeared in the scene...why??because they suffered at the hands of high caste hindus before that...

Give me proper reasons and proofs to establish anything else than what I have stated about the Muslims of Bengal. It is better not be oversmart without knowing history of a particular region or a people. Where from do you think the Muslims of Bengal then came from, certainly not from AASMAN.

If you believe that the local Bangali Hindus accepted Islam under COMPULSION, even then is it not more logical to think that the high caste people, and not the Sudras were forced to convert? So, come with logic next time. Historical events are past things and nothing can change these events. So, we should see history in its proper perspective.

To know about the immigration of foreign Muslims in Bengal, read the books named HAQIQAT-I-MUSALMAN-I-BANGAL, BAHARISTAN-I-GAEBI etc. This foreign group plus the Budhists and also the enlightened Hindus who took Islam became the core of Bangali Muslims. For more information, you may read history books written by many highly educated Bangali Hindu historians during British period. They never tried to hide a fact, whether it went against or in favour of Hindus. But, to do so you may have to learn Bengali first.

 

[ice_man]

That's probably because you - yes you, please don't generalize your entire populace - suffer from an acute case of inferiority complex. That mixed with brainwashing and reading half-baked history has led to your delusions.

inferiority my A*S!!!! LOOK MAN its simple no matter what you say we DON'T want to associate ourselves with you....but what i don't get is that why do YOU guys so badly want to believe we are the same as you!!! i mean why does it bother you so much!!!

for me i don't want to associate anything of mine with india!!! actually its the indians that try to tell the world that we are similar IT MUST BE because PAKISTANIS are better looking!!

before you say ohhhh we got good looking people....well look at the ratio man out a population of a BILLION!!! you have a few good looking people....stroll down the roads of bombay or delhi & try noticing who is good looking very few & far apart....

our ratio in 170 million is better!!!

I KNOW YOU WILL DISAGREE....good for you...let it go! why do you so badly want us to be you...I GUESS U are the one with INFERIORITY COMPLEX!

 

[Khajur]

Give me proper reasons and proofs to establish anything else than what I have stated about the Muslims of Bengal. It is better not be oversmart without knowing history of a particular region or a people. Where from do you think the Muslims of Bengal then came from, certainly not from AASMAN.

Every religion in the world be it islam,christianity or Buddism thrived and got mass acceptance only when they got patronage from the ruling elite of that period of time ...e,g christianity suffered for centuries long persecution ,but only when some Emperor accepted christianity ,it became the state religion...so was true for islam and we know how it spread from Arabia...Mahmoud himself had to fight wars and later followers also had to win battles to extended more terrritories under islam part of Jihad...Even Buddism got more following only when kings and ruling dynasties started to believe in Buddha's principles and they promoted Buddism in even far away places like East Asia and Srilanka...

Similarly on the other hand, many religions were reduced to oblivion with time..e,g Judaism,Parsis disappeared as they lost to invaders and particularly jainism india died out as the royal patronage cease to exist.

When i say royal patronage it means both violent and peaceful approch adopted and that those were employed generation after geneations to promota certain religion.

I'll not mention the case Hinduism here...because sanatana hindu dharma is a way of life from thousands of years.. antcient spiritual way to reach out to god...any indian origin religion e,g Buddism and jainism were never existed separate religions ,as different philosophies that coexisted along with many other prominient divisions under the umbrella of sanatana hindu dharma...and caste system existed in Buddism too ,though only implictly because simple non materialistic life Buddist life.

If you believe that the locals accepted Islam under COMPULSION, even then is it not more logical to think that they had forced the high caste people, and not the Sudras? So, come with logic next time. Historical events are past things and nothing can change these events. So, we should see history in its proper perspective.

Yes, they did force...even the high caste people to join isalm
Isnt that what u urself were trying to say in ur other post....

Read again what wrote:

So, it is preposterous to think that the educated Budhists or the higher caste Hindus did not accept Islam, but the illiterate Sudras accepted it. It was just the opposite. I know many Muslim families near my ancestral village with family titles of Thakur, Pal, Biswas, Singh and some others. My question is if Sudras had accepted Islam in Bengal, then why it is that there are so many Sudras among the Hindu Bangalis and why there is almost no Budhists among the Bangalis?

Now u are just going round and round with ur wild theories to ur original claim that Bengali Buddists turned to Islam because they suffered at the hands of high caste hindus .Thats what we are debating about ,arent we?? ...until u keep shifting the goal posts .

Fact remains...Buddists of Bengal or even some hindus for that matter turned to islam not because of any special reasons like upper class persecution of hindus ...but for the more common reasons,methods and similar circumstance that made other people turned to islam in other parts around the world.Islam survided Bengal because of several hundreds yrs of muslim rule and surely would've disappeard from Bengal like it happened Spain and in other parts of Europe where Crusaders wiped out all signs of Islam once they recaptured spain after centuries of islamic rule,had it not been the case of such prolong muslim rule .

Even the whole of undivided india were known as an islamic domain and official language was Farsi everywhere, even in Bengal (not Bengali)due to the muslim rule of india until its powere receded by 1700 and the British took over in india 1800s

Back to ur post, more over only a part of Bengal became muslim majority ...rest of the Bengali both hindus and Buddists who too came back to regular hindu life as the Buddists monasteries were disappeared with rising on islamic rule in Bengal, without state patronage.To say that all Buddists converted to islam just plain stupid and as usual part of ur propaganda **** that spit aganist india because its a hindu nation for u.

 

[EjazR]

Here is a link by a Tibitean Buddhist scholar about the interaction of Islamic and Buddhist cultures before the Mongol invasions. This person is the aide of the Dalai Lama and his work is based on Buddhist scrolls and manuscripts.
The Historical Interaction between the Buddhist and Islamic Cultures before the Mongol Empire
Some Common Features of Islam and Buddhism: A Conversation with Snjezana Akpinar and Alex Berzin

The main blow that came to Buddhists in Afghanistan and present-day Pakistan was from the Mongol invasions of Chengiz Khan and Halaku Khan who destroyed temples and mosques alike and killed thousands of people. These people were not muslims. Before that Buddhists had monasteries all the way in Afghanistan and Central Asia as well.

The interesting part is that these conquerors of muslims actually converted to Islam in their second generation which eventually had a civilizing affect on them. (That basically disproves again that Islam spread by force, why would the conquerors accept the defeated people's religion by force?) Then you have the ASEAN region - Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei - where the largest Muslim population in the world exists, which Muslim army went there?

If you notice muslim ethnicities around the world, they are mostly natives, so sub-continent muslims share their genetic traits mostly with their Hindu and Sikh neighbors. ASEAN or Chinese muslims share their traits with their Chinese neighbors. And similar examples in other parts of the world.

Compare that to European expansion which completely annihilated the local Australian or American indigenous populations. The local people there now share the same anglo saxon or Caucasian ethnicity as their European counterparts. That shows how it would look like if only force was used to expand

 

[TopCat]

Every religion in the world be it islam,christianity or Buddism thrived and got mass acceptance only when they got patronage from the ruling elite of that period of time ...e,g christianity suffered for centuries long persecution ,but only when some Emperor accepted christianity ,it became the state religion...so was true for islam and we know how it spread from Arabia...Mahmoud himself had to fight wars and later followers also had to win battles to extended more terrritories under islam part of Jihad...Even Buddism got more following only when kings and ruling dynasties started to believe in Buddha's principles and they promoted Buddism in even far away places like East Asia and Srilanka...

Similarly on the other hand, many religions were reduced to oblivion with time..e,g Judaism,Parsis disappeared as they lost to invaders and particularly jainism india died out as the royal patronage cease to exist.

When i say royal patronage it means both violent and peaceful approch adopted and that those were employed generation after geneations to promota certain religion.

I'll not mention the case Hinduism here...because sanatana hindu dharma is a way of life from thousands of years.. antcient spiritual way to reach out to god...any indian origin religion e,g Buddism and jainism were never existed separate religions ,as different philosophies that coexisted along with many other prominient divisions under the umbrella of sanatana hindu dharma...and caste system existed in Buddism too ,though only implictly because simple non materialistic life Buddist life.



Yes, they did force...even the high caste people to join isalm
Isnt that what u urself were trying to say in ur other post....

Read again what wrote:


Now u are just going round and round with ur wild theories to ur original claim that Bengali Buddists turned to Islam because they suffered at the hands of high caste hindus .Thats what we are debating about ,arent we?? ...until u keep shifting the goal posts .

Fact remains...Buddists of Bengal or even some hindus for that matter turned to islam not because of any special reasons like upper class persecution of hindus ...but for the more common reasons,methods and similar circumstance that made other people turned to islam in other parts around the world.Islam survided Bengal because of several hundreds yrs of muslim rule and surely would've disappeard from Bengal like it happened Spain and in other parts of Europe where Crusaders wiped out all signs of Islam once they recaptured spain after centuries of islamic rule,had it not been the case of such prolong muslim rule .

Even the whole of undivided india were known as an islamic domain and official language was Farsi everywhere, even in Bengal (not Bengali)due to the muslim rule of india until its powere receded by 1700 and the British took over in india 1800s

Back to ur post, more over only a part of Bengal became muslim majority ...rest of the Bengali both hindus and Buddists who too came back to regular hindu life as the Buddists monasteries were disappeared with rising on islamic rule in Bengal, without state patronage.To say that all Buddists converted to islam just plain stupid and as usual part of ur propaganda **** that spit aganist india because its a hindu nation for u.

You put a lot of effort for this post without really coming back to the original point. Why on earth the whole India remained as Hindu except Bengal under the same kind of catalyst like Muslim rule, force conversion, lure conversion so on and so on?
You contradict on the point that Buddhist did not convert but gone back to Hinduism because muslim destroyed all the monestaries but you fail to accept the same logic that Buddhist coverted to Islam becase of social injustice done to them through labeling them as lower caste. Why do they want to go back to Hinduism as a lower caste whereas they ruled bengal for thousand year as a higher caste?

Regarding spain and europe, you missed the point that muslim did not convert back to the christianity rather they had to migrate. Even except western europe Islam did survive in Europe and still thriving.

This is just to straighten the fact.

 

[toxic_pus]

eastwatch

Khajur has a very valid point. If Buddhists could withstand and survive the 'tyranny' of Brahminism for centuries, and not convert to Hinduism which would have relieved them from the tyranny, why then would they suddenly convert en mass to Islam, when Islam was replacing Brahminism - the perpetrators of tyranny.

Through out you have insinuated that the lower castes were tortured. Wouldn't that lead the lower castes to covert? But strangely you are saying that the upper caste (the perpetrators), converted, while the lower caste (the tortured) continued to retain their religion.

Things are not adding up.

 

[Khajur]

inferiority my A*S!!!! LOOK MAN its simple no matter what you say we DON'T want to associate ourselves with you....but what i don't get is that why do YOU guys so badly want to believe we are the same as you!!! i mean why does it bother you so much!!!

for me i don't want to associate anything of mine with india!!! actually its the indians that try to tell the world that we are similar IT MUST BE because PAKISTANIS are better looking!!

before you say ohhhh we got good looking people....well look at the ratio man out a population of a BILLION!!! you have a few good looking people....stroll down the roads of bombay or delhi & try noticing who is good looking very few & far apart....

our ratio in 170 million is better!!!

I KNOW YOU WILL DISAGREE....good for you...let it go! why do you so badly want us to be you...I GUESS U are the one with INFERIORITY COMPLEX!

No, not exactly ....there is not much difference between pakistan especially its most populous states pakistani punjab and sindh province... and just next door neighbour across the borders in Punjab,Rajastan,Gujart and most of north india in terms of racial profile based on scientific fact .I guess u hold some faith on scientific analysis.


Now we can understand that u'll never accept this simple fact which the whole world can figure out easily, because its going to negate the foundamental aspects on the basis of which ur country was created and india got partitioned in the first place . U have to repeat this false impression propagated during partition...usually get more vocal support from slightly distant pathan section of pakistan...so as to remind, explain and justify partition among ur own citizens.

 

[TopCat]

eastwatch

Khajur has a very valid point. If Buddhists could withstand and survive the 'tyranny' of Brahminism for centuries, and not convert to Hinduism which would have relieved them from the tyranny, why then would they suddenly convert en mass to Islam, when Islam was replacing Brahminism - the perpetrators of tyranny.

Through out you have insinuated that the lower castes were tortured. Wouldn't that lead the lower castes to covert? But strangely you are saying that the upper caste (the perpetrators), converted, while the lower caste (the tortured) continued to retain their religion.

Things are not adding up.

Lower caste did convert. Specially the fisher men (Mleccha that you call them) who got converted in high numbers. They did not convert because of tyranny of Bhramins but to get out of caste system. I dont think Sudras converted in large numbers as till this day all the sudra reamined as Hindu in bangladesh. Specially shoe shiner, cleaners etc. In eastwatch's post he clearly explained why a sudra not qualify for a conversion.

There may be debate for the reason of Buddhist conversion but mostly all the remaining Buddhist did convert to Islam. That just change the equation in Bengal and made this a Muslim majority.