Akbar and other Mughals

[toxic_pus]

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.

First, 'Mleccha' means someone who doesn't follow the vedic codes. The Muslims, the Christians etc. would be that. The word you are looking for is 'Meccho', a bengali word for fisher man and fish seller.

Second, shoe shiners, coblers and fishermen were all Sudras. What you do not know is, caste system is not just about 'verna' but is also about 'jati'.

Third, the 'caste system' is what referred to by eastwatch as tools of 'tyranny'. Wanting 'to get out of caste system' would be same as trying to run away from the 'tyranny of Brahmins'.

Fourth, unfortunately, eastwatch has made cuckoo of a post, as usual. It is clear, like you, he is at loggerheads with the fact that in spite of all the 'Brahminical tyranny' and advent of Islam, which had the potential of freeing them from such 'tyranny' how come the lower castes continued to exist in such vast number. Ergo, they were not 'enlightened' enough to convert to Islam. Suddenly 'tyranny', which led the Buddhists to convert, is no longer a factor. Typical eastwatch-esque attempt to shoehorn bizarre theories to match the reality.

His theories still don't add up.

 

[TopCat]

First, 'Mleccha' means someone who doesn't follow the vedic codes. The Muslims, the Christians etc. would be that. The word you are looking for is 'Meccho', a bengali word for fisher man and fish seller.

Thanks for the tips.

Second, shoe shiners, coblers and fishermen were all Sudras. What you do not know is, caste system is not just about 'verna' but is also about 'jati'.

Ohh i knew they are of low cast but did not know they were sudras. What is the connotation on Verna and Jati with regards to cast system? I am just confused. Does that mean some cast with some Jat is different than same cast with different jat?

Third, the 'caste system' is what referred to by eastwatch as tools of 'tyranny'. Wanting 'to get out of caste system' would be same as trying to run away from the 'tyranny of Brahmins'.

Fourth, unfortunately, eastwatch has made cuckoo of a post, as usual. It is clear, like you, he is at loggerheads with the fact that in spite of all the 'Brahminical tyranny' and advent of Islam, which had the potential of freeing them from such 'tyranny' how come the lower castes continued to exist in such vast number. Ergo, they were not 'enlightened' enough to convert to Islam. Suddenly 'tyranny', which led the Buddhists to convert, is no longer a factor. Typical eastwatch-esque attempt to shoehorn bizarre theories to match the reality.

His theories still don't add up.

Its not all black and white. There must always be a grey area. All the factors mentioned by you and us may worked for the conversion of large number of people in Bengal. The buddist factor, the muslim migration factor, low cast factor, economic factor all might added up to the large scale conversion. My point was that Buddhist played a significant role in the whole process as they were the largest number by the end of Pala dynasty.
Bhraminical tyranny or we could better say, tyranny by the stronger over the weaker was always there in India. There were also a counter force to that worked all along the history.

 

[moving_ahead]

wat so ever mughal got the right reward during jange azadi 1857 due to wat they did during their ruling days over india.
AKBAR if u mention indicates the stupidity And THE cream of MUGHALS AROGANCE SO THE RIGHT RESULT THEY DESERVED AFTER THEY WERE CHOPED OFF BY ENEMIES OF ISLAM....
AURANGZEB IF U ASK IT NOT FULLY BUT SOMEHOW HE DID SERVED A BIT FOR MUSLIMS OF INDIA.SO HE GOT SOME HONOUR IN HEARTS OF UMMAH....

 

[eastwatch]

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.

I suggest you read a book named 'Caste Dynamics in Hindu Society' written by an Indian (I forgot his/her name) to know that the fishermen are not MLECCHO. They are called 'JOLIYO KOIBORTO, ' in Bangla. And Koiborto is equivalent to Kayostho. Only Bengal caste system is different from other Hindu caste systems. Bangali Hindus do not have KHATRIO (as we say). They have Brahmin, Kayostha or Koiborto, Baissho and Sudra.

Please note that Budhist conversion was not the only cause of Muslim majority in Bengal. We have to understand that since 1203, there were much immigration of Muslims from Afghanistan and central asia as well as arabia and Persia. They spread to different parts of Hindustan, but many also immigrated to Bengal.

Also note that Muslim population did not gain majority from the very beginning. Even in the 1870 population census, Muslims were not in majority, but gained majority gradually. This phenomenon can be compared with the population figures of BD and Pakistan. In 1971, BD had about 75 million people and Pakistan had about 65 million. But now, the BD population is 145 to 150 million, whereas Pakistani population is 160 million.

Due to various social reasons, Muslim birth (birth - death) rates in Bengal were more than the Hindu birth rates for many centuries, which has also contributed to gain a majority for the Bangali Muslims. It can, therefore, be said that there was less conversion than the present majority suggests, but the Muslim numbers grew at a higher rate than the Hindu neighbours for many centuries.

 

[Halaku Khan]

For example, earlier you had posted a research published in 2009, by Sharma et al, which would have us believe that some breakthrough has been made. Once I got to go through the paper, I realised, that they were using the same set of data, which other scientists (Kivisild 2000, 2003; Codaux 2004) had used to come to one conclusion, while they chose to conclude something else, without so much as giving an adequate explanation.

Actually, they not only used existing data but also collected fresh data. And they have an extensive discussion of how they analyzed the data and drew their conclusions.

It was interesting to find that by adding information regarding
the frequency and diversity of R1a1* from different population
groups of North India (Information from North Indian population
groups was scanty in earlier publications from India.) to the
pooled data from different published sources, a clearer picture
emerged, with overlapping high frequency and molecular diversity
of R1a1* within India.

Further, the average diversity of the R1a1* haplogroup in Central
Asians, Europeans and Indians was also calculated. The highest
diversity of 0.52 (for both sampling and stochastic processes
s.d. = 0.32) was observed in Indians when compared with Europeans
(0.40, s.d. = 0.27) and Central Asians (0.32, s.d. = 0.23).

The Indian haplotypes were observed to be the most diverse, and haplotypes spanning Central Asia and Eurasia, along with some Indian regional haplotypes, seemed to be derived as a subset of this diversity.

 

[toxic_pus]

Thanks for the tips.

Welcome.

Ohh i knew they are of low cast but did not know they were sudras. What is the connotation on Verna and Jati with regards to cast system? I am just confused. Does that mean some cast with some Jat is different than same cast with different jat?

‘Verna’ means colour, while ‘jati’ means – for want of a better word – tribe or community. Todays caste system is more ‘jati’ oriented than ‘verna’. ‘Verna’ is like hierarchical rankings, much the same way as economic hierarchy works – the rich occupies the higher mantle, the middle class occupies the middle, while the poor occupies the lowest rung. ‘Jati’ on the other hand works, much the same way as ethnicity works, although the system of ‘jati’ is far more complicated than ‘ethnicity’. A combination of these two system, constitute of todays ‘caste system’. For deeper understanding read Andre Beteille.

Caste system in Bengal is slightly different from the Northern India. In Bengal, there were only two castes – the Brahmins and the non-Brahmins (the concept of shudras wasn’t explicitly present).

The non-Brahmins had numerous sub-castes and these were grouped as upper, middle and lower castes. Upper non-Brahmin caste consisted of Kayastha – the record keepers or clerks (e.g. Ghosh, Bose, Mitra etc.), Vaidya – the medicine makers or doctors (e.g. Dasgupta, Sengupta etc.), Tantuvaya – the weavers, Karmakara – the ironsmiths etc. The middle non-Brahmins caste consisted of Rajaka – the washer men, Svarnakara – the goldsmiths, Dhivara – the fish traders, Jalika – the fisher men [I stand corrected]etc. The lower non-Brahmin caste, or if one so pleases, the Shudras, consisted of Candala – those who cremated the dead, Carmakara – those who worked with leather etc. There two more castes which fell nowhere, although they were considered as equivalent to lower non-Brahmin caste – the Mlecchas and the Vaishnavs (People of all caste could become Vaishnavs and they had no caste system within themselves. However, since, mostly the lower caste non-Brahmins became Vaishnavs, the entire sect came to be considered as lower caste non-Brahmins). The Khastrya and Vaisya castes are virtually absent. However Burmans claim to be descendent of the Burmana dynasty of Bengal rulers and hence Khastriyas, while some jewellery makers claim to be Vaisyas. But they are few and far between.

Each of these castes and sub-castes has their own stories (myth or folk tale) of their origin. Accordingly, Kayasthas claim to be Khastriyas. Vaidyas claim themselves to be Brahmins and wear the same sacred thread that Brahmins wear. Svarnakaras claim to be Vaisyas etc.

Then there are ‘gotras’.

Its not all black and white. There must always be a grey area. All the factors mentioned by you and us may worked for the conversion of large number of people in Bengal. The buddist factor, the muslim migration factor, low cast factor, economic factor all might added up to the large scale conversion. My point was that Buddhist played a significant role in the whole process as they were the largest number by the end of Pala dynasty.
Bhraminical tyranny or we could better say, tyranny by the stronger over the weaker was always there in India. There were also a counter force to that worked all along the history.

The extent of muslim presence in todays Bengal can't be explained by occasional conversions of Hindus or Buddhists in the past. The real reason, which has been touched upon by eastwatch in post #274, is intermingling.

 

[toxic_pus]

I suggest you read a book named 'Caste Dynamics in Hindu Society' written by an Indian (I forgot his/her name) to know that the fishermen are not MLECCHO. They are called 'JOLIYO KOIBORTO, ' in Bangla. And Koiborto is equivalent to Kayostho. Only Bengal caste system is different from other Hindu caste systems. Bangali Hindus do not have KHATRIO (as we say). They have Brahmin, Kayostha or Koiborto, Baissho and Sudra.

See above

Please note that Budhist conversion was not the only cause of Muslim majority in Bengal. We have to understand that since 1203, there were much immigration of Muslims from Afghanistan and central asia as well as arabia and Persia. They spread to different parts of Hindustan, but many also immigrated to Bengal.

Also note that Muslim population did not gain majority from the very beginning. Even in the 1870 population census, Muslims were not in majority, but gained majority gradually. This phenomenon can be compared with the population figures of BD and Pakistan. In 1971, BD had about 75 million people and Pakistan had about 65 million. But now, the BD population is 145 to 150 million, whereas Pakistani population is 160 million.

Due to various social reasons, Muslim birth (birth - death) rates in Bengal were more than the Hindu birth rates for many centuries, which has also contributed to gain a majority for the Bangali Muslims. It can, therefore, be said that there was less conversion than the present majority suggests, but the Muslim numbers grew at a higher rate than the Hindu neighbours for many centuries.

Finally. Good to see you coming around.

 

[toxic_pus]

Actually, they not only used existing data but also collected fresh data. And they have an extensive discussion of how they analyzed the data and drew their conclusions.

Yes I am aware of that. But the manner in which their work was presented, can be highly misleading to an untrained eye. The claim was that:

A (2009) study headed by geneticist Swarkar Sharma, collated information for 2809 Indians (681 Brahmins, and 2128 tribals and schedule castes)

EDIT: It appears that their own samples amounted to a mere 621. Anyway, thats not the problem. Research is based on the shoulders of other researches.

Also, if R1a1 originated in India, then why R1b is so rare, almost absent in India.

 

[eastwatch]

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).

I know the word ARYA has the meaning of noble. And the meaning of Islam is 'PEACE.' By teaching me the irrelevant meaning of a word, I hope you are not trying to disprove that the the Hindus used to call their land 'ARYAVARTA' 30 centuries before the arrival of British colonialists or that German whose name I forgot.

You are writing what your religion should have been, but I am taliking about what your religion is in practice, and how your JAT PAT system has created disparities among the same and equal human beings. Unfortunately, your society is still avoiding to humanize it by discarding the caste system.

 

[manishmaithani]

I know the word ARYA has the meaning of noble. And the meaning of Islam is 'PEACE.' By teaching me the irrelevant meaning of a word, I hope you are not trying to disprove that the the Hindus used to call their land 'ARYAVARTA' 30 centuries before the arrival of British colonialists or that German whose name I forgot.

You are writing what your religion should have been, but I am taliking about what your religion is in practice, and how your JAT PAT system has created disparities among the same and equal human beings. Unfortunately, your society is still avoiding to humanize it by discarding the caste system.

I Have read your many post and i think you have very vast knowledge of indian history.many people of india realy dont know much about history of india, might be because of diversity of india.
Indian called themselves as Aryan wheather its muslim or hindu.
But when we come onto religeus point, suddenly people mind always changed like "muslim is better than hindu" and "hindu is better than muslim".
We always forget to respect other religeon people.Hindu facing castism since 1000 year but time is changing very fastly because people getting education, i think history will change again.

On the other hand sometime if i was not able to clear my views to other people ,i started to blame other religeous that every religeon has same problem as" Shiya and Sunni" and "catholik and Protesnt"

I am not blaming now.

 

[eastwatch]

I Have read your many post and i think you have very vast knowledge of indian history.many people of india realy dont know much about history of india, might be because of diversity of india.
Indian called themselves as Aryan wheather its muslim or hindu.
But when we come onto religeus point, suddenly people mind always changed like "muslim is better than hindu" and "hindu is better than muslim".
We always forget to respect other religeon people.Hindu facing castism since 1000 year but time is changing very fastly because people getting education, i think history will change again.

On the other hand sometime if i was not unable to clear my views to other people ,i started to blame other religeous that every religeon has same problem as" Shiya and Sunni" and "catholik and Protesnt"

I am not blaming now.

Thank you for your open mindedness. This thread is about the Mughals, but somehow it derailed partially to a subject, although not very irrelevant, of how Muslims became a majority in the eastern India. However, the points I wrote are not to spread hate against the Hindus. I tried to tell only the truths.

I personally detastes the way of Muslim Talibanism. Similarly, I also dislike Hindu JAT PAT system. It was never the intention of Bhagwan to degrade a of human group by imposing a repressive religious system on them. All these are man-made. All the religious groups must try to get rid of repression. I very much hope, your wish to get the Hindu society rid of divisions will be realized someday.

Muslim divisions of Shiya and Sunni is purely political. But, no Shiya or a Sunni will ever castigate the other group as lower than his own group. So, it is not a caste system, although there is a division of thinking on historical events. Shiya has a long term grievance that Hazrat Ali, the cousine and son-in-law of Prophet Muhammed (SAW), was not made the Khalifa of Muslim world after the death of Prophet (SAW).

Since the Muslims cannot go back by 1500 years, therefore, there is no way the decision of that time can be reversed. So, unless the Shiyas change their orthodox thinking and learn to live in the present world , and have a flexible mind, the Sunni-Shiya divide will not go away.

 

[eastwatch]

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!

Yes, Indian Muslims seem to me also a better looking group of people than the Hindus. It is because of infusion of foreign Muslim bloods from central asian region during the Muslim period. But, this thread is not about this issue.

 

[arihant]

Yes, Indian Muslims seem to me also a better looking group of people than the Hindus. It is because of infusion of foreign Muslim bloods from central asian region during the Muslim period. But, this thread is not about this issue.

I thought you mean, few BD looking better to attack India then other BD..

 

[eastwatch]

Each of these castes and sub-castes has their own stories (myth or folk tale) of their origin. Accordingly, Kayasthas claim to be Khastriyas. Vaidyas claim themselves to be Brahmins and wear the same sacred thread that Brahmins wear. Svarnakaras claim to be Vaisyas etc.

Thanks for all the posts you have been writing. I am a late joiner and I have not read all your posts, but I read your current posts. I have found many Indians are highly educated and there are much to learn from them. You are also amazing, although your nickname here in this forum gives a different impression.

The Bangali Hindu caste relationship that you have written is to the point. This is also what I have read in some other research books. By the way, as far as I have read somewhere that Vaidyas were basically from the Brahmin caste, who became Ayurbedic doctors/Kabiraj in Bengal. In ancient Bengal, a Brahmin was not supposed to eat or drink anything from the hands of a lower caste Hindu. So, an educated group from the Brahmins came out to take up medicine.

This medical profession became the family occupation of that group of Brahmins. In the course of time, this group became completely detached from the main job of a Brahmin, that is, Puja and some related works, and started to be called as Vaidyas. But, genetically they are from the Brahmin caste.

 

[Halaku Khan]

I know the word ARYA has the meaning of noble. And the meaning of Islam is 'PEACE.' By teaching me the irrelevant meaning of a word, I hope you are not trying to disprove that the the Hindus used to call their land 'ARYAVARTA' 30 centuries before the arrival of British colonialists or that German whose name I forgot.

You are writing what your religion should have been, but I am taliking about what your religion is in practice, and how your JAT PAT system has created disparities among the same and equal human beings. Unfortunately, your society is still avoiding to humanize it by discarding the caste system.

Aryavarta? So what? "The abode of the noble" is how you would translate it.

I was talking about the fundamental doctrines of Sanatana Dharma.

Which society is perfect? Indian society may not be perfect, but there are Indians who are trying to address the imperfections.

I could have talked about imperfections of Islamic societies. Or I could have discussed the the behavior of the Prophet of Islam, authentically quoting from the Sahih Hadith. Tales of torture, rape, kidnapping, enslavement and murder. If you want to go there, we will.