What's new

Creation of Bangladesh: Shining Moment or Strategic Blunder

I find only the Indians bear inferiority complex against the Bangali muslims.
This, in my MBA years many decades ago, was known as mother-in-law research; "How do you know?" "I asked my mother-in-law."
So, they try to degrade them by propagating false information.
An imaginary outcome from an imaginary finding; appropriate enough.

It is clear that there is no evidence of your premises. Is there any evidence of your conclusions? What false information are you exercised about? Please quote specific instances.
I am talking not about population of Bangladesh itself. I am talking about the Muslim population of Sube Bangal. Bihar, Jharkhand, west Bengal and Bangladesh were part of this Sube Bengal.

Population was divided only in 1947, but the 750 years of common history and the common heritage of muslim people of these areas cannot be divided by a date line.
Ah, the cat is out of the bag.

Unfortunately, nobody claimed that there was a difference between Muslim people in the rest of North India and those in Bangladesh, now conveniently re-defined as Sube Bangal. That is because nobody claimed that there was a difference between Muslim people and Hindu people, or adivasis, or the Jains, or the Buddhists.

If you are claiming that Muslims (in decreasing space) of India, North India, Sube Bangal, Bangladesh are genetically different, either produce evidence or stop these racist vapourings.

Who gave you this illusion that Murshidabad was the only Capital of Bengal. It was the last Capital of Sube Bangal. Capital changed time to time. It was in Lakkhanabati (called Lukhnouti by the immigrant Muslims), then Pandua, then Gaur, and then to Orissa (don't remember the name). Was it Rajmahal?

The point that the poster made was that these were all in western Bengal, and in the province of Bengal, which was largely a Mughal construct. You obviously know, or you should know that Jaunpur occupied much of the space before Sube Bangal, so called.

To build a racial and genetic myth around a political grouping of a few hundred years is bizarre; Sube Bangal had a very short existence in history, and building a romantic myth around the 'different' people who came to inhabit it, in that short space of time, not before, not after, is childish.

Rohilkhand, with a shorter political existence, has a better claim to ethnic (not genetic) differentiation.

This is like arguing for a different genetic makeup in Provence as opposed to the rest of France, on the grounds of the difference between langue d'oc and langue d'oeil.

I understand that for whatever reason it is important for you to prove that the Muslim South Asian, wherever located, was different from the other South Asians, but this is well-worn territory. You would be well-advised to go through the Two Nation Theory, which stands thoroughly discredited today, not due to the INC developed and Sangh Parivar inherited One Nation riposte, but due to the obvious and clear underlying ethnic, linguistic and cultural roots of identity which were ignored at that time. You may find it useful to know, before deciding whether or not to invest in further investigation, that this is current thinking in Pakistani liberal circles. That might give you a hint.

After the death of Pathan Sultan Daud Khan Karrani in a battle in Orissa, the Orissa Pathans moved to east Bengal under the leadership of Osman Khan to join hands with the resistance built by Isha Khan Afghan, Baezid Karrani and other Chieftains there.

Read the article "The Last Pathan Hero of Bengal" written by Dr. Bhattasali to know how this Pathan hero Osman Khan fought against the Mughals in Uhar located in Sylhet/Mymensingh. So, where these groups of people go. Did they drown themselves in the Bay of Bengal and vanished?

There was no central Capital during the next 30 years after 1576. The Mughals conquered Dhaka in 1605 and made it the Capital of Sube Bangal. Murshidkuli Khan moved the Capital to Mursidabad many years later. So, learn from history before you blame others of complex mindedness. I am talking from the pages of history, but you are just imagining things.

By the way, who gave you this naive impression that high class muslims should live in the Capital and others would live in the hinterlands? Power changed in Bengal many tens of times.

When a dynasty falls, all his retinues are also disgraced and they flee to places where no one will trace them out. It happened many tens of times in Bengal and also in Delhi. This is why throughout the Centuries, thousands of Delhi Muslim families fled to Bengal after losing a war. But, your revered EATON Sahab could not have the foresight to see this important point. And you are following his footsteps blindly.

Is it your case that this handful of people, dynasties and their retinues, numbering perhaps at best in the thousands, made a genetic difference to approximately 120 million Bengalis?

Bhramin is not a good example to deny the theory of Mandell. There are plenty of Bhramins in south India who are just as dark as black african. I am not actually sure how they became bhramin (as non aryan) but they are now.

Lets look at it from outside the box. Native australians are darker skin so it is fair to imagine that Australian weather is conducive only to darker skin and anybody who settle there will eventually become darker in the course of time. But it did not for west european even after 600 years of settlement. Same goes for American African or American caucasian who did not turn Red Indian natives or anyway near to them. That is becuase evolution takes time and could take 100,000 years to alter a very minute fraction of the DNA.

But again if you look at Chile or Ecuador or Columbia, where most people looks like native only. That is becuase inter mixing. People were forced to intermix in those countries due to the fact that the European women could not conceive in the thin air and the height from the sea level. The conclusion from this two case are that people just dont change their facial or skin appearance in a very short period of time but only intermixing could put a drastic effect.

Now I have to go to Mandels number game here. As I concluded that the evolution is not the factor that Phatan became a bengali featured overnight but its intermixing which made them look more like Bengalis. Now why Bengalis did not became more like Pathan instead Pathan are more like Bengalis now? Its because number of Pathans are less in the stock than those were Bengalis. If for instance 80:20 the proportion of Bengali vs Pathan then after a period of say 500 years with population increase 800 people will look more like Bengali and 200 people will look more like Pathan. But again both the stock will bear some mark of Bengalis and some mark of Pathan. Nobody will remain pure as they came from original stock.

That is just a very simplified way of looking at it. But there are again more complex theories, the survival of the fittest. When two genes meet only the better part of the DNA suppose to pass on to the next generation. In this case as Bengalis are native then their gene should suit the local environment and should be passed on as the superior gene to the next generation. But this is again a very slow process shoul take 10s of thousands of years to see the distinct featurastic change. But the immunity to dieseases are in immediate effect.

I suggest to you that this ratio, far from being the 80:20 that you have described, is closer to 1:1000, perhaps even 1:10000. There are no records of large Pathan settlements in Bengal, however we define it, in the classical sense or as the artificial construct of Sube Bangal. On the other hand, there are records of large Pathan settlements in Upper India, well beyond the borders of Sube Bangal, which continue to remain intact to this day. Now, while the original Pakhtunkhwa Pathan tract in North West India, today North West Pakistan, is genetically seen to be distinct from other Pakistanis, who are genetically close to South Asian patterns, there is no difference, genetically, between Rohilkhand and its surrounds.

Are we to assume that there was a much larger immigration into Bengal, an unrecorded migration, unknown to exist as a separate tract as Rohilkhand existed, and that this was such a large sub-stratum that it genetically influenced the entire population much more than the Rohillas influenced their surrounding population?

1% is a lot.. :cheesy:
We differ from Chimpanzee only by 4% ;)
Chimps, Humans 96 Percent the Same, Gene Study Finds

Even an Chinese and Black african's DNA dont differ more than 1%. Its just a very tiny fraction of a % DNA could make a complete different race.

I was wondering who would spot this, and of course, it had to be you.

It is not what I have said in all my posts about genetic superiority. Genetically no nation is more superior to any other nations. I cited the political history of this region to prove that Bangali muslims do not have a single source of genes. There have been admixtures of other people as well. I also cited about negro abisinian admixture in us. Does it also mean that I wanted to prove that we are genetically superior?

Unfortunately, in your racist obsession with Central Asia, and with at one time Turkic, at another time Pathan (two completely different genetic groups, as your close study of the genetic composition of these populations would have shown), you have completely overlooked the longer, deeper connection of Sube Bangal with another genetic type.

Since earliest recorded history, the eastern frontiers of South Asia, which at times merge with the eastern frontiers of the current Bangladesh, have seen an open frontier and the free influx of people of Tibeto-Burman stock, through the Brahmaputra Valley, and through the Arakan Peninsula, but also across the grain of the country, across the Khasi and Jaintia Hills.

I could remind you of the 1200 year history of Ahom domination of the Brahmaputra Valley, of the role of the Koch in northern Bengal, of the incursions of the Tibetans into Bengal during the period of expansion of the Tibetan Empire, an episode well-recorded in Tibetan history, and not acknowledged at all in Indian history, of the rule of Burma extending as far in as Cachar in as late as the 19th century, and of the permeable boundary between the tribes on the east side of the Khasi and Jaintia Hills and those on the west side.

By the way, do you really understand the meaning of Turkic blood? Read before you send trash again. Is it the present day Turkey that I was talking about? Learn about the definition of Turkic people. And also learn about the present day Turkey people, and why do they look so different from their cousins in the central asia. Now, you will come up again with another chart, perhaps.

What an explosion of bad temper!

The 'trash' contains full details of the 'Turkic' people, including the inhiabitants of the central Asian Russian republics that now form the CIS. If anybody genuinely wanted information, it was available for the asking.

As far as 'present-day' Turks are concerned, by which presumably we are to understand the inhabitants of the country known today as Turkey, it is astonishing that in spite of the mass migration of first the Seljuk Turks, and subsequently the Ottoman Turks, there should be such a regression to the original 'Anatolian' type.

This single item by itself proves the utter fatuity of the argument about a few thousand soldiers, courtiers, perhaps peasants (though no explicit records are cited or are available on this point) having been a genetic influence on the Bangali people, east, west or Suba Bangal. If the migration of two tribes en masse had no effect on such a territory as Anatolia, how the migration of a much smaller number would have had a dramatic effect on a much larger population is a mystery.

If an invasion has been discredited(?), then the immigration cannot be discredited. Look at the physical features of different groups/caste of Hindu people. You cannot just discredit a theory only because a German anthropologist studied the physical features of us and deduced the conclusion.

Physical features vary within the same unitary family; so what?

Aryan footprint is spread everywhere in the Sub-continent. Why people should deny the long bygone history of their own forebearers for silly reasons? It is not the common people who decide about history. It is history that proves the existence of truths.

It is amazing that in 2010 AD, someone still thinks that the Aryans were a people and that they had a footprint.

Incidentally, not the common people, but historians themselves have long decades ago blown apart the myth that 'Aryan' represented a people, and have shown us that there were Aryan languages, spoken by a core group of mixed ethnicity, and which rapidly spread out to beyond the core group. It is in this way that the languages spread, to populations which had no connection with the original core group.

One cannot cite political history when talking about genes and trying to prove the genetic background of group of people. Genes or genetic drift do not follow nor care about what happened politically.

As for not having a single source - that is true for nearly most of the population of earth. Humans have migrated to nearly everywhere and intermixing of genes is something which has happened with every local population. But my point of posting that chart and the links was to show that any Turkic, semitic or pashto gene present in Bangladeshi Muslims is an insignificant portion of the gene make up. You will find this portion is consistent with the portion that the population of North India and Pakistan (to an extent). This proves that the origin or ancestors of most of Bangladeshi Muslims were the natives of that land, not middle eastern people.

Thankfully my charts actually prove something and are backed by scientific proofs, unlike talking about history books and political history without actually providing any sort of proof to back up your points.

Btw what has Turkic people have any thing to do in particular with the topic? Here's their list if you need it - Turkic peoples - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You could have mentioned that the Pushto are genetically distinct from South Asians otherwise, including the Baloch and the Sindhi, Punjabi, and so on.

Till date, there are no archaeological evidence to support mass movement of population or invasion to South Asia in pre-historic periods. Perhaps thats why researchers and archaeologist do not accept the invasion theory.

But of course there need not be much archaeological proof of an invasion for the theory to be actually true. Many mass movements in history have not been archaeologically attested but are true.

In this connection, in partial corroboration, in partial contradiction of your point, I invited your attention to the implications of the BMAC culture.

I have not gone through all your gobblish. It is because you want to say that people should not study the Normandy invasion by William the conqueror to know how a different genes were added to the native population of England. In your opinion, we should not know how the Turkic settlers from the central asia had changed themselves by mingling with the europeans there.

In your opinion, no one should also cite or study how because of influx of millions of european immigrants in the USA the native Red Indian population decreased by percentage. You also want to say we should not study how the native population in the latin americas changed due to Spanish cruelty and highhandedness.

You must be a pitiful silly creature without a creative mind.
Keep on living in your hard nut to crack typical Indian mind-shell and lecture your fellow countrymen.

I was not aware that a creative mind was required to study history. That might explain why I am not already rich and famous.

And what the influx of millions of european immigrants in the USA reducing the Red Indian population by percentges has to do with the present argument is baffling.

Is the case that the influx of milliions (!) of Pathan and Turkic labourers and peasants yearning for the feel of the earth between their toes after millions of years of forced labour as nomadic herdsmen reduced the native Bangladeshi ethnics to a minority?

What millions were these? Those millions who migrated during the existence of Sube Bangal and none else? Or those who migrated earlier and later and operating in stealth mode took over agriculture from the earlier inhabitants, without leaving a single trace of their presence? Other than, of course, the conclusive evidence of what has been described to us as the taller, fairer specimens who occur in the population?

where did I deny that population migration or invasion does not change the genetic make up of the local population? Perhaps if you had read the following, you would have saved your time.



As I mentioned in my previous post, there was migration of some middle eastern people to North India and Bangladesh and this would have brought their genes into the local pool. However the fact still remains that a significant majority of Bangladeshi people have the same genetic makeup as of the rest of the surrounding area.

Ancestry is not claimed simply by going back in time and seeing who was our parents parent and who were their parent and so on. If we go on this way, every living person today can claim ancestry to everyone who had lived in the past (around 1000-1400 AD barring pedigree collapse). [COLOR]This way every single person today can claim to have descent from the sahaba's or even the prophet(PBUH) himself.[/COLOR] This is why when ancestry and genes are talked about, researchers usually mention straight matrilineal (through mitochondrial DNA) and patrilineal (through Y chromosomal DNA) descent rather than common ancestor.

This proves that majority of bangladeshi muslim's ancestors were not middle eastern invaders but rather the original native bengali people. <--- refer to the charts if you want to see the genetic makeup.

Did you know that if ancestry is to be claimed the way you suggest (outside invasion and what not), then nearly every single person living in north, central and western India can claim that the Mughal invaders are their ancesters!

Btw what the heck is gobblish :blink:

You were doing so well until you got to this point. What a shame!

The word gobblish comes from the dialect spoken in and around Gobindopur, and was given prominence by the Gobindopur Sen family.

Gobindo "Gobbles" Sen was a rich Bengali zamindar whose superb knowledge of Persian, Turkish and Arabic brought him the understanding that he was descended of the same stock as the Germans. He and his family and two neighbouring villages thereupon migrated to Germany, where they took up land which was lying fallow and began cultivating it. All the members of the family and their neighbours to boot (did this sound tongue-in-cheek? I hope not) were brilliant in anything they did. They became completely adapted to local conditions, learnt German and spoke it like, erm, natives.

This family and its adjuncts were single-handedly responsible for introducing black hair to Germany, during their one hundred and twenty years in that land and in Austria, and another province known as Sude Germany, corrupted by non-Pushto speakers to Sudeten Germany.

In politics, they rose to the heights. Their most illustrious descendant looked visible non-German (he resembles my first cousin a lot), but still held high office as Reichs Minister for Propaganda from 1933 to 1945, and is well-known to historians as Joseph Goebbels.
 
@ Joe Shearer,
Been following in your wake.

Some parts unusually stand out, to wit:

"You were doing so well until you got to this point. What a shame!
The word gobblish comes from the dialect spoken in and around Gobindopur, and was given prominence by the Gobindopur Sen family.
Gobindo "Gobbles" Sen was a rich Bengali zamindar whose superb knowledge of Persian, Turkish and Arabic brought him the understanding that he was descended of the same stock as the Germans. He and his family and two neighbouring villages thereupon migrated to Germany, where they took up land which was lying fallow and began cultivating it. All the members of the family and their neighbours to boot (did this sound tongue-in-cheek? I hope not) were brilliant in anything they did. They became completely adapted to local conditions, learnt German and spoke it like, erm, natives.
This family and its adjuncts were single-handedly responsible for introducing black hair to Germany, during their one hundred and twenty years in that land and in Austria, and another province known as Sude Germany, corrupted by non-Pushto speakers to Sudeten Germany.
In politics, they rose to the heights. Their most illustrious descendant looked visible non-German (he resembles my first cousin a lot), but still held high office as Reichs Minister for Propaganda from 1933 to 1945, and is well-known to historians as Joseph Goebbels. "

SIR, I DOFF MY HAT TO YOU.
'Keep em coming'.
 
Lets cut the humor part of gobblish.. Is this article worth a reading? It even gone as far as calling Muslim colonisation. Just give your thought..

Mahmud Shah (Sultan of Bengal)
Nasiruddin Mahmud Shah I (Bengali: &#2474;&#2509;&#2480;&#2469;&#2478; &#2472;&#2494;&#2488;&#2495;&#2480;&#2497;&#2470;&#2509;&#2470;&#2495;&#2472; &#2478;&#2494;&#2489;&#2478;&#2497;&#2470; &#2486;&#2494;&#2489;) (reign: 1435- 1459) was a sultan of Bengal. He was a descendant of Sultan Shamsuddin Ilyas Shah of Bengal, who ascended the throne of Bengal under the title of &#8216;Nasiruddin Abul Muzaffar Mahmud Shah&#8217; in 839 AH (1435 AD). His accession to the throne marks the restoration of the House of Ilyas Shah after a gap of about twenty (1415-1435) years.

Nasiruddin Mahmud was a man of peaceful disposition. During his reign the Sharqi sultans of neighbouring Jaunpur, who had been in rivalry with the sultans of Bengal since the time of Jalaluddin Muhammad Shah, were involved in a deadly conflict with the Lodhi sultans of Delhi and hence neither the Sharqis nor the Lodhis could turn their covetous eye to Bengal. This situation helped Nasiruddin Mahmud to devote his time and attention to the task of reconstruction and development. Nasiruddin Mahmud was also able to recover Bengal's military strength which he used in gaining certain military achievements.

During his reign, Khan Jahan (Bengali governor of Bagerhat) conquered Khulna and Jessore. An Orissan grant reveals that Nasiruddin Mahmud suffered defeat in an engagement with Kapilendra Dev, the king of Orissa. But this assumption, based on a very vague expression, is purely conjectural. Nasiruddin Mahmud is ascribed to have marched upon Mithila which was, however, baffled by Bhairab Singh, the king of Mithila. The find spots of the inscription of Nasiruddin Mahmud and the mint-towns mentioned on his coins show that Nasiruddin Mahmud ruled over a vast kingdom bounded by the districts of Bhagalpur to the West, Mymensingh and Sylhet to the east, Gaur Pandua to the north and Hughli to the south.

The most important social development during Nasirudddin Mahmud's reign was a steady expansion of Muslim colonisation and settlement in different parts of Bengal. The leader of this process of Muslim settlements in south Bengal was Khan Jahan. He undertook a systematic work of settlement and colonisation by constructing masjids, excavating tanks and adopting similar other public measures. Similar expansion of Muslim settlement and colonisation were also in progress in other parts of the country as well.

Nasiruddin Mahmud was a great patron of art and architecture and during his reign a large number of masjids, khanqas, bridges and tombs were built. The important masjids of his reign were the imposing Sixty Dome Mosque (&#2487;&#2494;&#2463; &#2455;&#2478;&#2509;&#2476;&#2497;&#2460; &#2478;&#2488;&#2460;&#2495;&#2470;) erected by Khan Jahan at Bagerhat, two masjids built by Sarfaraz Khan at Jangipur in the district of Murshidabad (1443 AD), the masjid built by a man named Hilali in the neighbourhood of Gaur (1455 AD), the masjid built at Dhaka by a woman named Bakht Binat Bibi (1455 AD) and the masjid built by Khurshid Khan at Bhagalpur (1446 AD). The tomb of Khan Jahan at Bagerhat and the tomb of an allama at Hazrat Pandua were erected during his time. Nasiruddin Mahmud himself laid the foundations of the citadel and palace at Gaur and beautified the city with other architectural monuments. Of these, a five-arched stone-bridge, part of the massive walls of the fort and the Kotwali Darwaza are still extant. These works indicate the prevailing peace and prosperity of the reign.

Nizamuddin Ahmad and Firishtah praise Nasiruddin Mahmud Shah as an ideal sultan. Ghulam Husain Salim says that by his good administration the wounds of oppression inflicted by the previous Sultan Shamsuddin Ahmad Shah were healed. This generous sultan after a peaceful reign of twenty four years died in 864 AH (1459 AD).[1]

During his reign there was a steady expansion of Muslim colonisation and settlement in different parts of Bengal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmud_Shah_(Sultan_of_Bengal)
 
Some more also suggest outsider settlement in East Bengal.

Islam in Bangladesh
From 1947 to 1971 Bangladesh was East Pakistan and is in the eastern half of the cultural, linguistic, and to a great extent, the chief economic region of Bengal; the western half is the Indian state of West Bengal. The people of Bangladesh are 87 percent Muslims, the remaining populations of 13 percent are predominantly Hindus although there are some Christians and Buddhists. Quite naturally, the Banaladeshis share various cultural and socio-economic characteristics with their West Bengali neighbors. Yet, the Muslims of Bangladesh have distinctive social patterns associated with almost all facets of their daily life. It is appropriate, therefore, to narrate briefly the early Muslim contact with Bengal before we discuss the influence of Islam in Bangladesh. Bengal was one of the latest lands to come into political contact with Islam. It was also one of the earliest to fall victim of European colonial expansion in the mid-eighteenth century.

Between these two events there elapsed a period of more than five hundred years, during which the land turned out to be the habitat of the second largest Muslim population (over one hundred million) in the world. Indonesia remains the largest Muslim nation. And ever since the arrival of the Muslims the course of the sociopolitical and cultural developments of this area has been deeply influenced by Islam.

The Muslim conquest of Bengal took place in the opening years of the thirteenth century, mainly as a sequel to Muhammad Ghori's expedition late in the 6th hijrah century in northern India. Long before that, however, early Arab Muslims had established commercial as well as religious contact with Bengal, particularly in its coastal region. One immediate result of the establishment of Muslim power over the Indus delta, commanding the mouth of the Arabian Sea and the vast west Indian coast generally, was that it secured Arab navigation in the region.
In the course of time the Arabs extended these activities along the entire coast of South Asia including the coasts of Bengal. Islam entered Bengal through three channels--the Arab traders, the Turkish conquest and the missionary activities of the Muslim Sufis. The writings of Arab geographers reveal that Arab traders had frequented the Bengal coast long before the Turkish conquest. The location bordering Bengal that finds prominence in the Arab accounts is Samandar, identified with a place in the mouth of the Meghna river near Sandip islands on the Bay of Bengal. The Arab writers also knew about Samrup and the kingdom of Ruhmi, the latter being identified with the kingdom of Dharmapal of the Pal dynasty. It is not certain whether the Arab contacts led to any Muslim settlement in Bengal; some coins of the Caliphs have been discovered from ancient sites of Paharpur in Rajshahi and Mainamati near Comilla. On the basis of the word Thuratana in the Arakanese tradition, some scholars have concluded that the Arabs founded a Muslim Kingdom in Chittagong.

The facial resemblance's of the people of Chittagong, the mixture of Arabic words in the Chittagonian dialect, and place names in and around the port city have been put forward to prove the Arab settlement in Chittagong. Turkish inroads toward the East started earlier, but it was at the beginning of the 13th century that Bengal came under Turkish sway. The dashing push of Muhammad Bakhtyar Khalji toward Nadiya met with brilliant success--he made Lakhnauti in northwest Bengal the seat of his government. The Muslims took more than 200 years to bring the whole of Bengal under their control. Satgaon was conquered during the reign of Sultan Ruknuddin Kaikaus (1291-1300), in whose time the conquest of East Bengal was also begun. During the next reign, that of Sultan Shamsuddin Firuz Shah (1300-1322), the territory right up to Sylhet was conquered, enabling the Tughlaqs to divide Bengal into three governorhsips--Lakhnauti, Satgoan, and Sunargaon. Slowly the whole territory of what is now known as Bangladesh fell under Muslim rule.

It is impossible to say who was the first Muslim saint to come to Bengal. If traditions that persist in different parts of Bangladesh are to be believed, a large number of saints came to Bengal long before the Turkish conquest. From the beginning the saints paid attention to educating the people. They also influenced the rulers in molding their policies and interfered in the politics of the country whenever they thought that policies of the rulers were going against the spirit and interest of Islam. Muslim society in Bengal was founded upon three important supporting groups--the Muslim ruling class, Muslim scholars, and the saints, Sufis and Pirs. The popular form of Islam in Bangladesh includes pirism and mullaism. Etymologically, the word "pir" means old. But it is generally used to denote the teachers who give spiritual guidance. Reverence to the pirs is not of Bangladesh oriqin--it was imported from Iran through northern India.

Local tradition is noticeable in the growth of mullaism or priestly influence. Mullahs are held in more reverence in the rural areas. The miracles and the piety of the Muslim saints and pirs played upon the people's imagination and led them ultimately to accept Islam. Other factors contributing to the historical conversion was the deteriorating condition of the existing society of Bengal. On the eve of the Muslim conquest, Bengal was inhabited by Buddhist and Hindus. Jainism--which was once a flourishing religion--had already declined. The manifold social restrictions imposed by the Hindus relegated both the Buddhists and the lower class Hindus to a position of contempt and untouchability.
When the latter two groups of people were treated in this manner, Islam came into Bengal. Muslim saints began to teach the Islamic principles of equality while the rulers took steps to build up Muslim culture on the basis of a casteless society. Many Buddhists and Hindus chose to identify themselves with the Muslims in order to be free from social injustice and to gain equality and good position in society. As a result of large-scale conversion, many local beliefs, not allowed by the Islamic dogma but useful in achieving compromise, found their ways into the Muslim society of Bengal.

The above discussion makes it clear that Muslim society in Bengal developed orthodox principles of Islam and at the same time accommodated certain popular traditions. Islam looked to mosques, madrasas, and khanqahs for its strength. These institutions became the pillars of society and all eyes were focused upon them for guidance. The 1872 census of Bengal--the first to be conducted in this area-- indicated that Bengal was inhabited by large number of Muslims. It showed that 48 percent of the total population in Bengal were Muslims, the majority of whom lived in East Bengal.
For the initial years in the emergence of Bangladesh, its relations with the rest of the Muslim world were less than cordial. Most of the Islamic world supported Pakistan during the 1971 struggle for independence of Bangladesh. The creation of Bangladesh was made possible through close cooperation with India and the Soviet Union. For the most part Bangladesh ignored--and was ignored by--the other Muslim nations. The "founding father" of Bangladesh, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, proclaimed Bangladesh to be both secular and socialist, and adopted a radically socialist economic policy that included the nationalization of all industries, banks, and insurance companies. Because Pakistan retained the hope of eventually regaining East Pakistan, Islamabad might also have influenced Muslim nations to withhold their early recognition of Bangladesh.

In 1975 Mujib and most of his family members were killed in a coup engineered by some disgruntled army officers. Having eliminated Mujib, the young officers had little idea of how to proceed. For some time it appeared that the People's Republic of Bangladesh would be renamed the Islamic Republic of Bangladesh but a radio announcement suggesting such a move was rescinded. In 1977 Ziaur Rahman assumed the presidency; he received electoral sanction by winning 60 percent of the votes in the parliamentary elections of February 1979. Unlike Mujib's exclusive stress on secular, socialistic norms of government, Zia was very much aware that 87 percent of the population of Bangladesh were Muslim. When asked whether the Islamic revivalism in the world would affect Bangladesh, Zia replied: "We give religion due importance in our life. Our people are very religious... I do not think any Muslim country has such a large number of mosques."

The new constitution, however, was explicit about protecting the rights of the minorities, most of whom are Hindus. Secular law prevails in criminal and civil matters, except where religious law supercedes it, as in personal matters. In such matters, the religion of the individual concerned is consulted. For example, bigamy is forbidden in civil law, but this applies only to Christian men and to all women, since Muslim and Hindu men are permitted multiple wives according to their religious laws. Thus minority Hindus and Christians are not subject to Islamic laws as are Muslim Bangladeshis. This ingenious formulation protects minority rights while at the same time acknowledging the law of the Muslim majority. In general, the 1970s saw Bangladesh assert its Islamic identity, but on a muted level.

Although the Muslims of Bangladesh are deeply religious, they show no indication of wanting to impose Islamic law on non-Muslim minorities in the country. What is happening in Bangladesh is a mature redefinition of the nation as a Muslim country engaged in the perilous process of modernization and determined not to lose itself in that process. In 1988, President Hussain Muhammed Ershad amended the constitution to provide for recognition of Islam as the state religion of Bangladesh. This amendment bill--passed unanimously by the Jatiya Sangsad or national parliament--provided for declaring Islam to be the state religion but did not declare the country as a religious state. The official name of the country, "People's Republic of Bangladesh" remains unchanged.

Under almost continual popular demand, Ershad resigned in December 1990. His abuse of Islam for political purposes and failure to hold free and fair elections, underscored by the viability of Islam and Bengali nationalism as pursued by his popular predecessor-Zia--slowly but surely eroded Ershad's popularity and effectiveness as a ruler. In the 1990s whatever course Bangladesh politics takes, it can hardly be in the direction of secularism as understood in the West, that is, separation of religion and politics, Islam is likely to remain part and parcel of the socio-political life in Bangladesh.

http://www.globalfront.com/nabic_archive/islam_in_bangladesh.htm
 
Even Banglapedia the most authentic source even suggest Large outsiders settlement.

Islam (in Bengal) came to Bengal comparatively late. Within about one hundred years of its advent, Islam penetrated into northwestern India, and Arabian traders came into contact with the coastal regions of India, including Bengal. But it took about five hundred years for Muslim political power to reach Bengal. According to unconfirmed traditions, some Muslim sufi-saints came to Bengal even before the political conquest, but Islam actually entered in full force with the Turkish conquest towards the beginning of the 13th century. Bangladesh is today a Muslim majority country; about 90&#37; of her population belong to the Islamic faith.

During the first three hundred years or so of Muslim rule, Bengal was ruled by the Turks of one or the other group- the Khaljis, the Ilbaris and the Qaraunahs. The Abyssinian slaves occupied the throne for a few years in the late 15th century and then came successively the Sayyids, the Afghans and the Mughals. So broadly speaking, the Muslim rulers of Bengal belonged to three racial groups- the Turks, the Afghans and the Mughals. The last were originally linked with the Turks.

Islam entered Bengal both by land and water. By land the Turkish conquerors came with their religion, culture and concept of governance, while the Arab traders came through waterway. They also came with their religion and culture, with a purpose different from that of the Turks. The influence of the Arabs in some parts of Bengal, particularly in the coastal region of Chittagong is remembered through traditions. But the Arabs probably did not affect the society as deeply as was done by the Turkish conquerors.

The Turks came with the avowed intention of establishing political power. The Arabs came to trade in the trading season, and left when the season was over. But for the Turkish conquerors the situation was different. They conquered, established a kingdom and a government and took other steps to strengthen their position. Ever since the establishment of the first Muslim kingdom in Bengal there was a continuous flow of Muslims into Bengal. There came the soldiers, who were, in fact the backbone of political power; the religious learned people, the Sayyids, Ulama and the Mashayikhs to disseminate religion; the civil servants, experts in politics, finance and governance; the traders and businessmen, and also the artisans and craftsmen. They all came in search of employment and /or better livelihood. The Mongol destruction of the Baghdad Caliphate in the thirteenth century led to widespread displacement of Central Asian Muslims, who took refuge in the capitals of Delhi and lakhnauti. They even spread to the outlying places. Muslims coming from the cultural centres of central Asia were welcomed, they were known as aizza ('respectable') and given suitable employment.

When the Muslim Kingdom was established in Lakhnauti, it was, theoretically at least, a part of the Abbasid Caliphate. Though the caliph's power was dwindling, he was considered the supreme spiritual head of Sunni Muslims all over. The Muslims of Bengal also shared this view and some early Muslim sultans of Bengal actually imprinted the names of Abbasid caliphs on their coins. Some others, who did not actually inscribe the name of the caliph, assumed titles inscribed on their coins, denoting their allegiance to the institution of the Caliphate. Be that as it may, the Muslim kingdom of Bengal in the pre-Mughal period was for all practical purposes an independent kingdom. During this whole period, the Bengal rulers took the title of sultan, thus proclaiming the character of the Kingdom as a Sultanate. Some Bengal sultans assumed the title of Khalifah themselves. The Caliphate of Baghdad came to an end long before the establishment of Mughal rule in India (or in Bengal). So they had nothing to do with that institution. The Mughals took the imperial title of shahinshah (king of kings), and they gave the title of sultan to their princes. Bengal, or Subah Bangalah, was all through a province of the Mughal empire.

Islam, which came in the wake of the Turkish conquest, changed the socio-religious pattern of Bengal. Politically, it sowed the seeds of Muslim rule, but socially it planted a Muslim society, opening the gate of Bengal to numerous immigrants from the then Muslim world, which affected the existing society enormously. The spread of Islam in Bengal was a lengthy process.

Bakhtyar's kingdom was only a nucleus and the Muslims took more than two hundred years to bring the whole of Bengal under their control. In 1338 Bengal witnessed the beginning of an independent Sultanate under fakhruddin mubarak shah. From this time onward, for two hundred years, Bengal remained independent. This was a period of overall development of the country both politically and culturally. But the most important development of this period was that the country for the first time received a name, ie Bangalah. Before this there was no geo-political unity of Bengal, no common name for the whole country. Bengal was known by the names of its different units, Gauda, Radha, Vanga etc. After Sultan Shamsuddin iliyas shah conquered all these three regions and united the whole of Bengal, the name Bangalah emerged and he earned for himself the title of Shah-i-Bangalah and Sultan-i-Bangalah. Henceforth, the Muslim kingdom of Bengal came to be known as the kingdom of Bangalah. Historians began to call the kingdom Bangalah instead of Lakhnauti, and foreigners also used this name, whence came the Mughal subah Bangalah and the British province of Bengal.

The independent Sultanate saw the expansion of Muslim power which spread into every nook and corner of the country, up to kamarupa in the north, Tippara in the east and the sea in the south. Chittagong was conquered by Fakhruddin Mubarak Shah (1338-1349), Faridpur was conquered by jalaluddin muhammad shah (1415-1432) and renamed fathabad. Khan Jahan brought the Khulna-Jessore area under the Muslim rule in the reign of nasiruddin mahmud shah (1435-1459) and ruknuddin barbak shah (1459-1474) conquered Bakerganj. The expansion of Muslim power in Bengal was now complete, and the Muslim kingdom of Lakhnauti founded by Muhammad bakhtiyar khalji was turned into the Muslim Kingdom of Bengal. The Mughals took over this kingdom. After the death of aurangzeb, when Mughal power declined, Bengal like other provinces of the empire was ruled by the nawabs more or less independently. This position continued up to the battle of palashi, 1757.

The establishment of Muslim rule was not an end in itself, for Muslim power had to be sustained in a country where a large number of non-Muslims had been living from time immemorial. These indigenous people were diametrically opposed to the incomers in every aspect of religious, social and cultural life; they were opposed not only in their fundamental beliefs but also in their day to day life from birth to death. So the Muslim rulers of Bengal, from the beginning till the end, built up institutions to disseminate Islamic learning and culture among those who professed the Islamic faith. They built mosques, madrasahs and khanqahs for this purpose. Mosques form an important feature of Muslim society and culture, because they afford opportunity to offer prayers, one of the fundamental pillars of the Islamic faith. In fact when a new area was brought under control and a Muslim settlement was established, a mosque was built to facilitate offering of prayers by the Muslims. Thus numerous mosques were built during Muslim rules down to the 18th century; a few hundred are still extant so that they can be used as prayer houses, while many have perished. Those which are still extant were pucca constructions, but there must have been numerous mud houses or thatched houses built for offering prayers whose existence or numbers cannot be ascertained.

Many Arabic or Persian inscriptions still exist, either fixed on the walls of the mosques, or displaced and removed to museums or other safer places. The inscriptions reveal that the mosques were built at the initiative of rulers or their officers. The inscriptions generally begin with either a verse of the Holy quran or a hadith of the Prophet (Sm) or both, promising the builder the rewards that await him in the next world for founding such religious institutions. The rulers therefore built mosques in full realisation of their performance of a religious duty.

Similarly madrasahs or schools or colleges were built to afford facilities to young Muslims to receive education. Mosques also served as maktabs to impart elementary religious education to the children. There were many madrasahs to impart elementary education, and also institutions of higher learning, particularly in the towns and cities. The rulers got the madrasahs built at state expense, but some were also built by individual philanthropists. Some of the institutions, called dar-ul-khairat or bina-ul-khair, were residential institutions, where teachers and students were provided board and lodging. Religious persons like the Ulama and the Sufis also built Madrasahs, but they were state patronised. The higher institutions of learning imparted instructions on ilm-i-deen and ilm-i-shara. Ilm-i-deen or religious knowledge and ilm-i-shara or knowledge of shariah may mean many things. In those days, as in the present day, a person had to pursue his study up to a certain level to become an Alim, and the subjects which he had to study were the Quran, Hadith, Tasawwaf, Mantiq, Kalam, and such other subjects, as also the Arabic and Persian languages.

Khanqahs were built to afford facilities to the sufi-saints to pursue their spiritual activities with their followers. They were built either by the rulers or by the Sufis themselves, but they received state patronage. Khanqahs of some of the very famous saints like Shaikh jalaluddin tabrizi, shah jalal, Shaikh nur qutb alam survives even today. Khanqahs of Sufis of the Mughal period are also extant. The Muslim rulers granted lands for the maintenance of mosques, madrasahs and khanqahs. They also granted lands to the Muslim learned people like Ulama and Mashayikh for their sustenance. They were granted by way of inam (rewards), wazifa (stipends) and madad-i-maash (assistance for subsistence). The Ulama and Mashayikh, therefore, enjoyed economic security so that they could engage themselves in the pursuit of knowledge and meditation. The Muslim rulers always encouraged Muslim Ulama, Sufis and other religious leaders, built religious institutions and thus helped the growth of a Muslim society in Bengal.

The building up of Muslim society in Bengal was a long process of gradual growth. The composition of the society quite naturally differed from century to century with the immigration of foreign Muslims and the conversion of local people. The early immigrants were turks, and they belonged to different stocks, like the Khaljis, the Ilbaris and the Qaraunahs. Their supporters also came from far-off places. Arabs and Persians also came, and included people from various professions and other trades. One Bengal sultan, Ruknuddin Barbak Shah imported a good number of Abyssinian slaves to guard the palace and the royal family, and this added a new element in the Muslim society.
With the occupation of Delhi by the Mughals, the Afghans lost control over northern India and they spread over outlying provinces including Bengal. The Afghans also became rulers in Bengal and their supremacy continued for several decades. Then came the Mughals and a fresh wave of Muslim migration to Bengal started. Mughal supremacy in Bengal lasted for several hundred years. So long the Muslim immigrants in Bengal were almost all Sunnis, and Shias were few and far between. With the supremacy of the Mughals there came iranians, mostly belonging to the Shia community.

The Mughal subahdars, some of whom were of royal blood were highly cultured. Many scholarly persons from Upper India and outside made their homes and settled in this rich province. The increase of oceanic communications between Bengal and the Persian Gulf countries in the 17th century, tempted cultured Shias, Persian scholars, physicians, philosophers and traders to come and settle in Bengal. A voyage from Bandar Abbas or Basra to hughli was much easier and cheaper than the overland journey across upper India, either through the Afghan passes or via the port of Surat.

Although Shias started coming to Bengal after the Mughal conquest or even before, they came in larger number from the beginning of the 17th century after jahangir's accession to the throne. After his marriage with Nur Jahan, a shiaite lady, her family became the controlling power of Mughal polities. Members of that family also came to Bengal as subahdars and held many other high posts. In the reigns of Jahangir and shahjahan, a large number of Persian poets adorned the court of Bengal subahdars. Even the court of shah shuja, who was himself a staunch Sunni, was surrounded by a good number of Shia scholars. Of course, he had received his education under a Shiah teacher and his wife and mother belonged to Shia families.

Great Mughal subahdars like mir jumla and shaista khan were Shias. They were accompanied to Bengal by many Shia followers who occupied important posts. Shaista Khan came to Bengal with half a dozen grown up children, who were all trained soldiers and efficient administrators. From the provincial capital down to the sarkars and parganas, from the military department to the rent receiving stations, Iranians and Shias were found thronging along with Sunnis and others. From murshid quli khan to sirajuddaula, ie till the 18th century, the subahadars or nawabs, as they were called then, were all Shias. During this time the Shias became predominant in all branches of administration, in the army, navy (nawara), in the revenue and other departments.


The nawabs, particularly Murshid Quli Khan and his son-in-law shujauddin khan appointed their relatives to the key positions of the state; during the time of alivardi khan, though Hindu officials did go up the ladder, he also confined the most important offices to his relatives, particularly his family members, children of his brother who were all his sons-in-law. So, although initially Sunni Muslims predominated in Bengal society, during the closing years of Muslim rule they gradually yielded place to Shias.

Chittagong being an important seaport, the Arab, Persian and many other foreign traders went there for commerce and trade. Prospects of better livelihood in the newly conquered country and prospects of lucrative trade were responsible for attracting foreign Muslims to this country. While some may have left, many settled here in Bengal. There were also cases of conversion of local people to Islam; the question of conversion is of special significance and will be taken up later in this essay. There were also the children of mixed marriages; many immigrants including the rulers accepted local wives and there are examples of children of such marriages attaining high ranks in society, according to the status of their respective fathers.

So it is found that there were many elements in Muslim society, the Turks, the Afghans, the Mughals, the Arabs, the Persians, the local converts etc. How were these various people integrated into the society? The earliest reference to different groups in society is found in a proclamation of Sultan firuz shah tughlaq issued to the people of Lakhnauti on the eve of his invasion of Bengal in 1354 AD. The proclamation was addressed to the (i) Saadat, Ulama, Mashayikh and others of similar nature; (ii) the Khans, Maliks, Umara, Sadrs, Akaber and Maarif and their retinue and followers. A Hindu poet, writing in 1495 AD, refers to the Mughals, Pathans, Shaikh, Sayyid, Mulla and qazi. In the early 16th century duarte barbosa wrote about the wealthy Arabs, Iranians, Abyssinians and Indians of gaur and also about the high living standard of these Muslims. The proclamation of Firuz Shah Tughlaq, an official document, addressed those whose co-operation and help were needed and sought against his opponent, the sultan of Bengal. So they were the people who formed the upper class of the society, the Ashraf as they are called. They belonged to the religious class, the Saadat, Ulama, and Mashayikh, and the official class, the Khans, Maliks and Umara.

The Saadat or the Sayyids were the descendants of the Prophet (Sm), the Ulama or the Alims were those who were well versed in the Islamic sciences or theology. They received training in Muslim Law, Logic, Arabic Letters and religious literature. The Mashayikh or the Sufi-Saints were spiritual persons, sometimes otherworldly or ascetic. Of these the theologians, ie the Ulama occupied a special position, because they occupied judicial and other religious offices. They were the exponents of the Law, having sufficient knowledge and expertise to arbitrate disputes. The word Shaikh literally means old, but technically it means doctor in Muslim Law and Theology. In this sense Shaikhs were Ulama but they were Ulama who had themselves attained or helped others attain spiritual development.

The Sufis of Bengal were called Shaikh, because they actually devoted themselves to the teaching of Islamic sciences alongside their mystic devotions. The Sufis were also called Makhdums, ie those who are served. Shaikh or Makhdum, by whatever name the Sufis were called, were people who were spiritually developed and who adhered to the spirit of Islam. They were renowned for their simplicity of life, strength of character, devotion to faith and peaceful pursuits, They influenced the people and society very deeply. The other groups of Muslims were the Khans, Maliks etc who belonged to the official class and bureaucracy; they were the army personnel and civil servants who ran the administration and were the backbone of Muslim political power.

At the time of the Muslim conquest, Bengal was predominantly a Hindu-Buddhist country. The proportion of Hindus and Buddhists cannot be ascertained, but it is a fact that Buddhists ruled Bengal for several centuries
, though before Bakhtyar's conquest Hindus, the Senas, were holding political power. Raja laksmanasena was then ruling over the whole of Bengal. Moreover, non-Aryan elements were always present in Bengal, particularly outside the urban centres and in the river-girt Bangalah; and Buddhism which was uprooted from the land of its birth, ie North India, had been a great competitor of Hinduism on the eve of the Muslim conquest.

The non-Aryan elements had somehow identified themselves with the Buddhists and thus when Hindu-Buddhist rivalry was very much present in the society, Islam came as a relieving force, in which many found an easy opening to salvation and success. This probably led to the conversion of local people to Islam. It is interesting to note that whereas in northern India, the place under imperial domination for centuries, Islam was confined to urban centres, in deltaic Bengal it captured the rural society. The large number of Muslims in this area was not so much due to the introduction of foreign blood into the country as to the conversion of indigenous population for whom the rigid caste system of Hinduism had become intolerable. There is hardly any evidence of forcible conversion in the context of India or Bengal.
During several hundred years of Muslim rule, it is not expected that all rulers were free from religious bias or the desire to win converts even by coercion, but there is a consensus that its extent was very limited. The theory of political patronage also cannot explain the mass conversion to Islam that took place in Bengal because a large number of Hindus occupied state services including the office of ministers. Hinduism had prohibited the outcast from residing in the same village as the twice-born Brahman, had forced him to perform the most menial and repulsive occupations and had virtually treated him as an animal undeserving of any pity; but Islam announced that the poor, as well as the rich, the slave and his master, the peasant and the prince, were all equal in the eye of God. Above all, the Brahmans held out no hopes of a future world to this most virtuous helot, while the Mulla not only pronounced assurances of felicity in this world but of an indefeasible inheritance in the next. So the 'hewers of wood and the drawers of water', many a despairing chandal and kaibartta joyfully embraced Islam, a religion that proclaimed the equality of man.

The reasons for conversion may be either mundane, eg for gaining royal favour, job opportunities and economic gains, or genuine love for the faith and desire to be free from oppression from people belonging to higher castes. The last mentioned cause seems to have played a greater part in the matter of conversion in Bengal. Islam with its social justice, principles of equality and fraternity came to the downtrodden people as a saviour when the entire local society was steeped in inequality and caste oppression. And their models in Muslim society were certainly not the kings and nobles, but the Sufis and Ulama whose unostentatious life must have set an example.

It is unnecessary to speculate what percentage of Muslims adhered to the fundamental principles of Islam ie Salat (prayers), Saum (fastings), Zakat (poor rates) and Hajj (pilgrimage to the holy cities), because it was incumbent for Muslims to follow them. There were facilities for practising the fundamentals and religious leaders were there to preach them.

The great majority of the people, particularly those who entered the fold of Islam later could not be as religious. It is not unnatural that some popular elements had crept into the general belief of the Muslims. It should be conceded that many of the converted Muslims retained their long-inherited customs, social behaviour and even love for Hindu epics. Jola (weavers), mukeri (livestock holders), pithari (cake-sellers), Kabari (fish-mongers), garasal (converts of mixed origin), sanakar (loom-maker), hajam (circumciser), Tirakar (bow-maker), kagaji (paper-maker), Kalandar (wandering faqir or holy men), darji (tailors), rangrez (dyers), Kal (those who beg for alms at night), kasai (beef-sellers), gola or goala (milk-men) etc retained their old professions. Some of these groups were linked with the village economy, others to the textile industry and still others like the tirakar provided weaponry to the armed forces while the kagaji or paper-maker supplied paper for the use of civil servants in the offices and teachers and students for writing books. They continued the professions in which they were engaged before accepting Islam.

Centuries of contact between the Hindus and the Muslims had profoundly influenced both, so that the social and religious life of the Muslims profoundly influenced Hinduism, and in the same manner some practices of the Hindus entered into the life of the Muslims. As a result some popular elements are also found in the religious practices of the Muslims. The most important popular element is found in Pirism. The Persian word Pir is now very loosely used, denoting those spiritual guides for which the Arabic words, Shaikh, Murshid were formerly used.

In the early days, the Pirs were the people who adhered most strictly to the ideals and principles of a spiritual life. They led an austere and puritan life. Pirism was hardly hereditary, because Pirs had to attain spiritual development. But Pirism gradually degenerated and sometimes false tombs or dargahs were built and these even became famous. Wandering Muslim faqirs built, in imitation of Hindu temples and Buddhist Viharas, tombs and mausoleums in the name of famous Muslim Sufis of Central Asia and thus earned their livelihood and found out ways and means to acquire followers. Through assiduous and persistent propaganda regarding the miracles of these saints they attracted people, particularly of the lower classes.

In Bengal there also developed Satya-Pir and Panch-Pir movements and a good number of books were written on the Satya-Pir cult. While the Muslim writers call him Satya-Pir, to the Hindus he was known as Satya-Narayana. In fact, there is no difference between Satya Pir and Satya Narayana. Satya-Pir or Satya-Narayana worship could be noticed in the northern and western parts of Bengal even in the beginning of the 20th century. But the traditions about them may go as far back as the 16th century. The worship of Panch-Pir also gained popularity. Though Panch-Pir dargahs are found in several places, no accepted list of five Pirs is available. The names vary in the lists, though one or two names of local Pirs are found common in all. A number of imaginary Pirs also receive reverence from the credulous masses. They are given different names like Manik Pir, Ghora Pir, Kumbhira Pir and Madari Pir. Offerings are made to them seeking relief from dangers. For example, offerings of milk and fruits are made to Manik Pir, and folk songs known as Manik Pirer Gan are composed and sung in various parts.

In some dargahs people bind coloured threads to the branches of nearby trees and/or stones or walls are washed with lime. Sometimes people offer edibles to fish or tortoises in tanks attached to the dargahs. The fish or tortoises are called madari. The disciples of Badiuddin Shah Madar are called Madari, but the name Madari given to the fish or tortoise shows that the people have forgotten its original connotation.

Mullaism is another element of popular Islam. Mullas are usually consulted by the ordinary and less educated Muslims and they help the village Muslims in performing marriage ceremonies, killing animals on festive and religious occasions, giving taviz (amulet) to the seekers of relief from evils. They also teach children in mosques and maktabs and are paid for their services.

The Muslims also venerate stone representations of the footprint of the Prophet (Sm). In Bangladesh there are several buildings containing the footprint eg kadam rasul at Nabiganj, Dhaka, Kadam Mubarak at Chittagong town and Kadam Rasul at Bagicha Hat, Chandanaish, Chittagong. The Shias also brought some practices and ceremonies. The most important of them is linked with the tragic death of Imam Husain (R) and his family at Karbala, the Muharram festival. In the late Mughal period, the festival was observed ceremoniously in places like Dhaka and Murshidabad.

The Shia nawabs and high officials spent huge amount of money in observing it. Muslim poets have also written on Muharram. Folk songs called jarigan are very popular even today. In the past Taziah processions were organised with pomp, splendour and also grief in remembrance of the Karbala tragedy. The birth, marriage and death of Muslims are guided by set rules, but here also Hindu practices have infiltrated. In their social life also the Muslims were influenced by some Hindu practices. For example, the Ashraf and Atraf (or Ajlaf) difference among Muslims was not much different from the caste distinction of the Hindus. In the first half of the Muslim period, the social difference was not so acute, but during the Mughal period when Islam spread to the nooks and corners of the country, particularly in the river-girt area, the cultivators, the weavers, and others who adopted similar professions were relegated to the lower or Atraf class. Economically backward people also belonged to the Atraf class.

The advent of Islam in Bengal gave the Brahmanical ascendancy a rude shock. The importance of the superior castes in both political and social life was greatly reduced. It was not only Islam but several other forces, such as the Manasa, Chandi and Dharma cults, that were opposed to the Brahmancial system and were more amenable to the proselytizing influence of Islam. In their attempt to face these challenges, the Brahamins further tightened their caste rules. The attitude of the Brahmins is exemplified by the foundation of the Navadvipa school of Nyaya, the composition of a number of smrti texts by Raghunandan and his contemporaries and general revival of the culture embodied in the Sanskrit texts. This was, however, a negative approach; instead of liberalising the rules and thus keeping the lower class Hindus, Vaishyas and Shudras, away from the influence of Islam, they tightened the caste restrictions and thus isolated themselves further from the people. They lost their hold over society and in eastern and southern Bengal adherents to the local cults of Manasa, Chandi and the Nathas far outnumbered others.

It was not possible for the Brahmins to keep themselves aloof for long. Living in the same country, contact with the Muslims, Buddhists and other lower class Hindus, whom they treated as mlechchhas or untouchables, was inevitable. This affected their caste purity. Association with the Muslims was called Yavana-dosa (dosa meaning offence). Besides Yavana-dosa, being childless, going to brothels, marrying within the community, marrying wicked girls, killing Brahmins, committing adultery or fornication could affect the social life of Brahmins and entitled them to lose their caste sanctity. So there was a reaction among the Brahmins themselves against this negative and suicidal policy. The idea gained ground in some sections that unless the Brahmins could keep pace with the challenge of time and liberalise their social restrictions, they would not be able to stem the tide of Islam. This group represented the progressive element and their chief exponent was sri chaitanya, the founder of Gaudiya vaisnavism.

Chaitanya was a great reformer who advocated a casteless society. So the most important influence of Islam in Bengal is to be found in the diminishing superiority of the Brahmins, the social revolution among the Brahmins themselves, prominence of local cults like those of Manasa, Chandi and Natha, and finally the rise of Gaudiya Vaisnavism as a means of saving Hinduism, chiefly with its casteless appeal.

The Muslims brought with them their food habits, culinary art and dress, but they had to adjust these to the local climate. Islamic architecture was developed before the Muslims came to Bengal. This architecture with its true arch, dome, minar etc took the place of the false arch and skyline or pyramidal shape. Both religious and secular buildings represented Muslim architecture. The religious buildings were mosques and mazars (tomb), whereas the secular buildings were of miscellaneous kinds, like the houses, pavilions, gates, wells, bridges, gardens etc. The Muslims also introduced mortar in their buildings. But the most important contribution of the Muslims in Bengal was the growth of Bengali literature. Muslims came to Bengal with two languages, Arabic as the language of religion and Persian as the language of culture. They also had their mother tongue, Turkish or Poshtu as the case may be. In Bengal the languages were Bengali and Sanskrit. But Sanskrit was the language of both religion and culture.

The Brahmins considered it sacrilegious to write religious books in a language other than that of the Vedas, ie Sanskrit. The shudras had no access to the religious texts. The Brahmincal ascendancy in the Hindu period was, therefore, a great barrier to the growth of Bengali literature. In the Hindu period, the court language was also Sanskrit. So the rulers and the educated people were interested in the Sanskrit language only. After the Muslim conquest, the position changed; Persian became the court language and Sanskrit receded to the background. Local talents got momentum in cultivating their own language and literature.

Fortunately, the Muslim rulers were tolerant. They encouraged the cultivation of local language and literature, patronised Hindu poets and thus some very important books were written in the Sultanate period. Almost all these poets received patronage from the Muslim rulers. The names of Barbak Shah, husain shah, nusrat shah and the Muslim officers, paragal khan, Chute Khan may be mentioned in this connection. From the 16th century onwards, Muslim poets themselves wrote poems in Bengali. Besides, as an impact of Muslim rule, many Arabic and Persian words became assimilated into the Bengali language. The loan words in Bengali from these languages may be several hundred or even thousand and thus the Bengali vocabulary has been enriched. The Muslims also introduced romantic literature in Bengali. Whereas the Hindus wrote chiefly on religious themes centring round gods and goddesses, the Muslims introduced love-stories of men and women.

The Muslims came in contact with the local people in various ways. In their military establishments such as thanas, or the settlements of peaceful persons, they could not remain isolated and confined amongst themselves. In their day to day life, in the market places, bazaars, in the ports and in the trading stations, people of both the communities came closer. The Mughal revenue system brought the people even closer. Todar Mal's elaborate land revenue system, called zabti, was never applied in Bengal but ambitious local Muslims and Hindus, of both of whom the mother tongue was Bengali, were now forced to learn Persian to get a share in the extended secretarial work of the Mughal provincial administration.

In Bengal the state revenue was collected through middlemen. Unlike the sultans of Bengal, the Mughal subahdars had no occasion to learn Bengali, and hence the agents of local zamindars at the courts of subahdars had to be masters of Persian. Thus Persian culture infiltrated from the subahdar's court to that of the Rajas and zamindars of Bengal. During the early period of Mughal rule, the higher posts in the revenue, accounts and secretarial departments were reserved for Muslims and Hindus from Upper India, such as the Khatris from the Panjab and Agra and Lalas from the U.P. From the time of Murshid Quli Khan the policy was abandoned; he established a local dynasty, and the high posts also passed into the hands of local Hindus and Muslims; these people were well-versed in Persian. Thus Persian spread in Bengali Hindu society no less than among the Muslims. Thus Islam, which came to Bengal a few hundred years after its birth, influenced the people and the society of this county very deeply. [Abdul Karim]
BANGLAPEDIA: Islam (in Bengal)
 
Last edited:
Lets cut the humor part of gobblish.. Is this article worth a reading? It even gone as far as calling Muslim colonisation. Just give your thought..

Janab,

YOU tell me how you want me to respond, and I will respond in that way.

Warm regards,
 
Janab,

YOU tell me how you want me to respond, and I will respond in that way.

Warm regards,

Well, even I was not aware of the mass migration that eastwatch was trying to advocate long before this thread started. Now with so much of talk it made me inquisitive about this subject matter.
You made a suggestion along with me that buddhist was the major factor of conversion, eastwatch suggested it was the mass settlement. Now I found some article which also backs both the theory. Do we have a conclusion here. Or you just discredit those article that I posted?

Regards..

PS: your gobblish story was awesome.. I think Goebbels bhoot were awken by that.. LOL
 
PART- ONE
@ What to talk about our liberation war. It is true that we fought against Pakistan and India helped us in this due to her own interest and we got our indepenfence. But the question is are we save at all from the security aspects. Apperently, India is our friend but in the true sense if we critically analysis her activities for the last 40 years what we see some of her friendly activities are summarised below:

1. Just after the surrender of Pakistani Army on 16 December 1971, the real faces of Indian came out. Though their stay was short lived (Hardly 2 months) but within this time "Kella Fate". They not only took the Pakistani armament but they took what ever they found. They took most of the projector machines of cinema hall(shame), they took even the office furnitures of offices and schools. Once our brave freedom fighter saw this they tried to stopped them and even fired upon. The Maj(Maj Jallil) was caught and taken back to India. Soon he came back to Bangladesh but was court Marshalled by the own govt.

2. It is true that India helped us in re-constructing our infra-structure. Though time and again the blame was given to Pakistan. One has to realise that it was a comventional war. In time of war who bothers for keeping the breezes intact. These were destroyed basing on the tactical plan.

3. Soon after our independence, our jute market was quickly taken over by India and the International Jute office was established at India(Bombay) though we were the largest jute producing country at that moment. Since our jute industies were closed soon our raw jutes were smuggled to India and our jute dependent fragile economy was doomed. Many of our jute godowns were burned and it was alleged that RAW had an hand on it.

4. Within a short span of time many Bangldeshi fake notes were made in India and supplied inside Bangladesh. So our economy was gone.

5. We made a border pact(1974) with India and gave India a small disputed land called Berubari in exchange of "Tin Begha Corridor" but India did not gave that to Bangladesh. We quickly ratified in our Parliament but India did not rather some one made a writ to High Court which is still hanging. ( To be continued)
 
Last edited:
Well, even I was not aware of the mass migration that eastwatch was trying to advocate long before this thread started. Now with so much of talk it made me inquisitive about this subject matter.
You made a suggestion along with me that buddhist was the major factor of conversion, eastwatch suggested it was the mass settlement. Now I found some article which also backs both the theory. Do we have a conclusion here. Or you just discredit those article that I posted?

Regards..

PS: your gobblish story was awesome.. I think Goebbels bhoot were awken by that.. LOL

I see your point, that our positions should not be fixed in the case of new evidence that comes to light, and agree with it.

I also see your point that having started from the premise that the bulk of the Bangla population, specifically the Muslim population, was converted from the earlier Buddhist and lower caste Hindu population (largely so, without implying that no upper caste Hindus were converted, which we know to be untrue from the examples of other places in India), and having found additional evidence which is frankly ambivalent, you find yourself evaluating and assessing this with an open mind.

My position is this: it seems to me that you may have found the new evidence overwhelming, and find that the theory of the bulk of Muslims being migrants far more probable than the theory of their having been autochthones.

This is borne out by your concluding statement, do we have a conclusion here, or does Joe simply discredit the articles?

That is where the rub is. My opinion should not matter. If you have come to a conclusion, that is surely good enough for you. Why should we drag the controversy further, indeed, why should we take it to the stage where you fear that the alternatives are between a conclusion or Joe discrediting the articles?

Joe really wants to arrive at the probable truth. Joe is also aware of the problems at arriving at this truth.

We do not have the equipment, and I do not have the time to do the fascinating exercise that has been done on a large-scale basis, that is, to compare the population when we started this period of massive and violent interactions between the existing residents of the lands in question and the raiding bands which slowly became immigrants more than armies of invaders. Or perhaps it is better conceptualised as armies of invaders followed closely by immigrants.

I have reason to believe - remembering first of all that the circumstances outlined in the extracts are broadly known to me - that the outlines have to be interpreted, and that the interpretations point in a certain direction.

Just to keep the thing in context, an autobiographical note may be in order: the history degree in the university that we studied the subject required study of Indian history in three sections, Ancient, Mediaeval and Modern Indian history. The syllabus emphasised the history of Bengal: "with particular reference to the history of Bengal." Right through our first two years in college, we used the Dhaka Univeristy History of Bengal as our Bible. In those days, this was available only as an ancient collection of volumes; the college History Seminar, as befitting a History Seminar in a college that educated the first president of two different countries, had a set, and as Seminar Secretary, I naturally had access and wallowed in it. It was delectable; all the references that were hinted at in larger histories with a wider scope were spelt out in great detail here.

To be honest, comparing this with sources such as Wikipedia would be - please forgive my language - a comparison of "Chandradesh" with "Paschat-bhag".

What I wrote earlier was with full knowledge of the information regarding immigration that had been elaborated there. The three articles presented by you are interesting reading, but are obviously not academic in their scope. Under the circumstances, it would not be difficult to point out that their contents could be interpreted in the same direction that i had taken, or could be discarded because they were tangential to the discussion. The question is: should I? If in your view, it is already a question of a conclusion or of discrediting these articles that you have posted, it then becomes a matter of polemic. Now in a strictly academic context, it might have been necessary to press home the point; in the columns of PDF, it hardly seems worth it. It hardly seems worth it to trample on someone's conclusions in order to arrive at an austere truth.

In one simple sentence, being familiar with the background material and having considered it earlier in this discussion, it would be possible for me to represent the facts that you have posted in terms that would favour a view that the bulk of Muslims in east India were converts, not migrants, but it does not seem worth the effort - some effort is involved - if your mind is already made up.

That is what i had meant by my earlier question, and I hope that through this elaborate explanation, it has been possible to convey to you that my motto in this present discussion is not the truth at all costs.

Regards,
 
4. Within a short span of time many Bangldeshi fake notes were made in India and supplied inside Bangladesh. So our economy was gone.

Can you explain that story more? When it was and how.
 
PART- ONE
@ What to talk about our liberation war. It is true that we fought against Pakistan and India helped us in this due to her own interest and we got our indepenfence. But the question is are we save at all from the security aspects. Apperently, India is our friend but in the true sense if we critically analysis her activities for the last 40 years what we see some of her friendly activities are summarised below:

1. Just after the surrender of Pakistani Army on 16 December 1971, the real faces of Indian came out. Though their stay was short lived (Hardly 2 months) but within this time "Kella Fate". They not only took the Pakistani armament but they took what ever they found. They took most of the projector machines of cinema hall(shame), they took even the office furnitures of offices and schools. Once our brave freedom fighter saw this they tried to stopped them and even fired upon. The Maj(Maj Jallil) was caught and taken back to India. Soon he came back to Bangladesh but was court Marshalled by the own govt.

2. It is true that India helped us in re-constructing our infra-structure. Though time and again the blame was given to Pakistan. One has to realise that it was a comventional. In time of war who bothers for keeping the breezes intact. These were destroyed basing on the tactical plan.

3. Soon after our independence, our jute market was quickly taken over by India and the International Jute office was established at India(Bombay) though we were the largest jute producing country at that moment. Since our jute industries were closed soon our raw jutes were smuggled to India and our jute dependent fragile economy was doomed. Many of our jute godowns were burned and it was alleged that RAW had an hand.

4. Within a short span of time many Bangldeshi fake notes were made in India and supplied inside Bangladesh. So our economy was gone.

5. We made a border pact(1974) with India and gave India a small disputed land called Berubari in exchange of "Tin Begha Corridor" but India did not gave that to Bangladesh. We quickly ratied in our Parliament India did not rather some one made a writ to High Court which is still hanging. ( To be continued):welcome:
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Md Akmal View Post
4. Within a short span of time many Bangldeshi fake notes were made in India and supplied inside Bangladesh. So our economy was gone.
Can you explain that story more? When it was and how.


@ Since we did not had "Takshal" in our country so initially all papers notes were printed from India officially. But just within three months fake notes were abundance in Bangladesh and it continued from 1972 to 1974. Then the case was handled by Mujib himself and printing of currency notes were stopped from India and the contract was given to UK. We the Bangldeshi people have really gone through very hardship life in those days. And today we can proudly say that near about 10 million Bangladeshi people are working abroud and our army is much more strong and at present we are second largest peace keeping contributor in UN Forces. Akmal
 
Leaving aside the trifles like stealing projectors(?) and seizing PA's arms, there is only two points I found worth debunking --

Soon after our independence, our jute market was quickly taken over by India and the International Jute office was established at India(Bombay) though we were the largest jute producing country at that moment. Since our jute industries were closed soon our raw jutes were smuggled to India and our jute dependent fragile economy was doomed. Many of our jute godowns were burned and it was alleged that RAW had an hand.

Jute industry, both in West Bengal and BD died because there is no demand for Jute based product anymore. Reason being the the advent of more economical and handy polythene. Jute industry used to be backbone of West Bengal's economy as well. And also India is the largest jute growing country, not Bangladesh, so it's normal to assume the office will be established in India. Although it should have been established in Calcutta, not Bombay. But our state govt's weird 'playing victim' policy didn't help.

We made a border pact(1974) with India and gave India a small disputed land called Berubari in exchange of "Tin Begha Corridor" but India did not gave that to Bangladesh. We quickly ratied in our Parliament India did not rather some one made a writ to High Court which is still hanging.

Tin Bigha corridor was formally transferred to Bangladesh on June 26, 1992.
 
Last edited:
Leaving aside the trifles like stealing projectors(?) and seizing PA's arms, there is only two points I found worth debunking --


And the breezes? You forgot the breezes.

It was interesting to see the re-introduction of urban legends put out by Bangabandhu's murderers to justify their actions. That clears up what is going on.
 
In order to understand the process of Muslim immigration from north India and beyond from Afghanistan and central asia it is necessary to read many contemporary history books written in Persian by the Muslim Historians. It is also necessary to read the history books written by many English elites who loved history, lived in this country for tens of years, studied Persian and then wrote history books of old Muslim times.

There were another group of Hindu Bangali Historians who also loved history. They also contributed to this efforts enormously. These Hindu Historians are mostly responsible to patch up many forgotten chapters of muslim history by collecting many lost links. Under these Hindu Historians, many truths about muslim dynasties and their non-Bangali foreign retinues came to be known during the British era.

No body really cares who has the origin from where. I have found an Afghan lady who was very proud of her Indian origin. So, it is not that Afghan bloods should make Muslim Bangali or other Indians unnecessarily proud. But, one can say, with good reasons, that these Afghans had dominated the entire politics of western, central and eastern India (Sube Bangal) during muslim period.

Moreover, no blood line remains intact in a muslim society. Because, Islam does not allow a caste system, so, there have always been intermarriages with other stocks of people when these people settled in Hindustan/Bengal. This is why muslims living in Delhi are known just as Delhiwala. Similarly some are Biharis or Bangalis.

I will give only one example how the Afghans had dominated the politics of Hindustan. Take the case of Mughal emperor Babar. He was from the present-day Uzbhekistan. But, after being deprived of his rightful throne of Samarkand by his uncle, he moved towards Kabul, and somehow managed to capture it.

When he marched towards Delhi in 1526, his army was consisted mostly of Pathans. But, on the other side, his adversary was a Pathan Sultan himself. Sultan Ibrahim Lodi of Delhi was also supported mainly by the descendents of those Pathans who have immigrated to Hindustan when one of their tribal Chief Bahlul Lodi captured the throne of Delhi sometime in 1450s and became the 1st Pathan Sultan of Hindustan minus Bengal.

By the way, one can see that these north Indian Pathans remained no more pure-blooded, because they had been living in north Hindustan for more than 70 years. They had become Hindustani just like their many Hindu or Muslim predecessors who had immigrated to Hindustan before them.

So, what happened to these Hindustani Pathans after they were defeated in the 1st Battle of Panipath at the hands of Baber? They, along with their families, dependents and retinues, fled towards east to the independent Sultanate of Bengal, and sought the protection of Sultan Nasrat Shah. A daughter of slain Sultan Ibrahim Lodi was married by her uncle Mahmud Lodi to the Sultan of Bengal to forge a strong bond so as the Sultan grants them land and protection in Bengal. These people were duly settled in Bengal, and later played a very strong role in the politics of both north India and Bengal.

There are many many similar historical events that contributed to the swelling of ranks of muslims in Bengal, and at the same time reduced the muslim population in the central India including that of Delhi. Since Bihar was a parched land, produced nothing but mountain stone chips, so, the PERSECUTED muslims of north Indian origin naturally prefered to settle in the fertile lands in the mainland Bengal.

People who really love history, may be requested to read the History books I am listing below. There are certainly many other books that also are to be studied to understand the political process that contributed to immigration to Bengal. Thing is, there were invasions always from the west and the groups of muslims who supported the vanquished Delhi muslim govt had to flee to Bengal for fear of being punished by death. These people had never again left Bengal, except one time under the leadership of Sher Shah.

There was a proverb that said, "Bengal is a cursed hell with full of wealth." Why it was called a hell? It was because the humidity here was torturing for the northern muslims. There was another proverb, that said, "There are thousand roads that lead to Bengal, but none to get out." The meaning is people would not find a way to move out of Bengal once they were in.

LIST OF HISTORY BOOKS

1) Babur's Memoire: translation by Beveridge. It also says about Baber's encounter with Bengal army at the bank of river Ghrghara, west of Bihar. Baber was worried that Bengal would attack Delhi with the help of the north Indian muslims who have received shelters in Bengal.

2) Tarikh-i-Firuzshahi:

3) Tarikh-i-salatin-Afghana: Ahmed Yadgar. Translation by Elliot

4) Taz-ul-Nasiri: Minhaj-us-Siraj. English and Bangla translations are available

5) Tabakat-i-Nasiri: Hassan Nizami. translation by H.M. Dowson

6) Memoirs of Gour and Pandua: Abid Ali Khan

7) Akbarnama: Abul Fazal Alami, translated books are available

8) Makhzan-i-Afghana: Niamatullah, translation by Elliot

9) Padshahnama: Abdul Hamid lahori, translated books are available

10) Ain-i-Abari: by Abul Fazal, Translation available

11) Riaz-us-Salatin:

12) Siere Mutakkherin: Golam Hossain Salim, an english translation by Prof. Dani has many footnotes that described the effect on the demography of muslims in Bengal.

13) Bahar-i-Stani Gaebi: Mirza Nathan or Mirza Ispahani, a mid-level Mughal army officer who was in Bengal with the Mughal army. He described how the mughals had allowed to settle their north Indian troops to the northern Bengal with their families and retinues, and how 30,000 of these troops rebelled against Akber when a new FARMAN ordered them to hand over their farm lands to the govt. There are many other elements.

14) Haqiqat-i-Musalman-i-Bangal: Khandker Fuzle Rubbi, translation availble. This important book tells how more than 40&#37; of Bengal farmland were distributed among foreign muslims who came to Bengal and sought land from the govt. Fuzle Rubbi was a Manager of Murshidabad Nawabi Estate. Here we can find clues why W. W. Hunter wrote in his book that during muslim period it was impossible for Bangali muslims to be poor, and in British time it has become impossible for them to remain rich.

15) Tabakat-i-Akbari:

16) Raja Todormal:

17) The Musalmans: W.W. Hunter

18) History of Bengal: Sir Jadunath Sarkar

19) Brihat Banga: Dinesh Chandra Sen

20) Bangalar Itihash: Rakhaldash Bannerji

21) History of Bengal: Charles Stewart

22) Census Report of India: 1880 1nd 1890, yr may be different

23) Caste Dynamics of Bengali Hindu: ------- Sharma

24) The Last Pathan Hero of Bengal: Dr. Professor Bhattashali of Dhaka University

25) Gaur Kahini: Shailendranath. Many tiny details about the time in 1570s when the last Pathan Sultan of Bengal was killed by the Mughals. Also about all the Pathan muslim Chieftains jointly called Baro Bhuyian.

I think, Asiatic Society in Calcutta has all and many other relevant books. Interested persons may seek to satisfy their appetite for knowledge and truth by reading these books and then analyzing them.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom