kalu_miah
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2009
- Messages
- 6,475
- Reaction score
- 17
- Country
- Location
BANGLAPEDIA: Faraizi Movement
Faraizi Movement nineteenth century religious reform movement launched by haji shariatullah. The term Faraizi is derived from 'farz' meaning obligatory duties enjoined by Allah. The Faraizis are, therefore, those who aim at enforcing the obligatory religious duties. The exponent of the movement, Haji Shariatullah, however, interpreted the term in a broader sense to include all religious duties enjoined by the quran as well as by the Sunnah of the Prophet (Sm).
Shariatullah made a pilgrimage to Makkah, stayed there for 20 years and studied religious doctrines under Shaikh Tahir Sombal, an authority of Hanafi School. Returning home he launched a movement to make the Bengal Muslims follow the true canons of Islam. For historical reasons the Muslims of Bengal had been following many indigenous customs, rituals and ceremonies which were far from the principles of Islam. Most Bengal Muslims did not even follow the fundamentals of Islam.
Shariutullah vowed to bring the Bengal Muslims to the true path of Islam. He laid utmost emphasis on the five fundamentals of Islam, insisted on the complete acceptance and strict observation of pure monotheism and condemned all deviations from the original doctrines as shirk (polytheism) and bid'at (sinful innovation). Numerous rites and ceremonies connected with birth, marriage and death such asChuttee, Puttee, Chilla, Shabgasht procession, Fatihah, Milad and Urswere forbidden. Saint-worship, showing undue reverence to the Pir, raising of Taziah during the Muharram were also declared shirk. He gave stress on justice, social equality, and the universal brotherhood of Muslims.
Haji Shariatullah regarded British rule in Bengal as injurious to the religious life of the Muslims. In pursuance of the Hanafi law he opined that the absence of a lawfully appointed Muslim caliph or representative administrator in Bengal deprived the Muslims of the privilege of holding congregational prayers. To the Faraizis, Friday congregation was unjustified in a non-Muslim stale like Bengal.
The Faraizi movement spread with extraordinary rapidity in the districts of Dhaka, Faridpur, Bakerganj, Mymensingh, Tippera (Comilla), Chittagong and Noakhali as well as to the province of Assam. The movement, however, gained the greatest momentum in those places where the Muslim peasantry were depressed under the oppressive domination of Hindu zamindars and European indigo planters.
Many Muslims did not accept the Faraizi doctrine and they tried to resist their activities with the help of zamindars. Thus, the landlords of Dhaka secured the expulsion of Shariatullah by the police in 1831 from Ramnagar or Nayabari where he had set up his propaganda centre. Through continuous involvement with the Hindu landlords and European indigo planters, the movement gradually developed into a socio-economic programme which became a dominant feature of the Faraizi movement under Shariutuallah's son dudu miyan and his successors.
The landlords levied many abwabs over and above normal rent and such abwabs were illegal in the eyes of law. Many abwabs were of religious nature, such as, cesses on Kali Puja, Durga Puja etc. Shariatullah objected to this practice and directed his disciples not to pay these illegal cesses to the landlords. The landlords had even imposed ban on the slaughter of cow, especially on the occasion of Eid-ul Azha. The Farizis ordered their peasant followers not to adhere to such a ban. All these contributed to strained relations between the Faraizies and the landlords who were almost all Hindus.
The offended landlords launched a propaganda campaign with the British officials, implicating the Faraizis with rebellious mood. In 1837, they accused Shariatullah of attempting to set up a kingdom of his own like that of titu mir. They also brought numerous lawsuits against the Faraizis in which they gained active co-operation of the European indigo planters. Shariatullah was more than once in the custody of the police for allegedly occasioning agrarian disturbances in Faridpur.
On the death of Haji Shariatullah in 1840 his only son Muhsinuddin Ahmad alias Dudu Miyan was acclaimed the head of the Faraizi movement. It was under his leadership that the Faraizi movement assumed agrarian character. He organised the oppressed peasantry against the oppressive landlords. In retaliation, the landlords and indigo planters tried to contain Dudu Miyan by instituting false cases against him. But he became so popular with the peasantry that in the cases, courts seldom found a witness against Dudu.
The initial victories of Dudu Miyan captured the imagination of the masses and his prestige rose high in their esteem. These incidents also gave added impetus to the spread of the Faraizi movement and drew to its fold not only numerous Muslims who so far stood aloof but also the Hindus and native Christians who sought Dudu Miyan's protection against the oppressive landlords.
Dudu Miyan died in 1862 and before his death he had appointed a board of guardians to look after his minor sons, Ghiyasuddin Haydar and Abdul Gafur alias Naya Miyan who succeeded him successively. The board, with great difficulty, kept the dwindling movement from falling to pieces. It was not until Naya Miyan attained maturity that it regained some of its lost strength. nabinchandra sen, the then sub-divisional officer of Madaripur, thought it prudent to enter into an alliance of mutual help with the Faraizi leaders, who, in their turn, showed a spirit of co-operation towards the government.
On the death of Naya Miyan in 1884, the third and the youngest son of Dudu Miyan, Syeduddin Ahmad was acclaimed leader by the Faraizis. During his time, the conflict of the Faraizis with the Taiyunis, another reformist group reached the climax and religious debates between the two schools had become a common place occurrence in Eastern Bengal. He was bestowed the title of Khan Bahadur by the government. In 1905, on the question of the partition of Bengal, he lent support to Nawab Salimullah in favour of partition, but he died in 1906.
Khan Bahadur Syeduddin was succeeded by his eldest son Rashiduddin Ahmad alias Badshah Miyan. During the early years of his leadership, Badshah Miyan maintained the policy of co-operation towards the government. But the annulment of the partition of Bengal made him anti-British and he took part in the khilafat and non-cooperationMovements. Soon after the establishment of Pakistan he summoned a conference of the Faraizis at Narayanganj and declared Pakistan as Dar-ul-Islam and gave permission to his followers to hold the congregational prayers of Jum'ah and Eid.
james wise testifies that the Panchayets of Eastern Bengal exercised great influence on the people and in Faraizi villages, it was exceedingly rare that any case of violence or assault committed within the area found its way to the regular courts. According to him Dudu Miyan settled disputes, administered summary justice and punished any Hindu, Muslim or Christian who dared to bring a suit for recovery of debt in the adjoining Munsif's Court instead of referring the case to his arbitration.
[Muin-ud-Din Ahmed Khan]
A great son of Faridpur, but look at what we have today with the Gopali's.
BANGLAPEDIA: Shariatullah, Haji
Shariatullah, Haji (1781-1840) was an eminent Islamic reformer of Bangladesh. The district of Shariatpur is named after him. He was born in 1781 in a petty Talukdar family at the village Shamail under the then Madaripur sub-division of greater Faridpur district. He emigrated to Makkah in 1799, returned to Bangladesh in 1818 and started an Islamic revivalist reform movement, akin to the contemporary Arabian Wahhabism. The movement he started came to be popularly known as the faraizi movement.
His reform movement was basically religious; but it touched upon various other aspects of the society. He may be characterised as an Islamic revivalist, a social reformer and a populist peasant leader. These traits were symptomatic of the devastating malaise which had taken hold of the people of Bengal who were then smarting under the unhampered misrule, loot and plunder of the Englisheast india company.
Haji Shariatullah
While going to the holy Makkah in 1799 at the age of 18, he left behind a demurred, anguished, thrown over, unprotected people bemoaning at the suppression and repression of the indigo planters who lorded over them. The planters had by the side of them an equally outlandish corporation of marwaris who purchased large-scale zamindari estates under the terms and conditions of the permanent settlement of 1793. A third group of agents, popularly called gomastas of the private businesses of the officers of the East India Company, who were also mainly Marwaris and their Bengali associates, took under their monopoly control river ports and markets all over the country. The combined perpetration of violence and extortion turned the people into serfs and slaves of the type of Medieval Europe; the violent social change was termed by the contemporary annual report of the English Police Commissioner as a 'loathsome revolution'.
When Shariatullah returned home in 1818, devoutly educated in religious learning and Arabic literature, schooled under the supervision of the great Islamic theologians of the time at Makkah with unbroken scholarships for nearly two decades, he entertained high hopes for a good and respectable career. His stay at Arabia from 1799 to 1818 coincided with the rise and fall of the Saudi power on the top of the explosive Mawahhidun revolution miscalled Wahhabism of Arabia. The Saudi power was suppressed by the Egyptian expedition under Khedive Muhammad Ali's son Ibrahim Pasha, but the revolutionary religious spirit of Islamic revivalism that set the Arab's heart boiling, remained throbbing and afresh. Shariatullah came back with a burning sparkle of the same revivalist fire, which he tried to introduce in Bangladesh.
But the revivalism in the Arabian setting, which contemplated to re-implement the pristine doctrines of Islam that were current in the first three generations, were, in view of the polytheistic background of pre-Islamic Arab society, negatively anti-polytheistic. Whereas, since 13th century AD, Islam was propagated in Bangladesh by the Sufimissionary activists who primarily emphasized on holding the iman(faith) at heart was actuated by a positive attitude. This anomaly in attitudes has been the root cause of the so-called Wahhabi-Sunnimisunderstanding and quarrel.
In 1818, Haji Shariatullah's mission proved unsuccessful. His preaching of pure doctrines failed to attract audience. He, thereupon, went back to Makkah to seek advice from his teachers. Taher Sombal, his teacher, initiated him into the Qadiriyah Tariqah of Sufism and sent him back to Bangladesh in 1820 with spiritual blessings. The new Sufielement with a call to hold the iman in the qalb (heart) worked like a magnet. This time, his reform movement, which came to be known as the Faraizi, spread far and wide and became popular also in the neighbouring areas of greater Dhaka, Barisal and Comilla districts during the lifetime of the Haji.
He emphasized on holding correct faith in the Tawhid (Unity of Allah) and on the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be on him) as well as on abstaining strictly from associating any false gods and goddesses with Him (shirk). Secondly, he laid extraordinary emphasis on performing the compulsory religious duties of Islam, by which he meant all necessary and mandatory duties, such as five times daily prayers (salat), payment of poverty alleviation religious taxes (zakat), fasting in the mouth of Ramadan (saum) and performance ofHajj, which are Faraiz (compulsory duties) and hence the movement was known as Faraizi. Besides, he emphasized on the unity and brotherhood of the Muslims and equality of mankind; he condemned caste discrimination, which had contaminated the Muslim society. He vehemently condemned numerous un-Islamic customs, usage and polytheistic accretions that had crept into the Muslim society by contagion of the practices of the non-Muslim neighbours. Following the Wahhabi reforms of Arabia, he also condemned the performance ofFatiha, Urs and Milad, which were and still are popular social usage of the Muslims of the sub-continent, and tried to abolish them by stigmatising them as bid'at (irreligious and sinful innovations). This evoked conservative reaction against his movement from the Muslim society around 1831 that resulted into a riot at Nayabari in the district of Dhaka.
Following the classical doctrines of the Muslim legal experts as noted down in Hedaya, he declared British India as a Dar- al- harb (an enemy state); in view of the inability to wage a war of freedom against the occupation power, he gave the lesser verdict that the absence of Muslim administration deprived the Muslims of Bangladesh from holding the congregational prayers of Juma' and Eids. This evoked vehement reaction of the conservative Ulama who continued to perform these prayers fearing lest their abolition should disunite, deharmonise and eventually demolish the Muslim society. His contemporary religious preacher Maulana Karamat Ali jaunpuri vehemently opposed him on this point and condemned him as the Khariji of Bengal.
In the socio-economic field, following the injunctions of the Quran to the effect that there is nothing due to man except the fruits of his own strivings, he declared that zamindars created under the Permanent Settlement had no right on the agricultural crops produced by the tillers of the land. He instructed his followers not to participate in the Puja festivities of the polytheistic Hindu neighbours, but also not to pay any crop-levy imposed on them by the zamindars, besides the legal revenues fixed by the rent-roll of the government. This policy aroused the opposition of the newly created Hindu landlords against his movement. They shrewdly combined their patronising forces with the conservative Muslim peasantry and also took into their arms the forces of the Indigo Planters and their combined forces of opposition gradually came to a loggerhead about the year 1840, when he died and was succeeded by his son dudu miyan. [Muin-ud-Din Ahmad Khan]
Bibliography Muin-ud-Din Ahmad Khan, History of the Fara'idi Movement, Dhaka, 1984; Munshi Abdul Halim, (MS) Haji Shariatullah (Bengali), ASB Collection, Dhaka; Durr-i-Muhammad, Faraizi Puthi in Bengali, ASB Collection, Dhaka.
Faraizi Movement nineteenth century religious reform movement launched by haji shariatullah. The term Faraizi is derived from 'farz' meaning obligatory duties enjoined by Allah. The Faraizis are, therefore, those who aim at enforcing the obligatory religious duties. The exponent of the movement, Haji Shariatullah, however, interpreted the term in a broader sense to include all religious duties enjoined by the quran as well as by the Sunnah of the Prophet (Sm).
Shariatullah made a pilgrimage to Makkah, stayed there for 20 years and studied religious doctrines under Shaikh Tahir Sombal, an authority of Hanafi School. Returning home he launched a movement to make the Bengal Muslims follow the true canons of Islam. For historical reasons the Muslims of Bengal had been following many indigenous customs, rituals and ceremonies which were far from the principles of Islam. Most Bengal Muslims did not even follow the fundamentals of Islam.
Shariutullah vowed to bring the Bengal Muslims to the true path of Islam. He laid utmost emphasis on the five fundamentals of Islam, insisted on the complete acceptance and strict observation of pure monotheism and condemned all deviations from the original doctrines as shirk (polytheism) and bid'at (sinful innovation). Numerous rites and ceremonies connected with birth, marriage and death such asChuttee, Puttee, Chilla, Shabgasht procession, Fatihah, Milad and Urswere forbidden. Saint-worship, showing undue reverence to the Pir, raising of Taziah during the Muharram were also declared shirk. He gave stress on justice, social equality, and the universal brotherhood of Muslims.
Haji Shariatullah regarded British rule in Bengal as injurious to the religious life of the Muslims. In pursuance of the Hanafi law he opined that the absence of a lawfully appointed Muslim caliph or representative administrator in Bengal deprived the Muslims of the privilege of holding congregational prayers. To the Faraizis, Friday congregation was unjustified in a non-Muslim stale like Bengal.
The Faraizi movement spread with extraordinary rapidity in the districts of Dhaka, Faridpur, Bakerganj, Mymensingh, Tippera (Comilla), Chittagong and Noakhali as well as to the province of Assam. The movement, however, gained the greatest momentum in those places where the Muslim peasantry were depressed under the oppressive domination of Hindu zamindars and European indigo planters.
Many Muslims did not accept the Faraizi doctrine and they tried to resist their activities with the help of zamindars. Thus, the landlords of Dhaka secured the expulsion of Shariatullah by the police in 1831 from Ramnagar or Nayabari where he had set up his propaganda centre. Through continuous involvement with the Hindu landlords and European indigo planters, the movement gradually developed into a socio-economic programme which became a dominant feature of the Faraizi movement under Shariutuallah's son dudu miyan and his successors.
The landlords levied many abwabs over and above normal rent and such abwabs were illegal in the eyes of law. Many abwabs were of religious nature, such as, cesses on Kali Puja, Durga Puja etc. Shariatullah objected to this practice and directed his disciples not to pay these illegal cesses to the landlords. The landlords had even imposed ban on the slaughter of cow, especially on the occasion of Eid-ul Azha. The Farizis ordered their peasant followers not to adhere to such a ban. All these contributed to strained relations between the Faraizies and the landlords who were almost all Hindus.
The offended landlords launched a propaganda campaign with the British officials, implicating the Faraizis with rebellious mood. In 1837, they accused Shariatullah of attempting to set up a kingdom of his own like that of titu mir. They also brought numerous lawsuits against the Faraizis in which they gained active co-operation of the European indigo planters. Shariatullah was more than once in the custody of the police for allegedly occasioning agrarian disturbances in Faridpur.
On the death of Haji Shariatullah in 1840 his only son Muhsinuddin Ahmad alias Dudu Miyan was acclaimed the head of the Faraizi movement. It was under his leadership that the Faraizi movement assumed agrarian character. He organised the oppressed peasantry against the oppressive landlords. In retaliation, the landlords and indigo planters tried to contain Dudu Miyan by instituting false cases against him. But he became so popular with the peasantry that in the cases, courts seldom found a witness against Dudu.
The initial victories of Dudu Miyan captured the imagination of the masses and his prestige rose high in their esteem. These incidents also gave added impetus to the spread of the Faraizi movement and drew to its fold not only numerous Muslims who so far stood aloof but also the Hindus and native Christians who sought Dudu Miyan's protection against the oppressive landlords.
Dudu Miyan died in 1862 and before his death he had appointed a board of guardians to look after his minor sons, Ghiyasuddin Haydar and Abdul Gafur alias Naya Miyan who succeeded him successively. The board, with great difficulty, kept the dwindling movement from falling to pieces. It was not until Naya Miyan attained maturity that it regained some of its lost strength. nabinchandra sen, the then sub-divisional officer of Madaripur, thought it prudent to enter into an alliance of mutual help with the Faraizi leaders, who, in their turn, showed a spirit of co-operation towards the government.
On the death of Naya Miyan in 1884, the third and the youngest son of Dudu Miyan, Syeduddin Ahmad was acclaimed leader by the Faraizis. During his time, the conflict of the Faraizis with the Taiyunis, another reformist group reached the climax and religious debates between the two schools had become a common place occurrence in Eastern Bengal. He was bestowed the title of Khan Bahadur by the government. In 1905, on the question of the partition of Bengal, he lent support to Nawab Salimullah in favour of partition, but he died in 1906.
Khan Bahadur Syeduddin was succeeded by his eldest son Rashiduddin Ahmad alias Badshah Miyan. During the early years of his leadership, Badshah Miyan maintained the policy of co-operation towards the government. But the annulment of the partition of Bengal made him anti-British and he took part in the khilafat and non-cooperationMovements. Soon after the establishment of Pakistan he summoned a conference of the Faraizis at Narayanganj and declared Pakistan as Dar-ul-Islam and gave permission to his followers to hold the congregational prayers of Jum'ah and Eid.
james wise testifies that the Panchayets of Eastern Bengal exercised great influence on the people and in Faraizi villages, it was exceedingly rare that any case of violence or assault committed within the area found its way to the regular courts. According to him Dudu Miyan settled disputes, administered summary justice and punished any Hindu, Muslim or Christian who dared to bring a suit for recovery of debt in the adjoining Munsif's Court instead of referring the case to his arbitration.
[Muin-ud-Din Ahmed Khan]
A great son of Faridpur, but look at what we have today with the Gopali's.
BANGLAPEDIA: Shariatullah, Haji
Shariatullah, Haji (1781-1840) was an eminent Islamic reformer of Bangladesh. The district of Shariatpur is named after him. He was born in 1781 in a petty Talukdar family at the village Shamail under the then Madaripur sub-division of greater Faridpur district. He emigrated to Makkah in 1799, returned to Bangladesh in 1818 and started an Islamic revivalist reform movement, akin to the contemporary Arabian Wahhabism. The movement he started came to be popularly known as the faraizi movement.
His reform movement was basically religious; but it touched upon various other aspects of the society. He may be characterised as an Islamic revivalist, a social reformer and a populist peasant leader. These traits were symptomatic of the devastating malaise which had taken hold of the people of Bengal who were then smarting under the unhampered misrule, loot and plunder of the Englisheast india company.
Haji Shariatullah
While going to the holy Makkah in 1799 at the age of 18, he left behind a demurred, anguished, thrown over, unprotected people bemoaning at the suppression and repression of the indigo planters who lorded over them. The planters had by the side of them an equally outlandish corporation of marwaris who purchased large-scale zamindari estates under the terms and conditions of the permanent settlement of 1793. A third group of agents, popularly called gomastas of the private businesses of the officers of the East India Company, who were also mainly Marwaris and their Bengali associates, took under their monopoly control river ports and markets all over the country. The combined perpetration of violence and extortion turned the people into serfs and slaves of the type of Medieval Europe; the violent social change was termed by the contemporary annual report of the English Police Commissioner as a 'loathsome revolution'.
When Shariatullah returned home in 1818, devoutly educated in religious learning and Arabic literature, schooled under the supervision of the great Islamic theologians of the time at Makkah with unbroken scholarships for nearly two decades, he entertained high hopes for a good and respectable career. His stay at Arabia from 1799 to 1818 coincided with the rise and fall of the Saudi power on the top of the explosive Mawahhidun revolution miscalled Wahhabism of Arabia. The Saudi power was suppressed by the Egyptian expedition under Khedive Muhammad Ali's son Ibrahim Pasha, but the revolutionary religious spirit of Islamic revivalism that set the Arab's heart boiling, remained throbbing and afresh. Shariatullah came back with a burning sparkle of the same revivalist fire, which he tried to introduce in Bangladesh.
But the revivalism in the Arabian setting, which contemplated to re-implement the pristine doctrines of Islam that were current in the first three generations, were, in view of the polytheistic background of pre-Islamic Arab society, negatively anti-polytheistic. Whereas, since 13th century AD, Islam was propagated in Bangladesh by the Sufimissionary activists who primarily emphasized on holding the iman(faith) at heart was actuated by a positive attitude. This anomaly in attitudes has been the root cause of the so-called Wahhabi-Sunnimisunderstanding and quarrel.
In 1818, Haji Shariatullah's mission proved unsuccessful. His preaching of pure doctrines failed to attract audience. He, thereupon, went back to Makkah to seek advice from his teachers. Taher Sombal, his teacher, initiated him into the Qadiriyah Tariqah of Sufism and sent him back to Bangladesh in 1820 with spiritual blessings. The new Sufielement with a call to hold the iman in the qalb (heart) worked like a magnet. This time, his reform movement, which came to be known as the Faraizi, spread far and wide and became popular also in the neighbouring areas of greater Dhaka, Barisal and Comilla districts during the lifetime of the Haji.
He emphasized on holding correct faith in the Tawhid (Unity of Allah) and on the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be on him) as well as on abstaining strictly from associating any false gods and goddesses with Him (shirk). Secondly, he laid extraordinary emphasis on performing the compulsory religious duties of Islam, by which he meant all necessary and mandatory duties, such as five times daily prayers (salat), payment of poverty alleviation religious taxes (zakat), fasting in the mouth of Ramadan (saum) and performance ofHajj, which are Faraiz (compulsory duties) and hence the movement was known as Faraizi. Besides, he emphasized on the unity and brotherhood of the Muslims and equality of mankind; he condemned caste discrimination, which had contaminated the Muslim society. He vehemently condemned numerous un-Islamic customs, usage and polytheistic accretions that had crept into the Muslim society by contagion of the practices of the non-Muslim neighbours. Following the Wahhabi reforms of Arabia, he also condemned the performance ofFatiha, Urs and Milad, which were and still are popular social usage of the Muslims of the sub-continent, and tried to abolish them by stigmatising them as bid'at (irreligious and sinful innovations). This evoked conservative reaction against his movement from the Muslim society around 1831 that resulted into a riot at Nayabari in the district of Dhaka.
Following the classical doctrines of the Muslim legal experts as noted down in Hedaya, he declared British India as a Dar- al- harb (an enemy state); in view of the inability to wage a war of freedom against the occupation power, he gave the lesser verdict that the absence of Muslim administration deprived the Muslims of Bangladesh from holding the congregational prayers of Juma' and Eids. This evoked vehement reaction of the conservative Ulama who continued to perform these prayers fearing lest their abolition should disunite, deharmonise and eventually demolish the Muslim society. His contemporary religious preacher Maulana Karamat Ali jaunpuri vehemently opposed him on this point and condemned him as the Khariji of Bengal.
In the socio-economic field, following the injunctions of the Quran to the effect that there is nothing due to man except the fruits of his own strivings, he declared that zamindars created under the Permanent Settlement had no right on the agricultural crops produced by the tillers of the land. He instructed his followers not to participate in the Puja festivities of the polytheistic Hindu neighbours, but also not to pay any crop-levy imposed on them by the zamindars, besides the legal revenues fixed by the rent-roll of the government. This policy aroused the opposition of the newly created Hindu landlords against his movement. They shrewdly combined their patronising forces with the conservative Muslim peasantry and also took into their arms the forces of the Indigo Planters and their combined forces of opposition gradually came to a loggerhead about the year 1840, when he died and was succeeded by his son dudu miyan. [Muin-ud-Din Ahmad Khan]
Bibliography Muin-ud-Din Ahmad Khan, History of the Fara'idi Movement, Dhaka, 1984; Munshi Abdul Halim, (MS) Haji Shariatullah (Bengali), ASB Collection, Dhaka; Durr-i-Muhammad, Faraizi Puthi in Bengali, ASB Collection, Dhaka.
Last edited:
