How different a Bengali Muslim is from a Pakistani Muslim?

[Bindovi]

I read in PDF that Bengalis are way different from Pakistanis. I wonder how different are Bengalis compared to Pakistanis? Isn't Pakistan itself a multi ethnic country with several different cultures? Punjabi, Sindhi, Pashtun, Baloch, Tribal culture etc.

I see two differences..
1. Bangladeshis kept there country as one after 1971...but Pakistanis couldn't ....
2. Bangladeshis are little bit dark but intelligent enough to work with India ...but Pakistanis are little fair but no ....( a big NO)

 

[insight-out]

Hi,

Now if you dug in a little deeper and found out that those short and dark pakistanis are actually bangladeshis in disguise---then what are you thoughts going to be!!!!!!!!

Then I will continue digging deeper and find that they are humans, just like me. They would be as entitled to my respect as any tall and light-skinned person. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[asad71]

We Bihari Muslims still have Ashraf and Ajlaf system to maintain pure blood of Islamic conquerers. We fought for an Islamic nation and died for Fatherland of Pakistan there is the difference

1.Yes, Bengali Muslims are pure Muslims. There is no Atraf or Ashraf. No sectarianism. No tribalism or cast differentiation.
2. When Akbar had begun over fraternization with the Hindus, we had revolted responding to a fatwa issued by the Pir of Jaunpur. Our revolt continued till Aurangjeb declared Hinustan a Dar ul Islam. There had been innumerable revolts led by Sufis against the infidel English/British. But Western/Christian sources had blocked info on these. Titu Mir was not the only one. The base of power in terms of recruits and funds for Syed Ahmed Berlavi was Bengal - of which Bihar was a part then.

Which sect most Bangladeshi peopel follow? Braelvi or deobundi? I have been in there mosques and they seem to be like braelvi


Pure blood of conquers

This shit indian caste system really gave so much inferiority complex to many people that they started to claim something which they were not just to get approval/acceptance form others and to be part of elite.ruling class

There is no sectarian differentiation among us. However, many of our maulanas were educated in Deoband and therefore that influence remains - but mostly limited to the clerics.

 

[jamahir]

pakistan is closer to ME than us... its a fact mate..

closer by the distance between iran's border with pakistan and iran's borders with iraq and turkey.

closer by the distance between the shores of gwadar and the shores of the arabian peninsula.

that much closer and no more.

though the lower and left portion of iran covers the entire length of arabian peninsula and turkey respectively, civilizationally and culturally iran must be grouped with south asia and this like i said before is also recognized by the uno.

culturally majority of them(as punjab is most populous) are similar to Indians but genetically they will obviously have influence of all the region that surround them Its one of the most contested regions in history, many tribes passed via it and settled, it was on a famous trade route.
There is no need to reject this fact.

yes, that cannot be rejected, but like i said, the regions surrounding pakistan are south asia, central asia and china.

what some naive pakistani members and many pakistan citizens do is have a automatic emotional connection to "middle east" ( which really means the arab lands ) on account of islam, and this despite the gulfis not really liking desis and syria and iraq and the african arab states not having been politically and culturally connected with pakistan in a great way, except in the actions of the pakistani progressives.

Kerala has also got some minor ME influence(genetically), due to ancient trade route.

kerala has 2000+ years relations with west asia.

---------

but this thread should be closed... it has degenerated into idiotic nationalism, racism, slave-mindedness and support of monarchy.

 

[asad71]

closer by the distance between iran's border with pakistan and iran's borders with iraq and turkey.

closer by the distance between the shores of gwadar and the shores of the arabian peninsula.

that much closer and no more.

though the lower and left portion of iran covers the entire length of arabian peninsula and turkey respectively, civilizationally and culturally iran must be grouped with south asia and this like i said before is also recognized by the uno.



yes, that cannot be rejected, but like i said, the regions surrounding pakistan are south asia, central asia and china.

what some naive pakistani members and many pakistan citizens do is have a automatic emotional connection to "middle east" ( which really means the arab lands ) on account of islam, and this despite the gulfis not really liking desis and syria and iraq and the african arab states not having been politically and culturally connected with pakistan in a great way, except in the actions of the pakistani progressives.



kerala has 2000+ years relations with west asia.

---------

but this thread should be closed... it has degenerated into idiotic nationalism, racism, slave-mindedness and support of monarchy.

1. In 50 BC, the Byzantine navigator Hipolatus had discovered the Monsoon winds. The Arabs then began an east-west sea trade between Canton and Aden. The ships traveled along the coast touching designated locations in Gujarat, Kerala, SL, BD-Arakan and onward. Originally they were Jews till conversions started after The Message was conveyed.
2. I believe we are having an interesting discussion here - barring few distractions. The thread should continue really.

 

[war&peace]

Well if both are true Muslims, then the differences immaterial and differences are material then they are not true Muslims. Because Islam is the same and all the fundamental teachings are same.

 

[jamahir]

1. In 50 BC, the Byzantine navigator Hipolatus had discovered the Monsoon winds. The Arabs then began an east-west sea trade between Canton and Aden. The ships traveled along the coast touching designated locations in Gujarat, Kerala, SL, BD-Arakan and onward. Originally they were Jews till conversions started after The Message was conveyed.

kerala had good many jews until one of the original disciples of christ, the saint thomas, landed in kerala in 52 ad and established what is now the oldest church in present india[1]... it seems from the wiki page that thomas also stayed in sindh before his southward journey, so there will be some church there too.

so christianity predates islam in the subcontinent.

2. I believe we are having an interesting discussion here - barring few distractions. The thread should continue really.

well, to me, not a few, but a lot of the posts are unpleasant... unnecessary quarrels and propagation of the tribalism, monarchic imperialism and religious discord of the past when we should be discussing about a scientific immediate-future.

-----

[1] St. Thomas Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, Palayoor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[MadDog]

So why was Bengal not included in the Pakistan acronym?

The answer lies in Pakistan Resolution of 1940, there were supposed to be one or more than one muslim majority states, making two wings almost 2000km apart into one country is lunacy, and not practical, which naturally transpired in 1971 debacle. It was the British who wanted the independence of British India into only 2 countries.

actually they are constructs used by your own fellow Pakistanis, many a times to not have to advertise that they are Pakistanis. you may not like it but by your own country-men's admission and actions, that's what you all are made of...well most of you.

Well ofcourse you go back far enough, everything was just emptiness ...question of where you draw the line in time depends upon the subject. For political subjects, the line is drawn when the country came into existence - which is 1947 for Pakistan. But for ethnicity and race purposes, that line goes much farther back - that is why Indians, Pakistanis, BD's and Srilankans share so many regionally common genes. If the subject in hand is religion, then some muslims try to draw that line to eternity and others to around the 6th century when islam was started. The fallacy of the 'eternity' argument is that nobody heard of Quran before the 6th century and as every muslim knows, there is no Islam without Quron. And finally if the context is language, then you have to look at when Punjabi and Bengali (for example) separated from Indian Punjabi and Bengali - guess what? they haven't yet!

Jinnah in his wildest dreams never dreamt of an undivided Punjab, it were the congress leaders who demanded it, otherwise the original map, had entire Punjab with Pakistan, which would have been strategic defeat for Congress. That is the reason Vallabhai Patel was so adamant in his support for division of Punjab. If Punjab were not to be divided, there would have been no division. Pak Punjabis share culture with Indian Punjabis, rest are different.

 

[Samandri]

But they were always in our service as tribesmen not they had any significant influence.

In your service? they were rulers over your ancestors. Preaching was indeed not the job of Pashtuns but they paved the way for penetration of Islam into Bengal and Orissa. The first Muslim rulers of Bengal, were Khilji Afghans from Helmand (They were not Turks according to Tabqat-i-Nasiri and Tarikh-i-Feroz Shahi but were Ghilzais evident from statement of Khushal Khattak). From 1537 to 1561, Suri Pashtuns ruled Bengal and from 1561 to 1576, Karlanri Pashtuns ruled it. And as late as 1614, eastern districts of Bengal were in possession of Pashtun chiefs, the last stronghold being Sylhet held by Usman Khan Miyakhel. In 18th century, the bulk of the army of Nawab Alivardi Khan consisted of Rohillas (Pashtuns). In 1746, one of the Afghan general , Mustafa Khan Barech, revolted and attempted to overthrow Alivardi, this Afghan insurrection was as serious as Maratha invasion .....so as late as mid 18th century, Bengal was vulnerable to be conquered by Pashtuns.

 

[asad71]

In your service? they were rulers over your ancestors. Preaching was indeed not the job of Pashtuns but they paved the way for penetration of Islam into Bengal and Orissa. The first Muslim rulers of Bengal, were Khilji Afghans from Helmand (They were not Turks according to Tabqat-i-Nasiri and Tarikh-i-Feroz Shahi but were Ghilzais evident from statement of Khushal Khattak). From 1537 to 1561, Suri Pashtuns ruled Bengal and from 1561 to 1576, Karlanri Pashtuns ruled it. And as late as 1614, eastern districts of Bengal were in possession of Pashtun chiefs, the last stronghold being Sylhet held by Usman Khan Miyakhel. In 18th century, the bulk of the army of Nawab Alivardi Khan consisted of Rohillas (Pashtuns). In 1746, one of the Afghan general , Mustafa Khan Barech, revolted and attempted to overthrow Alivardi, this Afghan insurrection was as serious as Maratha invasion .....so as late as mid 18th century, Bengal was vulnerable to be conquered by Pashtuns.

After Lodi was defeated by Babar, the Afghan Pashtuns began a gradual withdrawal into the east. Sher Shah was indeed our great hero. History of Hindustan thereafter has been a history of conflicts between the Mughal-Uzbeghs and the Afghan Pashtuns. This conflict continues even today in Afghanistan in the wars between the Northern Alliance (Uzbeghs, Tajiks) and the Pashtuns.

 

[bongbang]

In your service? they were rulers over your ancestors. Preaching was indeed not the job of Pashtuns but they paved the way for penetration of Islam into Bengal and Orissa. The first Muslim rulers of Bengal, were Khilji Afghans from Helmand (They were not Turks according to Tabqat-i-Nasiri and Tarikh-i-Feroz Shahi but were Ghilzais evident from statement of Khushal Khattak). From 1537 to 1561, Suri Pashtuns ruled Bengal and from 1561 to 1576, Karlanri Pashtuns ruled it. And as late as 1614, eastern districts of Bengal were in possession of Pashtun chiefs, the last stronghold being Sylhet held by Usman Khan Miyakhel. In 18th century, the bulk of the army of Nawab Alivardi Khan consisted of Rohillas (Pashtuns). In 1746, one of the Afghan general , Mustafa Khan Barech, revolted and attempted to overthrow Alivardi, this Afghan insurrection was as serious as Maratha invasion .....so as late as mid 18th century, Bengal was vulnerable to be conquered by Pashtuns.

They who were rulers and from army settled in the region. Many of us are their lineage. So what is your point exactly? We ruled ourselves and who are rulers over our ancestors?

 

[bongbang]

If you are of there lineage then why don't Bengalis look like Bihari Ashrafs that I posted?

Because I didnt cherry pick. And no intention to pull hair with the same infamous Bihari troll again.

 

[bongbang]

Show me Bengali Muslim who looks like those Bihari Muslims that I posted. And I am not a troll, I am Mughal. I showed you picture of bihari Mughal, we are pure mongoloid

As I said no intention to reply you.

 

[Post Colonnial]

Jinnah in his wildest dreams never dreamt of an undivided Punjab, it were the congress leaders who demanded it, otherwise the original map, had entire Punjab with Pakistan, which would have been strategic defeat for Congress. That is the reason Vallabhai Patel was so adamant in his support for division of Punjab. If Punjab were not to be divided, there would have been no division. Pak Punjabis share culture with Indian Punjabis, rest are different.

who cares what Jinnah wanted and did not? even Pakistanis don't give a damn, and the rest of the world knows the evils of partition. But all that is past and irrelevant now.

Facts are facts.

 

[Kabira]

They who were rulers and from army settled in the region. Many of us are their lineage. So what is your point exactly? We ruled ourselves and who are rulers over our ancestors?

I think Bengali claims are similar to some converts in punjab who claim chugtai, arab etc. Most Bangladeshis on internet just claim to be pathans without knowing anything else. While Bihari and UP pathans are well aware of their tribes. Also seem like every second Bangladeshi on internet is pashtun descendent.