What's new

Tagore, The Islamophobe....

Not all Hazaras look the same; some look more Caucasian while others look more Mongoloid while most probably look in between. The ones who look more Caucasian are the good looking ones.
 
The word Malaun is word used by Bangladeshi Muslims. I agree it's a curse word. IamBengali in the a


Bro of course we will have mongoloid influence we are in close proximity with North East and Burma. What is wrong with the Mongoloid look? Stop having a racist outlook on things. The Hazara's are Mongoloid looking, the Uighurs are Mongoloid looking. And what kind of stuff are spewing about "you know muslims, we like to spread Islam everywhere", Dawah is an obligation?

Most South Asian Muslim rulers, Turkic and Mughal (Persian word for Mongol) were part Mongoloid, but the source of these Mongoloid genes was Siberia, not South Asia or South East Asia. Afghans and Iranians were associates/followers to them, not the main rulers, it was mainly a Turko Mongol effort that Islamized South Asia, specially Bengal:

The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204–1760
Introduction
Sometime in 1243–44, residents of Lakhnauti, a city in northwestern Bengal, told a visiting historian of the dramatic events that had taken place there forty years earlier. At that time, the visitor was informed, a band of several hundred Turkish cavalry had ridden swiftly down the Gangetic Plain in the direction of the Bengal delta. Led by a daring officer named Muhammad Bakhtiyar, the men overran venerable Buddhist monasteries in neighboring Bihar before turning their attention to the northwestern portion of the delta, then ruled by a mild and generous Hindu monarch. Disguising themselves as horse dealers, Bakhtiyar and his men slipped into the royal city of Nudiya. Once inside, they rode straight to the king’s palace, where they confronted the guards with brandished weapons. Utterly overwhelmed, for he had just sat down to dine, the Hindu monarch hastily departed through a back door and fled with many of his retainers to the forested hinterland of eastern Bengal, abandoning his kingdom altogether.[1]

This coup d’état inaugurated an era, lasting over five centuries, during which most of Bengal was dominated by rulers professing the Islamic faith. In itself this was not exceptional, since from about this time until the eighteenth century, Muslim sovereigns ruled over most of the Indian subcontinent. What was exceptional, however, was that among India’s interior provinces only in Bengal—a region approximately the size of England and Scotland combined—did a majority of the indigenous population adopt the religion of the ruling class, Islam. This outcome proved to be as fateful as it is striking, for in 1947 British India was divided into two independent states, India and Pakistan, on the basis of the distribution of Muslims. In Bengal, those areas with a Muslim majority would form the eastern wing of Pakistan—since 1971, Bangladesh—whereas those parts of the province with a Muslim minority became the state of West Bengal within the Republic of India. In 1984 about 93 million of the 152 million Bengalis in Bangladesh and West Bengal were Muslims, and of the estimated 96.5 million people inhabiting Bangladesh, 81 million, or 83 percent, were Muslims; in fact, Bengalis today comprise the second largest Muslim ethnic population in the world, after the Arabs.[2]

How can one explain this development? More particularly, why did such a large Muslim population emerge in Bengal—so distant from the Middle East, from which Islam historically expanded—and not in other regions of India? And within Bengal, why did Islamization occur at so much greater a rate in the east than in the west? Who converted and why? At what time? What, if anything, did “conversion” mean to contemporary Bengalis? And finally, between the thirteenth and eighteenth centuries, in what ways did different generations and different social classes of Muslims in Bengal understand, construe, or even construct, Islamic civilization? In seeking answers to these questions, this study explores processes embedded in the delta’s premodern history that may cast light on the evolution of Bengal’s extraordinary cultural geography.

Bengal’s historical experience was extraordinary not only in its widespread reception of Islam but also in its frontier character. In part, the thirteenth-century Turkish drive eastward—both to Bengal and within Bengal—was the end product of a process triggered by political convulsions in thirteenth-century Inner Asia. For several centuries before and after the Mongol irruption into West Asia, newly Islamicized Turks from Central Asia and the Iranian Plateau provided a ready supply of soldiers, both as slaves and as free men, for commanders such as Muhammad Bakhtiyar. Once within Bengal’s fertile delta, these men pushed on until stopped only by geographical barriers. Surrounded on the north and east by mountains, and to the south by the sea, Bengal was the terminus of a continentwide process of Turko-Mongol conquest and migration. It was, in short, a frontier zone.
 
@bronxbull is south indian brahmin aunty, ask her if she see any difference. As far as Bengalis are concerned, everyone of them have mongloid eyes. And i have seen many Bengalis in my life. Same is not the case with Bengali brahmins. Don't hate mongloid but embrace them, just see east asians and south asians.

Urdu is our language, we speak urdu of Iqbal and Faiz poetry. Nothing to do with bhaiya language of UP lol

bengalis do have strong mongloid features but i also feel,the mongloid aspect need not be that strong,we often with our own biases start looking for mongloidness amongst bengalis.

But as someone said here,I have seen bangladeshi people also,all 3 races exist in Bengal.

I have found some bengali people who kill all stereotypes.

Bengali Brahmins are only slightly different,not all that different also.

regarding genetic differences between brahmins and non brahmins of TN,Brahmins have less ASI admixture but only less and far from zero or even a small number,the admixture is significant.

@ Nuri Natt

Stop living in theories,i have seen many pakistanis too and they too have ASI and there are many everywhere who don't have common sense,thats more dangerous than ancestry.

Of course upper classes generally tend to look better. And since, historically at least, men have been the main component of this group, they used their wealth and power to select the prettiest women for their brides. In other words, selective breeding. With the lower classes, as they say, "beggars can't be choosers".

Thats true but there is a small twist here,

Often these upper class zamindars go n mate with the lower class women and thus the kids of the poor man also gets the genes of the zamindar and there you go,the crazy mix.

I am not saying this happened everywhere in bengal but it was the norm.

You said jelous of Tagore lol British slave. Our punjabi literature and poets are way ahead of couple last century Bengali poets. Our literature start with Baba Farid, almost thousand years ago. Not to forget where Rig Veda was composed, again gawar bihari can only laugh.

With all due respect to Baba Farid/Baba Bulleh shah etc,Rig veda is not a poem.
 
Last edited:
bengalis do have strong mongloid features but i also feel,the mongloid aspect need not be that strong,we often with our own biases start looking for mongloidness amongst bengalis.

But as someone said here,I have seen bangladeshi people also,all 3 races exist in Bengal.

I have found some bengali people who kill all stereotypes.

Bengali Brahmins are only slightly different,not all that different also.

regarding genetic differences between brahmins and non brahmins of TN,Brahmins have less ASI admixture but only less and far from zero or even a small number,the admixture is significant.

@ Nuri Natt

Stop living in theories,i have seen many pakistanis too and they too have ASI and there are many everywhere who don't have common sense,thats more dangerous than ancestry.



Thats true but there is a small twist here,

Often these upper class zamindars go n mate with the lower class women and thus the kids of the poor man also gets the genes of the zamindar and there you go,the crazy mix.

I am not saying this happened everywhere in bengal but it was the norm.



With all due respect to Baba Farid/Baba Bulleh shah etc,Rig veda is not a poem.

Every South Asian have ASI, hell even Afghans have ASI so i never denied Pakistanis not having ASI. Rig Veda was composed in our pure land by pure people. No wonder the same land later on will produce Baba Farid.

And yes Bengali and South Indian brahmins have been mixing with locals, no one can deny that. But there are genetic differences between both groups which shows in phenotype also on average.
 
bengalis do have strong mongloid features but i also feel,the mongloid aspect need not be that strong,we often with our own biases start looking for mongloidness amongst bengalis.

But as someone said here,I have seen bangladeshi people also,all 3 races exist in Bengal.

I have found some bengali people who kill all stereotypes.

Bengali Brahmins are only slightly different,not all that different also.

regarding genetic differences between brahmins and non brahmins of TN,Brahmins have less ASI admixture but only less and far from zero or even a small number,the admixture is significant.

@ Nuri Natt

Stop living in theories,i have seen many pakistanis too and they too have ASI and there are many everywhere who don't have common sense,thats more dangerous than ancestry.



Thats true but there is a small twist here,

Often these upper class zamindars go n mate with the lower class women and thus the kids of the poor man also gets the genes of the zamindar and there you go,the crazy mix.

I am not saying this happened everywhere in bengal but it was the norm.



With all due respect to Baba Farid/Baba Bulleh shah etc,Rig veda is not a poem.
Someone said you were South Indian, so can I ask where your experiences of Bengalis are from? I am guessing that you might be in the US with an username like 'bronxbull'.

My own impression is that Bengalis show minor mongoloid admixture (other than the tribals), usually most prominent around the eyes. Yes, a few here and there show quite robust signs of admixture but generally I would say its mostly superficial. It's the Nepalis and Northeast Indians who generally show strong signs of admixture. Most are an in between race of Indian and Mongoloid.

I think, as you point out, people tend to exaggerate signs of admixtures in people when they know they have bit of it.

Can you please also explain what you meant by this line "But as someone said here,I have seen bangladeshi people also,all 3 races exist in Bengal."

Earlier I showed a link to the Bangladeshi football team. In your judgement, how strong is the Mongoloid admixture in these players?

http://paradiseintheworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/bangladesh-football-team-2012.jpg
 
Last edited:
Most South Asian Muslim rulers, Turkic and Mughal (Persian word for Mongol) were part Mongoloid, but the source of these Mongoloid genes was Siberia, not South Asia or South East Asia. Afghans and Iranians were associates/followers to them, not the main rulers, it was mainly a Turko Mongol effort that Islamized South Asia, specially Bengal:

The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204–1760
Introduction
Sometime in 1243–44, residents of Lakhnauti, a city in northwestern Bengal, told a visiting historian of the dramatic events that had taken place there forty years earlier. At that time, the visitor was informed, a band of several hundred Turkish cavalry had ridden swiftly down the Gangetic Plain in the direction of the Bengal delta. Led by a daring officer named Muhammad Bakhtiyar, the men overran venerable Buddhist monasteries in neighboring Bihar before turning their attention to the northwestern portion of the delta, then ruled by a mild and generous Hindu monarch. Disguising themselves as horse dealers, Bakhtiyar and his men slipped into the royal city of Nudiya. Once inside, they rode straight to the king’s palace, where they confronted the guards with brandished weapons. Utterly overwhelmed, for he had just sat down to dine, the Hindu monarch hastily departed through a back door and fled with many of his retainers to the forested hinterland of eastern Bengal, abandoning his kingdom altogether.[1]

This coup d’état inaugurated an era, lasting over five centuries, during which most of Bengal was dominated by rulers professing the Islamic faith. In itself this was not exceptional, since from about this time until the eighteenth century, Muslim sovereigns ruled over most of the Indian subcontinent. What was exceptional, however, was that among India’s interior provinces only in Bengal—a region approximately the size of England and Scotland combined—did a majority of the indigenous population adopt the religion of the ruling class, Islam. This outcome proved to be as fateful as it is striking, for in 1947 British India was divided into two independent states, India and Pakistan, on the basis of the distribution of Muslims. In Bengal, those areas with a Muslim majority would form the eastern wing of Pakistan—since 1971, Bangladesh—whereas those parts of the province with a Muslim minority became the state of West Bengal within the Republic of India. In 1984 about 93 million of the 152 million Bengalis in Bangladesh and West Bengal were Muslims, and of the estimated 96.5 million people inhabiting Bangladesh, 81 million, or 83 percent, were Muslims; in fact, Bengalis today comprise the second largest Muslim ethnic population in the world, after the Arabs.[2]

How can one explain this development? More particularly, why did such a large Muslim population emerge in Bengal—so distant from the Middle East, from which Islam historically expanded—and not in other regions of India? And within Bengal, why did Islamization occur at so much greater a rate in the east than in the west? Who converted and why? At what time? What, if anything, did “conversion” mean to contemporary Bengalis? And finally, between the thirteenth and eighteenth centuries, in what ways did different generations and different social classes of Muslims in Bengal understand, construe, or even construct, Islamic civilization? In seeking answers to these questions, this study explores processes embedded in the delta’s premodern history that may cast light on the evolution of Bengal’s extraordinary cultural geography.

Bengal’s historical experience was extraordinary not only in its widespread reception of Islam but also in its frontier character. In part, the thirteenth-century Turkish drive eastward—both to Bengal and within Bengal—was the end product of a process triggered by political convulsions in thirteenth-century Inner Asia. For several centuries before and after the Mongol irruption into West Asia, newly Islamicized Turks from Central Asia and the Iranian Plateau provided a ready supply of soldiers, both as slaves and as free men, for commanders such as Muhammad Bakhtiyar. Once within Bengal’s fertile delta, these men pushed on until stopped only by geographical barriers. Surrounded on the north and east by mountains, and to the south by the sea, Bengal was the terminus of a continentwide process of Turko-Mongol conquest and migration. It was, in short, a frontier zone.
Muslims in Bengal weren't just converted ones. Who do you think the Muslim invaders into Bengal over those centuries married? The very first Muslims came to Bengal in the 12th century at which time the population of Bengal would have been nothing like today, a small percentage of what it is today, so they would have had significant genetic impact. Also, although the elite rulers were often Turks, particularly during the Mughal period, their subordinates were mostly Afghan, particularly Pashtuns. During the six or seven centuries of Muslim rule in India it was mostly a joint Pashtun and Turk effort.
 
Poets are poets; and unless they cite hatred (which I doubt Mr Tagore did), they should be universally respected!
Also, I believe he brought great respect to the Bengali language, which is not a bad thing, as most Bengali's would agree.
Rabindranath Tagore represented a religious class that suppressed Muslims in Bengal for a long time, and that class was instrumental in changing the cultural makeup of Bengal by changing as many Muslim elements as they could. and when a personality and literary works like that are slapped against Muslims to adopt as their own, it does not go down well with them for historical connotations.
it shouldn't matter if i master J. Sebastian Bach numbers for personal interests but promoting that as a sole marker of my cultural-ethnic identity is essentially colonization.
I applaud that R. Tagore brought respect to Bengali language, but it's Hindu-Bengali language we are talking about here. it was the language made by Brahmins and for Brahmins, a non-Hindu has never historically seen that as anything but a solely Hindu language or a part of what Hindus practiced for that reason. so R. Tagore had a great contribution for Hindus. his irrelevance to Muslims should be clear

@bronxbull is south indian brahmin aunty, ask her if she see any difference. As far as Bengalis are concerned, everyone of them have mongloid eyes. And i have seen many Bengalis in my life. Same is not the case with Bengali brahmins. Don't hate mongloid but embrace them, just see east asians and south asians.



Urdu is our language, we speak urdu of Iqbal and Faiz poetry. Nothing to do with bhaiya language of UP lol
how many of them were Bangladeshis?
 
Tagore's texts are a threat to Bangladesh's national security. Extreme Tagore sympathizers should be exterminated as an example for the rest of them, he should be exterminated from Muslim Bengal.

Lol, what Tagore extremism? Shahjalal's darga was bombed by a certain group of extremists, but you want to exterminate Tagore readers? Open your eyes man.

Ps. If you are a Bangladeshi, why don't you put the flags on your profile? You talk about 'feminine' nationalism but hide your own status?! :rofl:

For those who say Tagore is only read by the educated class - the working class in the UK probably don't care a fig about Shakespeare either, but does that mean the UK should cut him out of history? Its the job of citizens to maintain their heritage, if the educated classes in BD are doing so, they should be commended.


The Mughals were part of history, so were the Yemeni's, the British, the buddhists and the Hindu's. But this country, Bangladesh, is a product of ALL this history not just the parts you prefer. We have been 'Muslim Bengal' for a tiny fraction of our long and mixed-up history - so try to take some pride in it all.
 
Lol, what Tagore extremism? Shahjalal's darga was bombed by a certain group of extremists, but you want to exterminate Tagore readers? Open your eyes man.

Ps. If you are a Bangladeshi, why don't you put the flags on your profile? You talk about 'feminine' nationalism but hide your own status?! :rofl:

For those who say Tagore is only read by the educated class - the working class in the UK probably don't care a fig about Shakespeare either, but does that mean the UK should cut him out of history? Its the job of citizens to maintain their heritage, if the educated classes in BD are doing so, they should be commended.


The Mughals were part of history, so were the Yemeni's, the British, the buddhists and the Hindu's. But this country, Bangladesh, is a product of ALL this history not just the parts you prefer. We have been 'Muslim Bengal' for a tiny fraction of our long and mixed-up history - so try to take some pride in it all.
my flags are all Bangladesh, malaun.
 
Lol, what Tagore extremism? Shahjalal's darga was bombed by a certain group of extremists, but you want to exterminate Tagore readers? Open your eyes man.

Ps. If you are a Bangladeshi, why don't you put the flags on your profile? You talk about 'feminine' nationalism but hide your own status?! :rofl:

For those who say Tagore is only read by the educated class - the working class in the UK probably don't care a fig about Shakespeare either, but does that mean the UK should cut him out of history? Its the job of citizens to maintain their heritage, if the educated classes in BD are doing so, they should be commended.


The Mughals were part of history, so were the Yemeni's, the British, the buddhists and the Hindu's. But this country, Bangladesh, is a product of ALL this history not just the parts you prefer. We have been 'Muslim Bengal' for a tiny fraction of our long and mixed-up history - so try to take some pride in it all.
no self-respecting Bangladeshi can support Tagore as their own poet. Shakespeare is English. he was not French that the French were imposing on the English during their occupation of England. if the French did do that with one or more of their poets, you would call any dissenting Englishman as "radical" right?
 
Kafir is not a abusive word. I wish people wouldn't be so blatantly ignorant to keep repeating that.

I know the word Kafir itself is not abusive. It just means rejecter, disbeliever, unbeliever but the way its used by some men is abusive to others as if its used to give a gali to non Muslims.
 
Hope Indian friends will stop wasting their time in responding these BD guys. Just laugh at them and leave.
 
You have no idea what you are talking about. Selective breeding does not change genetics. People with similar genetics one will be pretty and other ugly. There is clear genetic difference between brahmin bengalis and average bengali.



Yes British gave huge amount of land to British slaves like Tagore. Thats why Bengalis were biggest supporter of separate country while sindhi-punjabi muslims were not initially because they already controlled the lands.
Brahmin Bengalis and non-Brahmin Bengalis are different genetically - and we are talking about Hindus. the stricter endogamy among Hindus has maintained that
 
Brahmin Bengalis and non-Brahmin Bengalis are different genetically - and we are talking about Hindus. the stricter endogamy among Hindus has maintained that

Bengali brahmin are also different then bengali hindus.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom