Tagore, The Islamophobe....

[INDIC]

As i said only Sindh and some parts of South Punjab were feudal. Educated hindu urban is only true for Sindh not Punjab. Controlling economy of Lahore-Karachi is just another bs in long list of you brain farts

Hindus although minority in Lahore controlled the education and business sector of Lahore and Muslims who never accepted Western education felt themselves neglected. The whole Pakistan movement in Punjab-Sindh was against this dominance of educated Hindus and the Muslim Landlords formed the core of this movement both against educated Hindus of Punjab-Sindh and Hindu landlords of Bengal.

 

[dawn_news]

Hindus although minority in Lahore controlled the education and business sector of Lahore and Muslims who never accepted Western education felt themselves neglected. The whole Pakistan movement in Punjab-Sindh was against this dominance of educated Hindus and the Muslim Landlords formed the core of this movement both against educated Hindus of Punjab-Sindh and Hindu landlords of Bengal.

Stop giving importance where its not any, you didn't even know which parts of Punjab were under feudal. Your hindutva brain farts are useless now

 

[INDIC]

Stop giving importance where its not any, you didn't even know which parts of Punjab were under feudal. Your hindutva brain farts are useless now

Wasn't South Punjab then called as princely state of Bahawalpur, I was specific about the Unionists of Punjab province. You are even not aware of your own history.

 

[dawn_news]

Wasn't South Punjab then called as princely state of Bahawalpur, I was specific about the Unionists of Punjab province. You are even not aware of your own history.

Again you show your ignorance, hindutva should stick with Bihar history. I mean the best you could come with is jealousy of hindus lol, thats where your history start and end.

 

[INDIC]

Again you show your ignorance, hindutva should stick with Bihar history. I mean the best you could come with is jealousy of hindus lol, thats where your history start and end.

Pot calling the kettle black.

 

[khair_ctg]

Wait, what? You're calling the Bengali language 'Hindu'; despite the fact that the majority of speakers are Muslims?

Yes that is true. Majority-Muslims of Bengal historically practised Farsi, Urdu and Arabic as their languages, while Hindus practised Sanskrit and Magadhi Prakrit. during independent Muslim rule of Bengal, many Hindus also used Farsi language for economic reasons. Farsi was the state language, and Urdu was a literary language and a medium between people (mostly Muslims) of different origins. even in Muslim Bengal, the Bengali-speaking Muslims (not the Urdu- or Farsi-speaking Bengali Muslims) used many different spoken dialects of Bengali and so Urdu worked as the shared medium.

after British colonization, the Hindu pundits standardized what is called the Bengali script from Magadhi Prakrit using Devnagari. when the Brahmins gained new power and wealth, there has been many efforts to completely replace the Urdu and Farsi use with this Brahmin-Bengali language. while Bengal Muslims had to learn this Brahmin language during British colonial period, they did so for economic reasons. this Brahmin language (we know as Bengali script today) was not associated as language OF Bengal Muslims until formation of East Pakistan in 1947. more information if you have time Musalmani Bangla and its transformation

 

[Chronos]

Tagore's religious thought was nourished in a Semi Secular environment inspired by Hindu,Muslim and Christian schools of philosophy. His works shows his sense of internationalism without attaining the sense of nationalism. But in the last phases of his life he was deeply irritated by the growing Hindu Muslim attrition.It might have invoked a more hard line thinking in his mind.

But the hatred and anger about Tagore among Bangladeshi radical outfit is well understood.These nutheads see Tagore as an emblem of Hindu culture without caring to read his works.No wonder a person who tries to discover his cultural heritage thousands of miles away in Arabian desert, will took the extraordinary work of Tagore as a threat to his own hilarious Utopian world.

By the way, the link suggests something else.

Rabindranath also criticized Gandhi for his superstitious thinking, and called for embracing of scientific thinking, which India could make use of.

@Dillinger you were right about the Bangladeshis.

@IamBengali and @BDforever excepted.

 

[Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury]

Yes that is true. Majority-Muslims of Bengal historically practised Farsi, Urdu and Arabic as their languages, while Hindus practised Sanskrit and Magadhi Prakrit. during independent Muslim rule of Bengal, many Hindus also used Farsi language for economic reasons. Farsi was the state language, and Urdu was a literary language and a medium between people (mostly Muslims) of different origins. even in Muslim Bengal, the Bengali-speaking Muslims (not the Urdu- or Farsi-speaking Bengali Muslims) used many different spoken dialects of Bengali and so Urdu worked as the shared medium.

after British colonization, the Hindu pundits standardized what is called the Bengali script from Magadhi Prakrit using Devnagari. when the Brahmins gained new power and wealth, there has been many efforts to completely replace the Urdu and Farsi use with this Brahmin-Bengali language. while Bengal Muslims had to learn this Brahmin language during British colonial period, they did so for economic reasons. this Brahmin language (we know as Bengali script today) was not associated as language OF Bengal Muslims until formation of East Pakistan in 1947. more information if you have time Musalmani Bangla and its transformation

So are you suggesting we go back to Farsi? I think we should keep Bengali as adopting a new language will entail a lot of bureaucracy in the short term. However, let's adopt more Arabic and Persian words, particularly Arabic since it's the language of Islam.

Sometimes the words come out all wrong with text predicting.

 

[EasyNow]

His lands? He was brahmin and lands were stolen by British and given to him. Pundit historical occupation has been being in mandir and eating food left by zamindars. But British wanted slaves so they gave likes of Tagore huge amount of land taken away from poor farmer.

We are not talking about how he acquired that land, we are taking about how that land shows his connection to Bangladesh. If we go down your route, almost all the great zamindars of BD and Pakistan acquired their wealth through cronyism, exploitation or corruption. Are they not nationals?

 

[dawn_news]

We are not talking about how he acquired that land, we are taking about how that land shows his connection to Bangladesh. If we go down your route, almost all the great zamindars of BD and Pakistan acquired their wealth through cronyism, exploitation or corruption. Are they not nationals?

Well in Pakistan only some parts of South Punjab and Sindh were feudal, in rest average farmers had the land. Actually our ancestors were pretty happy how British treated them. While in BD they toke away lands from farmers and gave it to hindu pundits. Pundit main job always was being in mandir and distribuiting sweets, eating left over food by zamindars.

This new ocupation of being land lord made Bengali brahmins quite greedy so they treated poor peasants very badly.

The only thing is Pakistan had to start from 0 as far as industrial is concerned Because India inherited 90% of British machinery. But average farmer was happy.

 

[Jaggu]

I'm not Hindu or Muslim. I'm not Bangali either. But I'm proud to belong to the sub continent that produced poets like Tagore and Iqbal. It's unfortunate some people are so blinded by hatred that they have to paint everything along religious lines.

 

[khair_ctg]

I'm not Hindu or Muslim. I'm not Bangali either. But I'm proud to belong to the sub continent that produced poets like Tagore and Iqbal. It's unfortunate some people are so blinded by hatred that they have to paint everything along religious lines.

the only people with hatred are those who want to impose one of them where he doesn't belong

 

[EasyNow]

Bangladesh with its present borders was the demand of Muslims. Tagore not only DID NOT belong to such Muslim demands of statehood but was part of the reason that Muslims and Hindus parted ways with their own notions of nationhood. not just the Tagores, but countless other zamindars had oppressive presence in E. Bengal before 1947 Partition. I visited many old mansions formerly occupied by Brahmin zamindars. and you don't need dig deep to learn (and even see it for yourself today) the oppression, and suffering borne by those tey ruled.

R. Tagore may have spent 20 years in BD but his family over multiple generations including himself had lifetime zamindari interests in BD. it covered everything from physical and economic subjugation of Muslims to cultural domination, like restriction of Muslim practices and changing the Muslim names of places.
I definitely think R. Tagore has been inappropriately imposed on Bengal Muslims and this sorry attempt to re-paint him as part of the Bengal Muslim polity is inappropriate. what's not inappropriate is @aazidane's particular post you mentioned in the context of Indians coming to this BD subforum and constantly talking of extermination of people opposed to indian policies. I don't enjoy this verbal jousting though. besides your over the top support of historical Muslim-oppressors, your overlooking of hatred in Indian posters and enthusiastic accusation on aazidane's post make it seem you hold some grudge against Muslims in general.
I wouldn't be surprised if you wrote Mir Nisar Ali was a radical for the rebellion he put up

Your line of argument can only lead to the conclusion that no Hindu can therefore be considered a Bangladeshi. As they were also not behind the Muslim demand for statehood. Is that what you believe? And if so, would you be ok with Muslims in Hindustan being treated that way?

If you expect Muslims to be treated fairly, you should be fair too. I'm surprised that living in a western secular democracy this idea does not connect with you.

I'm not indulging in verbal jousting, i'm repeating what has been said by the individuals on this thread. If it shames them, so what? You again bring up radicalism, why don't you read your own words and work out where you stand.

 

[khair_ctg]

We are not talking about how he acquired that land, we are taking about how that land shows his connection to Bangladesh. If we go down your route, almost all the great zamindars of BD and Pakistan acquired their wealth through cronyism, exploitation or corruption. Are they not nationals?

you are over-analyzing. R. Tagore was against the concept that Bengal Muslims would be able to practise their religion and culture freely - whereas Bangladesh exists in its borders since 1947 in opposition to R. Tagore's ideals.

Your line of argument can only lead to the conclusion that no Hindu can therefore be considered a Bangladeshi. As they were also not behind the Muslim demand for statehood. Is that what you believe? And if so, would you be ok with Muslims in Hindustan being treated that way?

If you expect Muslims to be treated fairly, you should be fair too. I'm surprised that living in a western secular democracy this idea does not connect with you.

I'm not indulging in verbal jousting, i'm repeating what has been said by the individuals on this thread. If it shames them, so what? You again bring up radicalism, why don't you read your own words and work out where you stand.

not you, i meant how indians post and then BD members react and it leads to a verbal fight.

R. Tagore stood against the basis for Bangladesh's very existence. if any Hindu, Muslim or whoever, has had a problem with Muslims or a Muslim state, they couldn't have been a part of East Pakistan and so couldn't have been a part of Bangladesh

 

[EasyNow]

Well in Pakistan only some parts of South Punjab and Sindh were feudal, in rest average farmers had the land. Actually our ancestors were pretty happy how British treated them. While in BD they toke away lands from farmers and gave it to hindu pundits. Pundit main job always was being in mandir and distribuiting sweets, eating left over food by zamindars.

This new ocupation of being land lord made Bengali brahmins quite greedy so they treated poor peasants very badly.

The only thing is Pakistan had to start from 0 as far as industrial is concerned Because India inherited 90% of British machinery. But average farmer was happy.

Oh brother the feudals are still Pakistanis aren't they? the majority of agricultural land is held by a few people and I can assure you they did not sweat for any of it. That's the way things worked in those days, I don't hold it against them. So I don't think you should hold this against Tagore either.

Feudalism in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia