is dravidianism different from dravidian supremacism??
since the last 7-8 years or so, ever since bangalore and the hyderabad and chennai became IT hubs, there has been umpteen reports of a new found arrogance, a swagger, based on arguements down the lines of "we have bangalore and you have bihar", and/or "look at literracy rates in kerela and madhya pradesh" etc.
i have myself been on the wrong end of countless allusions to "stupid northies" and other unflattering descriptions. news papers like deccan herald are shamelessly parochial, "northi go back' is scrawled on the toilet walls of most colleges, "delhi sucks" was the slogan that all 10,000 people broke into during the Bryan adams concert....i could go on.
Where is this headed?? how long will it continue??
<!--QuoteBegin-ben_ami+Feb 3 2006, 12:40 PM-->QUOTE(ben_ami @ Feb 3 2006, 12:40 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->is dravidianism different from dravidian supremacism??
since the last 7-8 years or so, ever since bangalore and the hyderabad and chennai became IT hubs, there has been umpteen reports of a new found arrogance, a swagger, based on arguements down the lines of "we have bangalore and you have bihar", and/or "look at literracy rates in kerela and madhya pradesh" etc.
[right][snapback]46203[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
ben ami well you are right on the swagger part , just to show a example you can often see fights on sulekha even among the more educated , centre of right followers also.
at the very outset , for me a indian is a indian period. no north south nonsense.
the views below are what i gather from the people who behave in the above fashion despite having a balanced view on other topics.
1.The origins of the dravidian movement no doubt misguided and influenced by communists impostors , were also a backlash to the imli pani wala tag put on the southies by the northies , many movies including early bollywood ones poked fun at the accent of the people down south and also picked on the supposedly weaker physical built of the southies.
2.Like all cultures coming out of a period of darkness , the pride factor erupted in lying the blame on all things associated with the upper caste , their pet theory being AIT , at that time the upper castes were educated in hindi too since govt jobs were the best and life was easier knowing the national language , so everything associated with hindi , the upper castes was trashed.
3.This also gave rise to regional parties with strong dravidian and communist outlooks , both Andhra and TamilNadu being examples.
4.The northies did no help to the cause by continuing to make fun of people with no language of hindi in the workplace , social hangouts and in general in the perception.
5.The last but minor difference was , southies are a bit conservative due to lack of islamic invasion totally wiping out culture , north india was ravaged by the marauders and this also resulted in people following customs more in word rather than in spirit ,hence most of the happening places vis a vis partying etc lie in delhi noida , bombay , etc.
So what ends up happening is ,the southies are generally a little withdrawn and introverted in workplaces and Northies are a bit more reaching out , party a little , talk much more which also gives rise to again feelings of superiority vis a vis oh we are so decent , oh you are so boorish etc etc <!--emo&  --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--emo&  --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> but none of them are the true picture , it will take some time for people to throw out the false pride aspects , the economic boom just serves as the beating stick .
North ho ya South Bhaiyya We will be known as Indians.
is there any plausible reason why the south should be ahead of the rest of india on almost all counts??
lack of corruption, tech education, female education, infra structure, primary healthcare etc??
is it merely the lack of islam, the lack of colonial economic hammering, the presence of missionary welfare schemes or something beyond that?
Hmm the reasons for south india's better performance are varied , but the count on which i am worried the most is going to be north will be always easy for hindutva to take root , the south will not be , the reasons are many.
1.The foremost reason i beleive the south is performing better was the lack of an islamic invasion , though parts of bijapur , golconda ,mysore at a certain point of time was ruled by islamic kings , they did not owe their allegiance to the delhi sultanate which was way more fanatical in nature , this is not to say or whitewash the atrocities of the nijam or tipu but conditions were a little better.
2.Societies coming out of a period of lack of pride in their culture's tend to aggressively search for it , in this case a offshoot of the dravidian movement was the middle caste's made an aggresive push for education leaving behind agriculture or made sure at least one in the family was educated , you can call this process the upward movement of the caste's or sanskritization whichever , the same process is being undergone by bihar in the process of yadav's gaining power.
The bad part of this is , the lowest castes get subjugated even further at the hands of the one's directly above them.
But since India reached this point over a certain period of time say 800 yrs , it would take many more to reach a state of equilibrium.
3.Even today in the states of Tamilnadu , Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka , will not mention kerala , the power is held by a few castes which made an upward push , now the winds of change are blowing , the people below them are making a push , it will take some generations but ultimately it would happen.
<!--emo& --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> but the saddest part it lack of an serious marauder combined with the venom of a severe communist dravidian propaganda has turned the people down south into apologists and sarva dharma sama bhavana pseudo secular wimps.They dont realize they are sitting on a ticking time bomb vis a vis Hyderabad ,Coimbatore ,SIMI and naxalite affected areas (it is not secret the naxals have joined hands with ISI).
Karnataka is the only state which can put bjp into power ,Andhra some inroads can be made , seriously doubt tamilnadu and kerala.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->but the saddest part it lack of an serious marauder combined with the venom of a severe communist dravidian propaganda has turned the people down south into apologists and sarva dharma sama bhavana pseudo secular wimps.They dont realize they are sitting on a ticking time bomb vis a vis Hyderabad ,Coimbatore ,SIMI and naxalite affected areas (it is not secret the naxals have joined hands with ISI).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes dravidian propaganda has destroyed a lot of things but this is mainly confined to Tamil Nadu, in the other 3 states the Dravidian parties were always a no show, in Andhra the problem is naxalism and growing Islamic menace (confined to Hyderabad) not Dravidian nonsense while in Kerala the problem are the 3M's (Mullah-Missionary-Marxist), thanks to Hindu foolishness in family planning Kerala will become Hindu minority in a few years and they will then feel the heat and might even run away to Tamil Nadu (since running away has become a halowed Hindu tradition by now), in Tamil Nadu the problem is Dravidianism, Mullahs (Coimbatore riots) and missionaries, Karnataka I don't know.
Bharatvarsh ji would agree with most of your comments , you are right in your analysis of Tamil Nadu and Kerala definetly , but in the case of andhra the Communist parties do manage around 10-30 seats in the districts of Nalgonda , karimnagar and nizambad, parts of orissa bordering districts .
I agree that andhra is not as affected with the dravidian venom as of Tamilnadu but the naxals definetly seem to subsribe to a anti hindu posture(inspired by the communist dravidian literature) the recent example being the statement of A Ramachandra the head of the naxals openly issuing a statement one year ago vowing to wipe out hinduism ,holding it responsible for the ill's of society.
Karnataka will remain a strong state for bjp , especially the south canara districts due to the growing islamic menance are strongly turning hardcore right wing in nature, That is one state the bjp can capture provided it sticks to the basics .
The islamic menance is confined to Kerala , Hyd and Telangana in Andhra and Coimbatore in Tamil Nadu but the biggest threat sweeping through all three states is Christian Conversion.
AP is a fertile hunting ground for the heathen souls , the last I checked thousands were and are being converted in the rice belts , Kerala need i say more ,Tamil nadu is the same as Andhra in this regard.
so lets get this sorted out first.... why does the south fall such easy prey to christians??
if i know right caste abuse and dalit movements are most entrenched in the up-bihar belt.
on the other hand south indians are known to be amongst the most to-the-word followers of hinduism and its do's and don'ts.
so how come the missionaries are having such a field day in the rice fields??
btw, point number 2, a couple of posts above was very astute. all indian states will go through that sooner or later.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->so lets get this sorted out first.... why does the south fall such easy prey to christians??
if i know right caste abuse and dalit movements are most entrenched in the up-bihar belt.
on the other hand south indians are known to be amongst the most to-the-word followers of hinduism and its do's and don'ts.
so how come the missionaries are having such a field day in the rice fields??<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The South never developed strong anti missionary traditions which is one of the reasons there are so many conversions, in the Northern states the Arya Samaj stemmed the tide while the South never had such a strong movement, there was one Jaffna tamil scholar and Saiva sant Arumuga Navalar who started reversing this trend in Lanka and Tamil Nadu, he wrote several critiques of xtianity but after his death there was no worthwhile effort in this direction.
but surely, bengal, audh, kawnpore, bombay presidency etc experienced a greater dose of the west than the south, (save madras presidency). yet christianiyty never took root there, unless you count the refugee destitutes that mother teresa feasted upon.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->but surely, bengal, audh, kawnpore, bombay presidency etc experienced a greater dose of the west than the south, (save madras presidency). yet christianiyty never took root there, unless you count the refugee destitutes that mother teresa feasted upon. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bombay presidency again had reform movements, one of them was "Prarthana Samaj" and the Arya Samaj was also present in Audh and other areas, just because its strongest area was Punjab does not mean it was confined to Punjab, it had quite a large following and was influential all over North India and several prominent freedom fighters were Arya Samajis, Ram Prasad Bismil was from U.P and he was an orthodox Arya Samajist. Also the 2001 census records that in Andhra Christians are 1.6% and in Karnataka they are 1.9% and in West Bengal they are 0.6%, the difference is not very high and Kerala always had a xtian population since the Syrian Xtians came and large scale conversions ceased by 1950's, that is why in Kerala they are stagnant at 19%, the only Southern state where the xtian population has grown explosively is Tamil Nadu where they are 6.1%.
<!--QuoteBegin-ben_ami+Feb 7 2006, 04:44 PM-->QUOTE(ben_ami @ Feb 7 2006, 04:44 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->so lets get this sorted out first.... why does the south fall such easy prey to christians??
if i know right caste abuse and dalit movements are most entrenched in the up-bihar belt.
on the other hand south indians are known to be amongst the most to-the-word followers of hinduism and its do's and don'ts.
so how come the missionaries are having such a field day in the rice fields??
[right][snapback]46415[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This boils down to two crucial factors ,both of them related
1.Caste in society or to use the proper term Jaati is a complex mechanism ,It can cause the greatest fissures and at times can act as a bulwark .
In caste ridden Up and bihar , you might expect people to inadvertently hate Hinduism and enmass convert but the opposite happens <!--emo& --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> the ties are so strong ,the one who would dare to do that immediately is ostracized or shunned by the rest , he/she loses face in society and this has a huge turn off factor.
Some historians while tracing the present day degeneration of the caste system beleive it took crucial turns during the mughal invasion , It might have acted as a bulwark since a society which does not fall into a homogenous group is much difficult to conquer totally in the long run , on the superficial surface you can physically conquer them but this provides a bulwark for the culture.
The unfortunate effects are division of society. <!--emo& --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Maybe this is the reason Vivekananda condemning the modern degenerated version also called it a waterbed of hindu society.
2.Down south which never knew a invader , life was comfortable , caste ties were strong but were not the pre dominant factor , It was more the economic caste model that was followed , the rise of the middle castes which i have listed has given rise to a new caste system , this very system keeps on churning the bottom ones to the top , call it nature taking care of itself .
South indians are in general a loose knit community due to the above reasons , they are easy prey for the christian vulture who mask the gospel in the form of concoted katha's and Sarma darma Sama Bhavana nonsense .
Now here fits in Bharatvarsh ji's analysis which is right , the guru's who commanded respect in the south barring the original three great ones( Ramanujacharya , Madhvacharya, Shankaracharya) all propagated the same nonsense making it easy for our padris to showcase jesus as just one more avatar nonsense.
<!--emo&:clapping--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/clap.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='clap.gif' /><!--endemo--> if they tried the same in bihar showcasing jesus as a form of krishna , you know what would happen.
<!--QuoteBegin-sarangadhara+Feb 8 2006, 10:40 AM-->QUOTE(sarangadhara @ Feb 8 2006, 10:40 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-ben_ami+Feb 7 2006, 04:44 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ben_ami @ Feb 7 2006, 04:44 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->so lets get this sorted out first.... why does the south fall such easy prey to christians??
if i know right caste abuse and dalit movements are most entrenched in the up-bihar belt.
on the other hand south indians are known to be amongst the most to-the-word followers of hinduism and its do's and don'ts.
so how come the missionaries are having such a field day in the rice fields??
[right][snapback]46415[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This boils down to two crucial factors ,both of them related
1.Caste in society or to use the proper term Jaati is a complex mechanism ,It can cause the greatest fissures and at times can act as a bulwark .
In caste ridden Up and bihar , you might expect people to inadvertently hate Hinduism and enmass convert but the opposite happens <!--emo& --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> the ties are so strong ,the one who would dare to do that immediately is ostracized or shunned by the rest , he/she loses face in society and this has a huge turn off factor.
Some historians while tracing the present day degeneration of the caste system beleive it took crucial turns during the mughal invasion , It might have acted as a bulwark since a society which does not fall into a homogenous group is much difficult to conquer totally in the long run , on the superficial surface you can physically conquer them but this provides a bulwark for the culture.
The unfortunate effects are division of society. <!--emo& --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Maybe this is the reason Vivekananda condemning the modern degenerated version also called it a waterbed of hindu society.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yes right on.
the caste system preserved hindu society on the whole, while at the same time dividing it into compartments (its this compartmentalisation that preserved hindu society as a whole, cos its difficult to hammer a hererogenous group).
that site, atributetohinduism, has this beautifully explained, with relevent quotes from modern and mediaval writers about how in a way the caste system saved hinduism's skin.
<!--QuoteBegin-sarangadhara+Feb 8 2006, 10:40 AM-->QUOTE(sarangadhara @ Feb 8 2006, 10:40 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->2.Down south which never knew a invader , life was comfortable , caste ties were strong but were not the pre dominant factor , It was more the economic caste model that was followed , the rise of the middle castes which i have listed has given rise to a new caste system , this very system keeps on churning the bottom ones to the top , call it nature taking care of itself .
South indians are in general a loose knit community due to the above reasons , they are easy prey for the christian vulture who mask the gospel in the form of concoted katha's and Sarma darma Sama Bhavana nonsense .
Now here fits in Bharatvarsh ji's analysis which is right , the guru's who commanded respect in the south barring the original three great ones( Ramanujacharya , Madhvacharya, Shankaracharya) all propagated the same nonsense making it easy for our padris to showcase jesus as just one more avatar nonsense.
<!--emo&:clapping--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/clap.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='clap.gif' /><!--endemo-->Â if they tried the same in bihar showcasing jesus as a form of krishna , you know what would happen.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
whats this "katha's and Sarma darma Sama Bhavana" pray??
from your last line i gather its some loony x-ian canard that makes people believe that jesus was krishna and so people can easily change to christianity, whilest remaining hindu or some such.
er... as an aside, i know for a fact that some hindus (esp konkanis and tullus) visit the churches in mangalore and other parts of the konkan coast. they go there for the father/bishop to hand out bread crumbs or some such.
why this phenomenon?? are these the hindu equivalent of "rice christians"?? ie. the bread hindus??
<!--QuoteBegin-Bharatvarsh+Feb 8 2006, 02:45 AM-->QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Feb 8 2006, 02:45 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->but surely, bengal, audh, kawnpore, bombay presidency etc experienced a greater dose of the west than the south, (save madras presidency). yet christianiyty never took root there, unless you count the refugee destitutes that mother teresa feasted upon. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bombay presidency again had reform movements, one of them was "Prarthana Samaj" and the Arya Samaj was also present in Audh and other areas, just because its strongest area was Punjab does not mean it was confined to Punjab, it had quite a large following and was influential all over North India and several prominent freedom fighters were Arya Samajis, Ram Prasad Bismil was from U.P and he was an orthodox Arya Samajist. Also the 2001 census records that in Andhra Christians are 1.6% and in Karnataka they are 1.9% and in West Bengal they are 0.6%, the difference is not very high and Kerala always had a xtian population since the Syrian Xtians came and large scale conversions ceased by 1950's, that is why in Kerala they are stagnant at 19%, the only Southern state where the xtian population has grown explosively is Tamil Nadu where they are 6.1%.
[right][snapback]46440[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
which still doesnt answer how bengal has such a small percentage of christians despite housing the second city of the empire and being the english stronghold in india.
the difference in the percentage of christians in bengal and a.p/karnataka is not high, but the degree of western/colonial influence and the difference in number of economic refugees/destitutes that colonialism created in these parts, is beyond mere "high".
besides, if bombay presidency, punjab, oudh et al, can coume with some sort of counter missionary movement, then why cant other states??
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->besides, if bombay presidency, punjab, oudh et al, can coume with some sort of counter missionary movement, then why cant other states?? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And if other states can come up with resistance against Islamic invaders then why couldn't Bengal? or maybe you can tell us how come there was no largescale retaliation during partition in Bengal (who as per you are one of the people in India who know how to fight), even the cowardly and non martial South Indians were way ahead in retaliation (according to Pandit Sunderlal's report 200,000 Muslims got killed all over Hyderabad), even during Direct Action Day the lead for retaliation was taken by Bihari and UP Hindus in Calcutta and Sikhs, that is why Muslim authors and Bengali Hindu (p-secs) routinely try to shift the blame onto outsiders (Bihari Hindus) as the ones responsible for Direct Action Day. I will quote a Bengali himself on this:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->From the next day however, that is August 18, Suhrawardyâs goons and compatriots (some of whom had nothing to do with the riots) started getting a taste of their own medicine. The lead was taken by the Hindu Kalwars (ironmongers and scrap dealers) from Bihar and U.P., who were then joined by Sikhs and Hindu Bengalis. Armed with crowbars, Kripan (the Sikh dagger), swords and other lethal weapons they set out to avenge the last two daysâ depredations. In this they showed an incredible ferocity that was not hitherto known to exist in them. As with Hindu dwellings, there was also widespread torching in Muslim areas. Suhrawardy was probably not prepared for any reprisals from Hindus whom he must have taken as followers of Gandhi, and therefore necessarily incapable of violence. The massacre of Muslims in retaliation therefore took him by complete surprise. It is primarily these reprisals that forced him to call a halt to the devilry that he had, by unspeakable abuse of state power, unleashed. Meanwhile the atrocities rolled on to the 19th, by which time the Hindus had more than evened the score. A senior Imperial Police officer told Ashok Mitra that on the 18th Suhrawardy was found sitting forlornly at the Lalbazar control room table, mumbling to himself âMy poor, innocent Muslimsâ! [31]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A Muslim view of the Killings has been recorded in Mizanur Rahamanâs book âKrishna Sholoiâ in Bangla, meaning âBlack Sixteenthâ[38]. Mizanur Rahaman is an important contemporary literary person of Dacca, and is the editor of a trimonthly publication called Mizanur Rahamaner Patrika (Mizanur Rahamanâs Magazine). His is an eyewitness account, for he was then about thirteen, and a student of class eight in Mitra Institution (Main) of Calcutta at the time, and used to live in the predominantly Hindu area of Garpar. Mizanur Rahaman cannot, by any standards, be called a particularly communal or partisan Muslim, and yet in his writing there is a constant effort to whitewash the guilt of the Muslim League in the killings. He describes a conversation between himself and some of his Hindu classmates, in which he describes the call for âDirect Actionâ to be one of a strike against the British. He describes how he was caught in a crossfire of hurled brickbats between the two communities on Raja Dinendra Street in North Calcutta, and in that state was badly hit by a stick-wielding Bihari milkman. He has tried to establish that the rioting started not after Suhrawardy's Maidan speech, but early in the morning, and Muslims were casualties from the very beginning. And he has laid the blame for the riots squarely on the Bihari community of Calcutta, absolving both Bengali Hindus and Muslims from any complicity in the process.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://bengalvoice.com/
All states can't be everything you want them to be, some like Bengal had no large scale retaliation against Muslims while the South Indian states never had strong missionary traditions partly due to the Dravidian movement (in Tamil Nadu). In other areas like North and East Lanka which are still Tamil areas there has been a civil war going on for over 20 years now and the Tamils are reduced to grinding poverty which missionary vultures are utilising, you can answer my questions about Bengal in the Bengal history thread since I don't want this thread to get sidetracked too much.
[quote=Bharatvarsh,Feb 8 2006, 06:11 PM]
And if other states can come up with resistance against Islamic invaders then why couldn't Bengal?
very few indian states could come up with "effective" resistance to muslims. mostly the frontier states, and states that were lucky enough to have a powerful king when the onslaught came. also the buddhists converted en-masse as your reference proved.
or maybe you can tell us how come there was no largescale retaliation during partition in Bengal
says who??? the retaliation obviously wasnt big enough to prevent the partition, just as india couldnt do much to prevent pakistan from slipping away, but if you are going to tell me that there was no opposition for the partion of bengal, then i am not buying that.
(who as per you are one of the people in India who know how to fight),
true. the ina was half punjabi if not more. bengal and maharashtra produced more than half the national leaders through the various phases (extremists, moderates etc). most of the people who languished in kalapani (cellular jail) were marathis or bengalis with some firebrands from central india and north india thrown in too.
so, not according to me, according to history
even the cowardly and non martial South Indians were way ahead in retaliation
where did you get that?? when did i say that??
just that the 4 states betwen them have not produced 4 people of all-india stature during india's freedom struggle against the poms, unless yo consider Radhakrishnan a freedom "fighter".
(according to Pandit Sunderlal's report 200,000 Muslims got killed all over Hyderabad), even during Direct Action Day the lead for retaliation was taken by Bihari and UP Hindus in Calcutta and Sikhs, that is why Muslim authors and Bengali Hindu (p-secs) routinely try to shift the blame onto outsiders (Bihari Hindus) as the ones responsible for Direct Action Day. I will quote a Bengali himself on this:
yes, people of up and bihar have a lot more grievance against the muslims than do bengalis. i think we discussed this long back when i pointed out that the savage attacks that the muslims carried out in up-bihar-rajasthan, was spared to bengal. bengal's main beef was against the english. also at the time of DAD hindu and muslim bengalis were already opposing the english in tandem.
All states can't be everything you want them to be, some like Bengal had no large scale retaliation against Muslims
agreed.
i never tried to come up with fables of bengal's retaliation against muslims.
so may be you could start accepting facts as well.
while the South Indian states never had strong missionary traditions partly due to the Dravidian movement (in Tamil Nadu).
so if they didnt have strong missionary traditions, why are the x-ians having a field day?? that was my original question. also apart from the syrian christians of kerela, who came to india loooong back, bengal has had christians and missionaries for somewhat longer and in a more rubust manner than most of india. yet the missionaries never could do much - maybe its time you gave the Brahmo Samaj and ramkrishna-vivekananda combine their due??
In other areas like North and East Lanka which are still Tamil areas there has been a civil war going on for over 20 years now and the Tamils are reduced to grinding poverty which missionary vultures are utilising,
thats sri lanka. i was talking about india.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->very few indian states could come up with "effective" resistance to muslims. mostly the frontier states, and states that were lucky enough to have a powerful king when the onslaught came. also the buddhists converted en-masse as your reference proved. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You need to know your history better, to claim that there was no effective resistance is ridiculous, the resistance in Punjab started with the rise of Banda and reached its culmination when Maharaja Ranjit Singh established his far flung empire. The resistance in the South started as soon as Muslims left after their conquest, the Reddy and Nayaka chiefs (Vema Reddy and Prolaya Nayaka) destroyed Muslim power and later the Vijayanagar empire was founded and kept Muslims at bay for almost 200 years and after it fell the Marathas took over the torch and carried it through. In the north there were plenty of rebellions among the Jats which culminated in the establishment of the kingdom of Bharatpur under Maharaja Suraj Mal and in Bundelkhand was born the great Chatrasal Bundela, maybe you can tell us why the sufi Waliullah was writing the following letters to Ahmad Shah Abdali if there was no effective resistance:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->1. Letter to Ahmad Shah Abdali, Ruler of Afghanistan
The presence of the kings of Islam is a great blessing from Allah⦠You should know that the country of Hindustan is a large land. In olden days, the kings of Islam had struggled hard and for long in order to conquer this foreign country. They could do it only in several turnsâ¦18
Every (Muslim) king got mosques erected in his territory, and created madrasas. Muslims of Arabia and Ajam (non-Arab Muslim lands) migrated from their own lands and arrived in these territories. They became agents for the publicity and spread of Islam here. Uptil now their descendants are firm in the ways of Islamâ¦19
Among the non-Muslim communities, one is that of the Marhatah (Maratha). They have a chief. For some time past, this community has been raising its head, and has become influential all over Hindustanâ¦20
â¦It is easy to defeat the Marhatah community, provided the ghãzîs of Islam gird up their loins and show courageâ¦21
In the countryside between Delhi and Agra, the Jat community used to till the land. In the reign of Shahjahan, this community had been ordered not to ride on horses, or keep muskets with them, or build fortresses for themselves. The kings that came later became careless, and this community has used the opportunity for building many forts, and collecting musketsâ¦22
In the reign of Muhammad Shah, the impudence of this community crossed all limits. And Surajmal, the cousin of Churaman, became its leader. He took to rebellion. Therefore, the city of Bayana which was an ancient seat of Islam, and where the Ulama and the Sufis had lived for seven hundred years, has been occupied by force and terror, and Muslims have been turned out of it with humiliation and hurtâ¦23
â¦Whatever influence and prestige is left with the kingship at present, is wielded by the Hindus. For no one except them is there in the ranks of managers and officials. Their houses are full of wealth of all varieties. Muslims live in a state of utter poverty and deprivation. The story is long and cannot be summarised. What I mean to say is that the country of Hindustan has passed under the power of non-Muslims. In this age, except your majesty, there is no other king who is powerful and great, who can defeat the enemies, and who is farsighted and experienced in war. It is your majestyâs bounden duty (farz-i-ain) to invade Hindustan, to destroy the power of the Marhatahs, and to free the down-and-out Muslims from the clutches of non-Muslims. Allah forbid, if the power of the infidels remains in its present position, Muslims will renounce Islam and not even a brief period will pass before Muslims become such a community as will no more know how to distinguish between Islam and non-Islam. This will be a great tragedy. Due to the grace of Allah, no one except your majesty has the capacity for preventing this tragedy from taking place.
We who are the servants of Allah and who recognise the Prophet as our saviour, appeal to you in the name of Allah that you should turn your holy attention to this direction and face the enemies, so that a great merit is added to the roll of your deeds in the house of Allah, and your name is included in the list of mujãhidîn fi Sabîlallah (warriors in the service of Allah). May you acquire plunder beyond measure, and may the Muslims be freed from the stranglehold of the infidels. I seek refuge in Allah when I say that you should not act like Nadir Shah who oppressed and suppressed the Muslims, and went away leaving the Marhatahs and the Jats whole and prosperous.
The enemies have become more powerful after Nadir Shah, the army of Islam has disintegrated, and the empire of Delhi has become childrensâ play. Allah forbid, if the infidels continue as at present, and Muslims get (further) weakened, the very name of Islam will get wiped out.24
â¦When your fearsome army reaches a place where Muslims and non-Muslims live together, your administrators must take particular care. They must be instructed that those weak Muslims who live in the countryside should be taken to towns and cities. Next, some such administrators should be appointed in towns and cities as would see to it that the properties of Muslims are not plundered, and the honour of no Muslim is compromised.25
Â
2. To Najibuddaulah, the Ruhela Ally of Abdali in India
Your solemn letter has reached (me)â¦
At the âhidden levelâ (occult word), the downfall of the Marhatahs and the Jats has been decided. Now, therefore, it is only a matter of time. As soon as the servants of Allah gird up their loins and come out with courage, the magic fortress of falsehood will be shatteredâ¦26
Â
3. To Najibuddaulah
â¦There are three groups in Hindustan which are known for the qualities of fanaticism and zeal. So long as these three are not exterminated, no king can feel secure, nor any noble. The people (read Muslims) also will not be able to live in peace.
Religious as well as worldly interests dictate that soon after winning the war with the Marhatahs, you should turn towards the forts of the Jats, and conquer them with the blessings from the hidden (occult) world. Next is the turn of the Sikhs. This group should also be defeated, while waiting for grace from Allah.
â¦I appeal to you in the name of Allah and his Prophet that you should not cast your eye on the property of any Muslim. If you take care in this regard, there is hope that the doors of victory will be opened to you one after another. But if this caution is ignored, I fear that the wails of the oppressed may become obstacles in the way towards your goal.27
Â
4. To Najibuddaulah
These words are being written in reply to the verbal message sent by you. I have been asked (by you) to tell (you) about suppression of the rebellion of Jats in the environs of Delhi.
The fact is that this recluse (meaning himself) has witnessed in the occult world the downfall of the Jats in the same way as that of the Marhatahs. I have also seen it in a dream that Muslims have taken possession of the forts and the country of the Jats, and that Muslims have become masters of those forts and that country as in the past. Most probably, the Ruhelas will occupy those Jat forts. This has been determined and decided in the most secret world. This recluse has not the shadow of a doubt about that. But the way that victory will be achieved is not yet clear. What is needed is prayers from those special servants of Allah who have been chosen for this purpose.
â¦But keep one thing in your mind, namely, that the Hindus who are apparently in yourâs and your governmentâs employ, are inclined towards the enemies in their hearts. They do not want that the enemies be exterminated. They will try a thousand tricks in this matter, and endeavour in every way to show to your honour that the path of peace is more profitable.
Make up your mind not to listen to this group (the Hindu employees). If you disregard their advice, you will reach the height of fulfilment. This recluse knows of this (fulfilment) as if he is seeing it with his own eyes.28
Â
5. To Shykh Muhammad Ashiq
â¦I have received your weighty letterâ¦
According to whatever this recluse (meaning himself) has learnt (from the occult world), Ahmad Shah Abdali will come again for putting down the enemies. When this sacred promise is fulfilled, he will most probably stay here, and dedicate his life to the last to (the welfare of) this land. In spite of the crimes that abound and the evils that have multiplied, the work is proceeding according to plan. The reason for this most probably is that Allah wants to destroy the power of his enemies.29
Â
6. To Shah Muhammad Ashiq Pahalti
â¦your letter has arrivedâ¦
Safdar Jang had reached such a state (of damnation) that his foot got afflicted with cancer. The more they removed the (affected) flesh from his foot, the worse it became. At last, they were forced to amputate his foot. Finally, he passed away in this piteous condition. It means that Allahâs wrath against the Marhatahs and the Jats has now become manifest, and the defeat and destruction of these people has been decided at the occult level.30
Â
7. To Taj Muhammad Khan Baluch
Your honoured letter regarding suppression of the Jats has arrived. Allah is merciful, and it is hoped that he will crush the enemy. You should rest assured⦠You should forge unity with Musa Khan and other Muslim groups, and put to use this friendship and unity for facing the enemies. I hope for sure that on account of this unity among Muslims and their nobility, victory will be achieved.
The reason for the rise of enemies and the fall of Muslims is nothing except that, led by their lower nature, Muslims have shared their (Muslimsâ) concerns with Hindus. It is obvious that Hindus will not tolerate the suppression of non-Muslims. Being farsighted and practising patience are praiseworthy things, but not to the extent that non-Muslims take possession of Muslim cities, and go on occupying one (such) city every day⦠This is no time for farsightedness and patience. This is the time for putting trust in Allah, for manifesting the might of the sword, and for arousing the Muslim sense of honour. If you will do that, it is possible that winds of favour will start blowing. Whatever this recluse knows is this that war with the Jats is a magic spell which appears fearful at first but which, if you depend fully on the power of Allah and draw His attention towards this (war), will turn out to be no more than a mere show. Let me hope that you will keep me informed of developments and the faring of your armsâ¦31
http://voiceofdharma.org/books/muslimsep/ch6.htm<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
See there was no resistance, all this is make believe.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->says who??? the retaliation obviously wasnt big enough to prevent the partition, just as india couldnt do much to prevent pakistan from slipping away, but if you are going to tell me that there was no opposition for the partion of bengal, then i am not buying that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Anyone who has elementary knowledge knows that there was no large scale retaliation during partition in West Bengal, just compare the Muslim population pre partition and post partition in Punjab and Haryana with that of West Bengal and stop making excuses and just accept the fact that there was no large scale retaliation, opposing partition through marches and satyagrahas is not retalitiation, go read what happened to Muslims in East Punjab (that is real retaliation). Again a quote from our Bengali author:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But, precisely because of this ignorance, the question might be asked, why am I talking about the movement of Hindus alone? What about the reciprocal movement of Muslims from West to East Bengal? The simple reason why I am not talking about any such thing is that there was no such thing, no such reciprocal movement. Muslims have not left West Bengal in any number worth mentioning. This fundamental difference between the human migration in Bengal and that in Punjab simply cannot be overstated. In Punjab, after January 1948, no Muslim was left on the Indian side, and no Hindu or Sikh on the Pakistani side â literally. On the other hand, religious violence in the wake of partition in Bengal, unlike in Punjab, has been strictly a one-way affair. In Punjab there was a Patiala massacre (of Muslims) to match a Sheikhupura (of Sikhs and Hindus), but there is no parallel of the Meghna Bridge or Jagannath Hall massacres in West Bengal.
http://bengalvoice.com/<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->yes, people of up and bihar have a lot more grievance against the muslims than do bengalis. i think we discussed this long back when i pointed out that the savage attacks that the muslims carried out in up-bihar-rajasthan, was spared to bengal. bengal's main beef was against the english. also at the time of DAD hindu and muslim bengalis were already opposing the english in tandem.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
hehe so many excuses for cowardice, I guess even Noakhali proved this joint unity against the British, is that why so many Hindus were raped and murdered in here?, always blaming the English man while absolving the Mussalmans of any guilt, this has been a good weapon of Marxists. So do tell us how come even after Noakhali happened and the Englishman packed his bags there was no retaliation to the daily massacres of Hindus in East Bengal, were people still fighting the imaginary Englishman or were they too sacred to do some counter rioting like the Hindus and Sikhs did in Punjab?, so great was this obsession with the Englishman and refusal to face facts as the following quote shows:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The game of badminton was popular in Calcutta at the time. Despite
the news of Noakhali there was no suspension of badminton playing. I
visited two/three clubs and discussed the Noakhali riots with the
members. They said: "Oh well, the British rulers are behind these
riots. There is not much we can do." Despite having witnessed Moslem
riots in Calcutta itself just three months earlier, they were quite
unconcerned about the fate of the Hindus of Noakhali.
http://www.swordoftruth.com/swordoftruth/a...s/noakhali.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So there you go, all the sources do confirm what I said, there was no retaliation against Muslims.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->agreed.
i never tried to come up with fables of bengal's retaliation against muslims.
so may be you could start accepting facts as well.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can accept facts unlike you, its a fact that the South made negligible contribution to the freedom movement but its also a fact that most of the South was not under the British rule with the exception of Madras Presidency and some other areas and its a fact that the South produced great resistance to Muslims unlike Bengal under the Vijayanagara Empire and maybe you cna start reading history before shooting your mouth off, I had quoted Sunderlal's report and I am quoting it again, if you don't have counter points then stop talking, here is the quote:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The report, entitled On the Post-Operation Polo Massacres, Rape and Destruction or Seizure of Property in Hyderabad State, makes grim reading. In village after village across the state, it meticulously and unemotionally catalogued incidents of murder and mass rape, sometimes committed by troops, in other cases committed by local Hindu hooligans after the troops had disarmed the Muslim population. A short extract, chosen at random, gives the general flavour:
"Ganjoti Paygah, District Osmanabad:
There are 500 homes belonging to Muslims here. Two hundred Muslims were murdered by the goondas. The army had seized weapons from the Muslims. As the Muslims became defenceless, the goondas began the massacre. Muslim women were raped by the troops. Statement of Pasha Bi, resident of Ganjoti: the trouble in Ganjoti began after the army's arrival. All the young Muslim women here were raped. Five daughters of Osman sahib were raped and six daughters of the Qazi were raped. Ismail Sahib Sawdagar's daughter was raped in Saiba Chamar's home for a week. Soldiers from Umarga came every week and after all-night rape, young Muslim women were sent back to their homes in the morning. Mahtab Tamboli's daughters were divided among Hindus, one is in Burga Julaha's home... "
And so on, for page after page. In all, the report estimates that as many as 200,000 Hyderabadi Muslims were slaughtered in the aftermath of the 'Police Action': an astonishing figure which, if true, would turn the 'police action' into a bloodbath comparable to parts of the Punjab during Partition. Even if one regards the figure of 200,000 dead as an impossible exaggeration, it is still clear that the scale of the killing was horrific. Although publicly Nehru played down the disorder in Hyderabad, claiming to the Indian representative at the United Nations that following the Nizam's officials deserting their posts there had been some disorder in which Hindus had retaliated for their sufferings under the [Muslim] Razakars [militia], privately he was much more alarmed. This is indicated by a note Nehru sent to Sardar Patel's Ministry of States on the 26th of November 1948, saying that he had received reports of killings of Muslims so large in number 'as to stagger the imagination' and looting of Muslim property 'on a tremendous scale' - all of which would seem to confirm the general tone of Pandit Sunderlal's report.
http://www.travelintelligence.com/wsd/ar...t_832.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->so if they didnt have strong missionary traditions, why are the x-ians having a field day?? that was my original question. also apart from the syrian christians of kerela, who came to india loooong back, bengal has had christians and missionaries for somewhat longer and in a more rubust manner than most of india. yet the missionaries never could do much - maybe its time you gave the Brahmo Samaj and ramkrishna-vivekananda combine their due??<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I misspelled it, it was supposed to be "Strong anti-missionary traditions", I give credit to Vivekananda not half anglicised idiots who served under Muslims and had no self respect, Swami Dayananda also opposed idolatry and many gods but he had pride and was uncompromising about swarajya and had no illusions about Islam and xtianity.
er.. by "effective" resistance... i meant resistance effective enough to keep muslims out.
so far i know all of india nearly was under muslims. the only ones who kept the muslims "out" were the ahoms. and perhaps the marathas. even the heroic rajput resistance wasnt "effective".
why else did we have the 800 year old islamic misrule in india eh if it was all so effective in keepingthem out??
you cant compare the partition of bengal and that of punjab. the latter was a partition between 2 countries, not states and for good.
and as for resistance by the viyajanagar empire... doesnt that vindicate me?? that resistance came from exactly those who were lucky enough to have a very powerful kingdom at the time of the muslims arrival??
as for half-anglicised idiots (in which i suppose you include the father of modern india), trees are known by their fruits. there arnt many christians in bengal despite such a overwhelming western presence. and so it is that bengal doint have the deeply entrenched caste system or dowry and female infanticide and yet managed to keep x-ianity at bay.
"I can accept facts unlike you,"
>>> when did i try to say we offerend any resistance to muslims invaders?? partition of bengal was opposed tooth and nail, the noakhali killings are mutually exclusive to that and just cos it happened dont prove that we took it sitting down. only we had a bigger enemy back then, than muslims.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->er.. by "effective" resistance... i meant resistance effective enough to keep muslims out.
so far i know all of india nearly was under muslims. the only ones who kept the muslims "out" were the ahoms. and perhaps the marathas. even the heroic rajput resistance wasnt "effective".
why else did we have the 800 year old islamic misrule in india eh if it was all so effective in keepingthem out??<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well by your standards very few countries effectively resisted Islam, compared to other countries India performed very well and by the way even if we take your point that many states did not manage to keep Muslims out then that still doesn't counter the point I am making, compared to other Indian states Bengal had almost no worthwhile resistance after Muslim rule was established or even before it was establishe.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->you cant compare the partition of bengal and that of punjab. the latter was a partition between 2 countries, not states and for good.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What are you talking about, its absolutely fair to compare both, Punjab was partitioned into Pakistani Punjab (also known as West Punjab) and Indian Punjab (also known as East Punjab) and Bengal was partitioned into Indian Bengal (also known as West Bengal) and Pakistani Bengal (also known as East Bengal or East Pakistan), I am not talking about the earlier partition of Bengal but the later partition during the larger partition of Bharat into India and Pakistan.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->and as for resistance by the viyajanagar empire... doesnt that vindicate me?? that resistance came from exactly those who were lucky enough to have a very powerful kingdom at the time of the muslims arrival??<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You need to go read your history, Vijayanagara was not a powerful kingdom at the time of Muslims arrival (infact there was no Vijaynagar kingdom when the first Muslims invasions started into India), if you are saying that it was already a very powerful kingdom by the time Muslims arrvived into the South then you are again wrong, it was built from scratch by Harihar and Bukka under the guidance of Swami Vidyaranya (who would later also serve as its Prime minister for a brief period) for the protection of Hindu dharma, the Muslims already arrvived by this time into the South and Madurai was under their rule and according to tradition Harihar and Bukka were forcibly converted to Islam but later came under the influence of Vidyaranya who reconverted them and asked them to start a kingdom for protecting Hindus. It was built from scratch and soon expanded into one of the most powerful kingdoms in India, go read Gangadevi's Madhuravijayam which gives an account of the Vijaynagar invasion of Madurai to liberate it from Muslim depradations under Kumara Kampana (Gangadevi was his wife), at its zenith under Sri Krishnadevaraya it housed 18 million people and had a million strong army (which Devaraya used in the battle of Raichur).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->as for half-anglicised idiots (in which i suppose you include the father of modern india), trees are known by their fruits. there arnt many christians in bengal despite such a overwhelming western presence. and so it is that bengal doint have the deeply entrenched caste system or dowry and female infanticide and yet managed to keep x-ianity at bay.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes so what, many other states did equally well, as for him being the father of modern India, maybe to you he is but to many Indians he is not and never will be, the main difference between modern India and ancient India is that the former lacked political unity while the latter doesn't and last time I checked Ram Mohan Roy did nothing to unite India, if anything it was Sardar Patel who toiled day and night to bring about this political unity and as for reform Ram Mohan Roy is nothing compared to Maharishi Dayananda who with his teachings of Self pride and Self rule and Swadeshi would inspire generations of Hindus. Yes indeed a tree is known by its fruits, that is why the Arya Samaj would become a force to reckon with and would produce some of the great freefom fighters (Lala Lajpat Rai, Ram Prasad Bismil being 2 examples) while the Brahmo Samaj would become xtianised and anglicised with Keshub Chandra Sen becoming another British lackey. The following quotes illustrate what I am talking about:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->By the time he reached Calcutta, the Brahmo Samaj had split into two. A minority consisting of those who wanted to retain their. Hindu identity had remained with the Adi Brahmo Samaj led by Debendra Nath Tagore and Rajnarayan Bose. The majority had walked away with Keshub Chunder Sen who had formed his Church of the New Dispensation (NababidhAna) and started dreaming of becoming the prophet of a new world religion. Dayananda saw with his own eyes how infatuation with Christ had reduced Keshub Chunder to a sanctimonious humbug and turned him into a rootless cosmopolitan. He also witnessed how Debendra Nath Tagore was finding it difficult to retrieve the ground lost when the Adi Brahmo Samaj had repudiated the fundamental tenets of Hinduism - the authority of the Vedas, VarNAshrama-dharma, the doctrine of rebirth, etc. The only consolation he found in Calcutta was a lecture, The Superiority of Hinduism, which Rajnarayan Bose had delivered earlier and a copy of which was presented to him.
Dayananda wrote a critique of Brahmoism soon after he returned from Calcutta. It was incorporated in Chapter XI of his SatyArthaprakAsha which was first published from Varanasi in the beginning of 1875. The Brahmos, he wrote, have very little love of their own country left in them. Far from taking pride in their country and their ancestors, they find fault with both. They praise Christians and Englishmen in their public speeches while they do not even mention the rishis of old. They proclaim that since creation and till today, no wise man has been born outside the British fold. The people of Aryavarta have always been idiotic, according to them. They believe that Hindus have never made any progress. Far from honouring the Vedas, they never hesitate in denouncing those venerable Shastras. The book which describes the tenets of Brahmoism has place for Moses, Jesus and Muhammad who are praised as great saints, but it has no place for any ancient rishi, howsoever great. They denounce Hindu society for its division in castes, but they never notice the racial consciousness which runs deep in European society. They claim that their search is only for truth, whether it is found in the Bible or the Quran, but they manage to miss the truth which is in their own Vedic heritage. They are running after Jesus without knowing what their own rishis have bequeathed to them. They discard the sacred thread as if it were heavier than the foreign liveries they love to wear. In the process, they have become beggars in their own home and can do no good either to themselves or to those among whom they live.1
http://voiceofdharma.org/books/hhce/Ch11.htm<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Indian loyalists justified the British presence on the same grounds, e.g. Keshab Chandra Sen, leader of the reformist movement Brahmo Samaj (mid-19th century), welcomed the British advent as a reunion with his Aryan cousins: âIn the advent of the English nation in India we see a reunion of parted cousins, the descendants of two different families of the ancient Aryan raceâ
http://voiceofdharma.org/books/ait/ch11.htm<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->when did i try to say we offerend any resistance to muslims invaders?? partition of bengal was opposed tooth and nail, the noakhali killings are mutually exclusive to that and just cos it happened dont prove that we took it sitting down. only we had a bigger enemy back then, than muslims.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What bull how was partition of Bengal (during 1947) and Noakhali mutually exclusive, the latter was a massacre directly connected to this partition, oh so now you had a bigger enemy, so do tell us how come even though the British were also ruling Punjab there was large scale retaliation there and not in Bengal? and do tell us how come even after the Englishman packed his bags there was no worthwhile retaliation since this so called bigger enemy was gone now.
[/quote]
whats this "katha's and Sarma darma Sama Bhavana" pray??
from your last line i gather its some loony x-ian canard that makes people believe that jesus was krishna and so people can easily change to christianity, whilest remaining hindu or some such.
er... as an aside, i know for a fact that some hindus (esp konkanis and tullus) visit the churches in mangalore and other parts of the konkan coast. they go there for the father/bishop to hand out bread crumbs or some such.
why this phenomenon?? are these the hindu equivalent of "rice christians"?? ie. the bread hindus??
[right][snapback]46450[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Hmm the meaning i wanted to convey was not that of the rice christians.
The modus operandi differs a little from the north to the south , isolate the flock and pounce upon them , to isolate them make inroads masking the local god's in similar terms of the gospel.
For example there are conversions going on in the north in punjab too , the terms used are satsang , guru ,kirtan etc etc whereas they actually mean the church , pastor and the choir.
Since the tightly knit community features were absent down south, the pastor's use that method more effectively.
Regarding the question of resistance around 1326 Muhammed bin tughlaq mounted a vicious attack on the andhra country , the chieftans of andhra mounted a serious counter attack .
1.Hari hara and bukka were captured produced in the delhi sultanate, they ultimately escaped and under the guidance of vidyaranya founded the vijayanagara empire.
2.In karanataka Somadeva of aravidu mounted a spectacular assault on Malik Zada the commander of the mughal forces , slaughtered the mughal armies and restored the kingdom to the hindu's.
3.The vijayanagara empire reigned from 1336 till the most important battle of talikota 1565 .The contributions of the empire in keeping alive the hindu traditions in the face of the islamic demon are praise worthy .
It is noteworthy to remember that the Maratha's themselves were inspired by Samartha Ramadas the great saint in a similar fashion.
That was a watershed , the scale of destruction wrecked upon by the vijayanagara empire and to the lands of andhra , karnataka and tamilanadu was immense.
I beleive this dealt a huge blow to the psyche , south india is not separate in this regard , there were warriors who fought bravely , even during the 1600's -1800's there were tribal chiefs to kings who fought bravely against the british but could not appeal to the larger masses .
My original post referred to the loss of the pride factor , when the mughal armies razed and plundered after the destruction of the vijayanagara empire in typical islamic fashion made sure all vestiges were wiped out.
The south underwent islamic damage during that period , it was spared before that and the destruction unleashed during the sack of vijayanagara and later defeat of the nayakas put a serious dent on the psyche .
Even during the later period 1600's-1800's there were chieftan's and kings who tried to rise the banner of revolt but could not inspire the masses maybe due to the horror of the past.
Like the rest of india , each part had its own problems and the people will bounce back in their own way--atleast some generations from now is what I can wish for.
Well by your standards very few countries effectively resisted Islam, compared to other countries India performed very well and by the way even if we take your point that many states did not manage to keep Muslims out then that still doesn't counter the point I am making, compared to other Indian states Bengal had almost no worthwhile resistance after Muslim rule was established or even before it was establishe.
we put no resistance and had muslims rule.
others put a lot of resistance... and had muslim rule.
go figure.
What are you talking about, its absolutely fair to compare both, Punjab was partitioned into Pakistani Punjab (also known as West Punjab) and Indian Punjab (also known as East Punjab) and Bengal was partitioned into Indian Bengal (also known as West Bengal) and Pakistani Bengal (also known as East Bengal or East Pakistan), I am not talking about the earlier partition of Bengal but the later partition during the larger partition of Bharat into India and Pakistan.
yes and by then (47) the switch in populations had already taken place. you hardly need tell me about that, cos my ancestral family caomes from Moimonsingh, in bangladesh. you know crapshit about the exodus that took place in bengal and when exactly it took place.
in punjab the exodus was during 1947 and resulted in a bolldbath. here 90% of the switch had already taken place, during the partition of bengal itself and that was largely peaceful. if the muslims killed hindu bengalis later, then thats just cos they are muslims and lose no chance to kill few infidels more. its best you keep quiet about stuff you have no first hand info about.
You need to go read your history, Vijayanagara was not a powerful kingdom at the time of Muslims arrival (infact there was no Vijaynagar kingdom when the first Muslims invasions started into India), if you are saying that it was already a very powerful kingdom by the time Muslims arrvived into the South then you are again wrong, it was built from scratch by Harihar and Bukka under the guidance of Swami Vidyaranya (who would later also serve as its Prime minister for a brief period) for the protection of Hindu dharma, the Muslims already arrvived by this time into the South and Madurai was under their rule and according to tradition Harihar and Bukka were forcibly converted to Islam but later came under the influence of Vidyaranya who reconverted them and asked them to start a kingdom for protecting Hindus. It was built from scratch and soon expanded into one of the most powerful kingdoms in India, go read Gangadevi's Madhuravijayam which gives an account of the Vijaynagar invasion of Madurai to liberate it from Muslim depradations under Kumara Kampana (Gangadevi was his wife), at its zenith under Sri Krishnadevaraya it housed 18 million people and had a million strong army (which Devaraya used in the battle of Raichur).
true. but the vijaynagar empoire howsoever humble its beginings, went on to become one of the most powerful, rich and glorious empire in all indian history. had they ended up as another of the many mushrooming kingdoms we had in india, then they would not have been able to offer the resistance they did.
Yes so what, many other states did equally well,
but never had half the western influnce bengal did. it was a lot easier for them to keep missionaries at bay. by comparism the madras presidency did rather well (till the recent rise) i must say, becaouse after calcutta the one of the next biggest bastions of the english was madras.
as for him being the father of modern India, maybe to you he is but to many Indians he is not and never will be, the main difference between modern India and ancient India is that the former lacked political unity
forget ancient india. the main difference between modern and medieval (islamic) india was the predominance of sati, child marriage, the lack of widow remarriage, female education, dowry and other crap.
if you so disregard him, then dont send your daughters to school, marry them off at age 13, prepare to pay loads of dowry, and prepare a funeral pyre for a "sati" spectacle shoudl any unforseen incidents happen??
you may be sad that these social evils are no longer part of indian society, but there are lots of indians who are glad that they have been rendered a thing of the past.
while the latter doesn't and last time I checked Ram Mohan Roy did nothing to unite India,
he was a social reformer. not a politician. or freedom fighter.
if anything it was Sardar Patel who toiled day and night to bring about this political unity
yes. politicl unity. sardar patel was a political leader.
and as for reform Ram Mohan Roy is nothing compared to Maharishi Dayananda who with his teachings of Self pride and Self rule and Swadeshi would inspire generations of Hindus.
so how come this person never did anything to abolish sati?? child marriage?? install widow remarriage acts?? female education?????
where's the proof of the pudding eh??
Yes indeed a tree is known by its fruits, that is why the Arya Samaj would become a force to reckon with and would produce some of the great freefom fighters (Lala Lajpat Rai, Ram Prasad Bismil being 2 examples) while the Brahmo Samaj would become xtianised and anglicised with Keshub Chandra Sen becoming another British lackey.
how about listing the freedom fighters that the brahmo samaj spawned ???
brahmo samaj never become christianised, but just added a monotheistic veneer - which kept christianity at bay. read koenraad elst's explaination on this instead spewing fables.
welcomed the British advent as a reunion with his Aryan cousins: âIn the advent of the English nation in India we see a reunion of parted cousins, the descendants of two different families of the ancient Aryan raceâ[/color]
he was right - only the other way round. i have explained all that in the history of bengal thread.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->when did i try to say we offerend any resistance to muslims invaders?? partition of bengal was opposed tooth and nail, the noakhali killings are mutually exclusive to that and just cos it happened dont prove that we took it sitting down. only we had a bigger enemy back then, than muslims.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What bull
what sort of english is that??
how was partition of Bengal (during 1947) and Noakhali mutually exclusive, the latter was a massacre directly connected to this partition,
i said just cos the noackali killings took place doesnt mean the bengal partition was not oposed.
math was never your strong point was it??
oh so now you had a bigger enemy, so do tell us how come even though the British were also ruling Punjab there was large scale retaliation there and not in Bengal?
there was no large scale retaliation in bangal against the brits??? what are you smoking??
punjab formed the bulk of the INA soldiers. bengal produced more freedom fighters than perhaps maharashtra. a quality vs quantity thing. you are just a spineless person who hasnt learnt to give people their due, while happily riding piggyback on their efforts. bengal's contribution to the freedom movement hardly needs your nod of approval.
anyway burns down to punjab, maharashtra and bengal doesnt it, for the most part?? i love the way you inadvertantly keep vindicating me .
and do tell us how come even after the Englishman packed his bags there was no worthwhile retaliation since this so called bigger enemy was gone now.
the brits left in idnia in 1947, not on noakhali day.
and the INA's attacks from the eastern side is the biggest and most decisive retaliation the brits got, swiftly to be floowed by the naval mutiny.
is there a rule that says, retaliations in/from one state have to be of the exact same nature as in another state???
just take your parochial hogwash somewhere else. i am not looking forward to another sambarsoaked reply.
|
