Banner Advertiser

Friday, March 23, 2012

[ALOCHONA] ISI Funding for BNP: Pakistan rejects reports



ISI Funding for BNP: Pakistan rejects reports

Star Report

The Pakistan foreign ministry has rejected the allegation of funding BNP by the country's spy agency ISI before 1991 national election of Bangladesh as reported in local and international newspapers.

According to the ministry website, a spokesperson on Thursday termed baseless the news on ISI paying BNP.

Those reports were not only totally baseless but also part of mischievous efforts to damage the brotherly and mutually beneficial Pakistan-Bangladesh relationship, the spokesperson said.

Pakistan strictly adhered to the principle of non-interference in internal affairs of other countries and it would be ill-advised to give credence to such false, misleading and self-serving stories, the official added.

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=227541
http://amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2012/03/24/137604

__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] India helped Bangladesh in 1971 because....



India helped Bangladesh in 1971 because they wanted to break up Pakistan

Tuhin Reza

Some Indians often allege that there is an anti-Indian attitude among the Bangladeshis and that Bangladesh is not grateful for what India has done for her, especially in 1971. Yes, there is an anti-Indian sentiment among some sections of people in Bangladesh. But do these Indians ever ask why is this?

It is true that India helped Bangladesh during her war of independence with Pakistan.The question is, did India help Bangladesh out of great love and affection for the people of Bangladesh? If that is the case then why does not India support the right of self -determination of Kashmiris or the aspirations of the people of North-East India? If to-morrow Bengalis of West Bengal, Assam and Tripura want to join their Bengali brothers in Bangladesh and to create a greater Bangladesh, will India lend her support to this noble cause? The answer is, no.

India helped Bangladesh in 1971 because they wanted to break up Pakistan and to make it weaker. The way in which successive Pakistani regimes had behaved with Bangladeshis it was not possible for Bangladesh to remain with the then West Pakistan as one country. Bangladesh turned to India on the basis of this basic principle that 'your enemy's enemy is your best friend'.

Although Bangladesh sought help from India she had no doubts why India was helping her. That is why the people of Bangladesh were always very cautious. They formed their own provisional government and launched a guerrilla war against the Pakistani occupation forces instead of asking India to invade the then East Pakistan.

When in December the war between India and Pakistan broke out, Bangladesh only allowed Indian troops to come to Bangladeshi soil after the provisional Bangladesh government got India to recognise Bangladesh as an independent and sovereign country. Bangladesh knew that without a formal recognition India might not withdraw troops from Bangladesh and that she might face the
same fate as Kashmir or Hyderabad.

To make it short, in 1971, India used Bangladesh to achieve her aim of dismembering Pakistan, and Bangladesh in turn used India to achieve her independence; it was an alliance of convenience. Whatever, debts Bangladesh had to India had been paid with interests. India was allowed to achieve her life long ambition to break up Pakistan; they took all the arms and ammunition left by the Pakistani troops in Bangladesh instead of leaving them for the newly formed (to be) Bangladesh military; there is also evidence of high scale looting of machineries and other goods by Indian troops. India should ever remain grateful to Bangladesh for the way in which Bangladesh helped India to achieve her goal in 1971.

Despite these, still there could have been good neighbourly relationship with India, but that was not possible due to India's hostile and stepmotherly attitude towards Bangladesh. During the early period of Bangladesh, India subjected Bangladesh to severe political, economic and social pressure. Bangladesh was treated just like a mere satellite.

India sheltered anti-Bangladeshi elements and even assisted them to launch attack against Bangladesh armed forces. India actively supported and even encouraged Chakma uprising. Farraka barrage, Tin Bigha corridor, South
Talpatti island, river linking projects are only to name a few outstanding issues which still remain unresolved due to India's non-cooperation and even hostile attitude.

How much India loves Bangladesh is evident from her refusal to handover only one acre (Tin Bigha) of land to Bangladesh so that two Bangladeshi enclaves within India can have access to mainland Bangladesh, even after 30 years of the Indira-Mujib agreement. Apart from these, hundreds of Bangladeshis have been killed inside Bangladesh by BSF troops in unprovoked and indiscriminate shootings.

There has been a systematic campaign to portray Bangladesh as a failed and fundamentalist state by India and her media. One will hardly find any good news about Bangladesh being published from India. There have been numerous attempts by BSF (Indian Border Security Force) to push in many Bengali speaking Muslim people to Bangladesh under the pretext that they are
Bangladeshis.

Bangladesh always claims that these people are Indian Bengali Muslims. If they are truly Bangladeshis, then under international law, they could be deported through normal channel once their identity is established. Many Bangladeshi nationals are deported from Europe and America in this way. Why cannot India do the same?

My final point is that the anti-Indian feeling in Bangladesh is in no way directed to the people of India, but to the politics of the central government. People of Bangladesh have great love and respect for the people of India. Especially for the Bengali people of West Bengal, Assam and Tripura, Bangladeshis have a special place in their hearts; they are their ethnic brothers. If India wants to extend hands of friendship, Bangladesh will definitely accept that. But Indians should know that Bangladeshis want
friends and not masters.

http://www.mombu.com/culture/bangladesh/t-in-1971-india-wanted-to-break-up-pakistan-make-it-weaker-confirms-bangladeshi-in-uk-3853702.html

__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Personal attacks in Mukto-Mona



I am amused at the lack of attention by Dr. Bain on the personal attacks that Mr. Chakrabarty has made on me.  In fact he initiated them.  Like a street urchin begging for food, he keeps on begging for informations and want to teach me 'civility'.  A few years earlier, he even apologized to me in a personal email for his lack of manners.  This guy was a few years junior to me at Dhaka University.  Doesn't Dr. Bain think him insolent?

I do not enjoy any discussion with everybody.  Those who find me offensive are requested earnestly to ignore me.

On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

I think too much of personal attacking is going on in Mukto-Mona. A case in point is Dr. Kamal Das's nagging personal attacks on Mr. Subimal Chakrabarty.
 
I am sure many of us in this forum have children that are old enough for us to expect maturity in their expressions, especially when they communicate with other people. Let us please try that on ourselves. When appropriate, let us attack the message without attacking the messenger. Let us not use derogatory adjectives or insults on anyone. Direct attacks on individuals are worst, certainly detrimental to the respectability of the attacker.
 
Sukhamaya Bain 
 
 
=====================================
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 7:59 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
 
Mr. Chakrabarty thinks everybody but me is with him.  Being incorrigibly 'wise' he fails to see that God is a tribal lord.  Even the descendants of Abraham had different Gods.  Allah has ninety nine names, or 'Shayang Bhagwan' Krishna has hundred and eight for that matter, pointing not to so many manifestations but to so many different original constituents.  Most of the findings about Islam in the west is a post-Tagore phenomenon.  Just because some 'wise men' called the prophet 'Maharshi' he doesn't become infallible.  The research on Islam got momentum after Alfred Gillaum translated Ibn Hisham edited biography of the prophet written by Ibn Ishaque.  Whatever Mr. Chakrabarty might read, he comprehends next to nothing.  He should increase the dose of 'pancha gabya' in his diet to improve his comprehension.  May Allah grant him an Islamic paradise.
 
==============================
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

I think Mr. Chakrabarty is denigrating the "we" word a bit too much here. I have no intention of comparing my mind with that of any 'maharhishi' of any variety, Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or Jew. I put Buddha at a higher plane compared to the other 'maharhishis'. 'Maharhishi' or not, we came from our forefathers, and they had their virtues and vices, as we do; there is no need to overly denigrate any party. However, "we" certainly have a higher level of knowledge and intellect. We can appreciate our forefathers' real revolutions in terms of the standard at their time. We can go a bit soft on their crimes, because we came from them, and because we can certainly avoid emulating them. However, it would be wrong to import their primitive wisdom to our time. It would be wrong to apply too much of the superlative adjectives on them, because our present world has too many people who want to follow them by the book, even up to the point of hating innocent people.
 
Sukhamaya Bain
 
==============================================
From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 10:27 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
 
Thanks for speaking the truth. I will follow your advice. I will ignore personal attacks and say whatever I believe to be right. I personally know and you me. We both are too old to be able to be awakened from our sleep. Over the years we have consolidated our mindset and conviction which seem to be almost unchangeable. Now every one in the forum knows our directions of thought. We are on two different planes and we will never meet. But we we will definitely know each other. 
If you do not agree with Rabindranath you can say any thing you want to say against him as Das I'd now doing. I just wanted to explain why RN said so even though supposedly he must have not supported every thing Muhammad did in his personal life. Our mind is too little to comprehend him. We are neo intellectuals trying to use our leisure time as we have nothing else to do. We are all kind of parasites which we hardly realize. 
You have read the Geeta and you have seen Bhagwan himself, not even a sage, is instigating Arjuna to kill his own cousins and other close relatives to reinstate Dharma. 
Sent from my iPhone
 
===============================================
On Mar 17, 2012, at 8:00 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Here we go again. I have a suggestion for Kamal Das, and that is – he needs to let go the thread after one rebuttal; he keeps following the thread at no end without realizing where he is heading. It seems like he is trying to wake up someone who is pretending to sleep. There is a point when you have to realize that you cannot change the mind of your opponent no matter how much information you pile up in front of him/her. That's when you stop.
By now every one of us should have an idea about the intellectual aptitudes, philosophical, political, and religious views of all regular contributors to this forum. As a result, there is no need to prove anything. Just tell what your views are on the subject. That's it. You should always expect that, based on someone's intellectual aptitude, philosophical, political, and religious views, he/she will either agree or disagree with your views. I learned this truth from my own observations.
Now, about the 'Maharishi' attribute to Muhammad by Rabindra Nath, I do not know the pretext of the attribution, and it really does not matter to me. I like to judge everything on my own. I do not know any Maharishi ever instructed his followers to kill all non-believers of his views wherever they can find them. I do not know any Maharishi who told his followers to kill all male non-believers and distribute all female non-believers to his followers as booty after capturing them. I know it was in the context of a war, but – still does not make sense to me. Therefore, it will not make an iota of difference in my judgment even if God-almighty tells me that it was the right thing to do. I know – millions will disagree with me, and that's fine with me. I do not want to change anyone's mind; I just want to express my own feelings on the subject.
I know some people draw conclusion about a subject based on views of others, and some draw conclusions to please others. I do not do so; I collect information and then pass that through my own filter(s) to draw a conclusion of my own. The bottom line is – just because some famous people mentioned about something does not make it a truth. I remember Professor Amartya Sen, a Nobel laureate, visited Bangladesh sometime in 2001, just after the election and the worst ever communal pogrom in Bangladesh. Khaleda Zia gave him a reception, and during his speech Amartya Sen said that - Bagladesh was a perfect example of communal harmony. I am sure he knew that he was lying through his teeth just to promote his NGO program in Bangladesh. I hope I made my case.
Jiten Roy
==============================




__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh



"Among generals, I am Skanda" said Krishna in Gita.  Skanda is indisputably Sikander, i.e., Alexander the Great.   Krishna is apparently a post-Alexander personality.  So is Agastya Muni, author of Rg-Veda  History is well documented after the invasion by the Greeks and has no such record of a war at Kurukshetra.  A fool may be brainwashed with anything.  Couldn't the socalled 'Gita Bhashya' be written by someone else and passed in the name of Sankaracharya?

By some accounts the 'History of Western Philosophy' was submitted as a Ph. D. thesis which his supervisor Dr. Barnes.  By Russell's own fuzzy account, it was a compilation of  William Jones lectures, delivered at Harvard in the autumn of 1940.


On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 6:12 AM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

I am still intrigued about Russell's attempt to obtain a Ph.D degree. I will need more help from anybody in the forum.
Russell was born in 1872. History of Western Philosophy was published in 1945 when he was already 73 years old. He had already become world famous by co-authoring Principia Mathematica (1910-13) with Whitehead when he was 41.
When did he go to America any way? Probably not until he was in his fifties. It is hard to believe that a world famous man would go for a Ph.D degree at this age under the supervision of an American professor? Again, who knows! I really need help.
World famous philosopher Wittgenstein about whom Stephen Hawking has spoken so high was his Ph.D student in England.
Did a "bad boy" from England really care about a Ph.D degree at his old age?


Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 8:58 PM

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh

 
1.As usual, you are misreading what I write.  Russell wrote 'History of Western Philosophy' as a Ph. D. thesis and was not given athe degree as he failede to impress his supervisor.  Read his autobiography.  That did not prevent him from becoming a much more reputed scholar than his guide.

2. Remember the verse, "Prothome narjita Vidya...".  Trying to 'learn new things' with your age and mindset is next to impossible.  I may be in a worse situation in terms of health, but how do you know my age?  I skipped primary school, age wise you might not be younger than me. I started teaching in Rajshahi college at an age less than 20 yrs 10 months.  Many of my students even in the eleventh grade were older than me  That is besides the question.

3. When Islam ruined the old civilizations, northern Europe was mostly unlivable.  The desert 'civilization' is bound to be different from that of a fertile land.

4.  This may be last point, but most important.  I have no intention to carry on blogging with you.   Read good books if you can, and please for your Lord's [Ramkrishna] sake get off my back.  I have no need to share 'knowledge' with you or the men your 'gharana'.

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:26 AM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
1. Dada, you are probably three years older than me. Are you not in a worse situation than me with respect to learning new things?
2. Dada, you recommended me to read Bertrand Russell to "learn" that Islamic scholars had no contribution to European civilization. That's why I read (as a matter of fact re-read a few pages) from Russell and produced some quotes to show that he actually pretty well recognizes contribution of Islamic scholars. After all, he is Russell and has no problem in admitting what he thinks to be true.
3.Russell wrote the book in 1945. I am tired tonight. Hopefully tomorrow I will quote from a book that was published in 1990. You will be shocked more. 
4. As a matter of fact any reasonably good book on history of western philosophy reconizes the contribution of Islamic (muslim) scholars to the wealth of European wisdom.
5. One word of caution here. In the discussion we have to keep Islam, Mohammed, and muslim (Islamic) scholars separate from one another. That is exactly what a good book on history of philosophy does. 
6. I am surprised to learn that Russell had a Ph.D degree. 
7. About "A History of Western Philosophy" I have heard a different story. He wrote it to earn quick money when he was in deep financial crisis while his stay in the USA. An author has complained that the book was written in a hurry and hence is a job not well done.     

Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 8:59 PM

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
 
1. Mr. Chakravbarty, I have reasons to be impressed by your lack of depth on any subject.  I suppose you are a little over aged to enter into a freshman course.  With your level of comprehension, wisdom seems unattainable to you.   Ibn Sina called 'Maharshi Muhammad' a billy goat.  Read Khayyam's comments on him.  That may enlighten you.  To understand Islam, you have to study more contemporary authors than Russell.  Read Arberry, Watt, Ibn Warraqa, P.K. Hitti, Bernard Lewis etc.  Islam is a 'civilization' with many faces.  Only acceptable face is Sufism.  It had grown as a cult of Sophia, Goddess of Wisdom, and later got cloaked under the cult of Mohammedans.  The worst event in history was the fall of the Persians due to the war of succession after the death of Khosroe (poisoned by one of his sons).  Arabians filled the power vacuum thus created.  Islam is not a civilization.  It is a scourge to all great civilizations;viz., Byzantine, Egyptian, Indian, Persians, Spanish etc.  Kemal Pasha understood it and tried to be more Byzantine than Islamic.

2. Russell is informative, no doubt, but he is not the last answer.  He wrote 'History of Western Philosophy' as a Ph. D. dissertation and failed to impress his American supervisor.  In fact no book, except the 'Holy Quran' in your opinion, is the last answer.  So read as many books as you can find and draw your own conclusion.  Read every book more than once till the contents become comprehensible.  I do it myself.

3. Religion is something that binds a society together.  All 'great religions' are fragmented today.  God is also dead since long time ago. Being invented by primitive men, it can unite a few fools at best.  Even Karl Marx seem more powerful than God.


On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 8:15 PM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
1. I am neither a physician nor a holder of a doctorate degree.
2. I am quoting from Russell:
(i) "Its (Mohammedan civilization's) importance, which must not be underrated, is as a transmitter. Between ancient and modern European civilization, the dark ages intervened. The Mohammedans and the Byzantines, while lacking the intellectual energy required for innovation, preserved the apparatus of civilization---education, books, and learned leisure. Both stimulated the West when it emerged from barbarism---the Mohammedans chiefly in the thirteenth century, the Byzantines chiefly in the fifteenth. In each case the stimulus produced new thought better than any produced by the transmitters---in the one case scholasticism, in the other case the Renaissance (which however had other causes also)."
(ii) "He Averroes (Ibn Rushd) (1126-1198) holds that the existence of God can be proved by reason independently of revelation, a view also held by Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)."
(iii) "His (Averroes's) influence in Europe was very gteat, not only on the scholastics, but also on a large body of unprofessional free-thinkers, who denied immortality and were called Averroists.Among professional philosophers, his admirers were at first especially among the Fransiscans and at the University of Paris."
(iv) "From the twelfth to the seventeenth century, he (Ibn Sina or Avicenna (980-1037) was used in Europe as a guide to medicine.----------He was the author of an encyclopaedia, almost unknown to the East because of the hostility of theologians, but influencial in the West through Latin translations. His psychology has an empirical tendency."
 
I could have quoted more. My point is that we must not be shallow in our comments. We must read and then make a comment.
 
 

Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 8:37 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
 
Once again I appreciate your comment, Dr. Roy, on the uselessness of debating with Dr. Chakrabarty.  Any really inquisitive person would read serious literature and not try to 'learn' on the blog.  I have no clue what he is up to.  I have given plenty of references, apparently he reads none of them. Prof. Amartya Sen was an aspirant for the post of the President of India.  I believe he became an apologetic of Islam with that ulterior motive.
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Here we go again. I have a suggestion for Kamal Das, and that is – he needs to let go the thread after one rebuttal; he keeps following the thread at no end without realizing where he is heading. It seems like he is trying to wake up someone who is pretending to sleep. There is a point when you have to realize that you cannot change the mind of your opponent no matter how much information you pile up in front of him/her. That's when you stop.
By now every one of us should have an idea about the intellectual aptitudes, philosophical, political, and religious views of all regular contributors to this forum. As a result, there is no need to prove anything. Just tell what your views are on the subject. That's it. You should always expect that, based on someone's intellectual aptitude, philosophical, political, and religious views, he/she will either agree or disagree with your views. I learned this truth from my own observations.
Now, about the 'Maharishi' attribute to Muhammad by Rabindra Nath, I do not know the pretext of the attribution, and it really does not matter to me. I like to judge everything on my own. I do not know any Maharishi ever instructed his followers to kill all non-believers of his views wherever they can find them. I do not know any Maharishi who told his followers to kill all male non-believers and distribute all female non-believers to his followers as booty after capturing them. I know it was in the context of a war, but – still does not make sense to me. Therefore, it will not make an iota of difference in my judgment even if God-almighty tells me that it was the right thing to do. I know – millions will disagree with me, and that's fine with me. I do not want to change anyone's mind; I just want to express my own feelings on the subject.
I know some people draw conclusion about a subject based on views of others, and some draw conclusions to please others. I do not do so; I collect information and then pass that through my own filter(s) to draw a conclusion of my own. The bottom line is – just because some famous people mentioned about something does not make it a truth. I remember Professor Amartya Sen, a Nobel laureate, visited Bangladesh sometime in 2001, just after the election and the worst ever communal pogrom in Bangladesh. Khaleda Zia gave him a reception, and during his speech Amartya Sen said that - Bagladesh was a perfect example of communal harmony. I am sure he knew that he was lying through his teeth just to promote his NGO program in Bangladesh. I hope I made my case.
Jiten Roy--- On Sat, 3/17/12, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Date: Saturday, March 17, 2012, 5:17 PM
 
My responses are inserted below.
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
 
1. Only an incorrigible fool of your variety would not know that Tagore had all kinds of mistakes.  He also plagiarized a lot.  Consult with any Professor of Bengali if he is available in Arlington or wherever you live.
-----The way you "cuss out" reflects what you are. Can you please stop it and come to business directly? Rabindranath had all kinds of mistakes and he plagiarized a lot! So? Let scholars do research on it. We will have opportunities to learn more about him. Does this dwarf the wise Rabindranath? 2.  Nirad C. Chauddhuri was hired by Oxford University to write on Hinduism.   Bhaduri may be more reliable to you who has absolutely no knowledge on anything.  I had been reading N. P. Bhadhuri since he started writing.  He is nothing more than a Hindu Mollah.  You may write him to learn Hinduism from me if he can't find a better teacher.
-----If you say Bhaduri is a Hindu mollah, I must say you have not read him properly or you have not understood it. If you have really read N.C. Chowdhui, you must have many points on which you cannnot agree with him. To me it does not matter. Why do you have an extreme view about every thing or everybody? I am just wondering. PLease enlighten me with your view on Bhaduri. Please be specific.  

3. Einstein was a modern sage?  His wives and secretaries did not think so.
-----Looks like you are a Hindu fundamentalist. Looks like to you a sage is a "godly" man. To me a sage means a wise (original thinker) man. Remember that Manu, Vatsayana, and Kautilya are known as rishis.  In ancient times there were a limited number of them. Now we have many. All of them had human limitations. 4. Did Tagore really call Muhammad a Maharshi?  If even he did so, he might not have read any Islamic literature.  Muhamad committed eighty nine brigandages in about eight years of his sojourn in Yatrib, uprooted all Jewish enclaves, and put a whole community of Jewish tribe of about a thousand members to sword on a single day. Tell that to your 'RN' if you have a hotline with him.  Not even tell any Jew nearby that Muhamad was a 'great sage' by mistake.  You may end up with the fate of Guru Rajneesh being thrown out of the land and job together.  Read that damned biography of the prophet by Ms. Armstrong carefully.  The earlier posting on muktomona by Mohammad Asghar that I pasted recently might also be helpful.  Though he conquered Hejaj with the help of mercenaries, he did not dare to stay there.  Afterwards, the Umayyads simply ruined his grand children.  No angel prevented the ignominious death of Imam Hussain.  What do you know of the Maharshis?  Maharshi Trailanga Swami, along the modern ones, ate his own defecation all life long.  
-----Yes, he (RN) did call Muhammad a maha rishi. I am sure he read history as a common but serious and critical reader (not like you who looks for only the negatives). I am sure he was not unaware about what Muhammad did to spread Islam and I am sure he did not approve them as I also do not definitely. I am also sure he was aware about the limitations Muhammad had as a human being. But he had the broadness of mind (which you do not have) to recognize Muhammad's great teachings that have changed the world. Were our ancient rishis all flawless and without human passions? Ask yourself. I have read Asghar. It is good compilation from good sources. However, his concluding paragraph is incomplete. He has not seen any thing good in Islam and Muhammed. In my opinion it has been due to his overreaction to what is happening in the contemporary world with jihad, Islamic militancy, fundamentalism, muslim communalism, and fanaticism. The account could be complete by mentioning how Islamic (muslim) thinkers made (and are still making) huge contribution to the advancement of civilization. Goutam Roy in a recent review (Anandabazaar internet version, March 3, 2012) of a book titled "Confluence: Forgotten Histories from East and West"  by Ilija Trojanow and Ranjit Hoskote has summarized how Al-Kindi, Al-Raji, Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, and Ibne Rushd have influenced the European rennaissance. Anyway, this history is now well established and have been narrated in amny authentic books. 
Please stop bleating around and read books if a good library is available nearby. "Satadhauten ...malitwam na muchyate'
------Please stop being full of yourself. Read with open mind. Don't read to prove that you really are desperate to prove. Finally learn to disagree with respect which is a slogan of Mukto-mona.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
1. Nrisinhaprasad Bhaduri, an authority on Indian epics, should be more reliable than Nirad C. Chowdhury with regard to time line.
2. Marhaba. You have smelled grammatical mistakes in RN's writings. The circle is now full: Bankim, Vivekananda, RN reduced to nothing.
3. To me Einstein is also a modern sage. I am not surprised that RN called Muhammad a Maharishi. 
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 16, 2012, at 12:02 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
1.Vyas Deva is a person of seventh century of the common era according to the Encarta Encyclopaedia.  Hinduism may not really be as old as some think.  One should read Nirad Chaudhury to get an idea.  According to him, no Hindu scripture is older than sixth century C. E.  2.  Muhammad may be a total myth as proposed by Prof. Kallisch of  Islamic studies at a German University.  He might have been called a 'Maharishi' by Rabindranath Tagore.  He also compared Islam and Christianity with Bolshevism due to their intolerance to other faiths.  Even he would be amused, had he been alive, to learn that someone considers him an authority on Islam(more than Imam Bukhari!).  'No evidence has been cited to prove him faltu'???  Such statements prove that he is ignorant of Tagore as well.  After he earned a Nobel, Calcutta University usually picked his compositions to quote in question papers and asked students to discuss grammatical and spelling mistakes.An ignoramus of Mr. Chakrabarty's level should stay off from blogging.3. If we have to judge people on the ability to change the world, the modern scientists are way ahead of those preachers of religions who brought about dark age and perpetrated atrocities on those who disagreed with them.  Read Voltaire to get a flavor of what I mean. 3. The way 'Maharshi Muhammad' slaughtered the people who gave them shelter in Madina, he should be compared with Macbeth instead.4. I am sick of discussing serious matters with these 'wise' men as Chakrabarty and Rahman.  I would appreciate if these men ignore my postings.  In any case, I would do it henceforth to whatever they post here.
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:37 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
1. I am not alone. There are more as I have mentioned before. Read (don't have to agree) analytical posts of Bain, Roy, Q. Rahman, and some others. 
2. Ranindranath is lucky! No evidence has been cited to prove him to be 'faltu' even though he called Muhmed a Maharishi! 
3. Was RN not aware of Islamic history? Definitely he was. Was he wrong? My analysis is given below:
RN knew well about ancient sages. He knew about their human limitations and passions. But he could not ignore their great teachings. Vyasdev said through goddess Saraswati,'Nothing is truer than man, and nothing is above him. ' Chandidas echoed it after 2000 years. You can give a lot of examples. He saw Muhammed as nothing more than a man. He saw him as a great sage who was a seer of the past, present, and the future. He had the spirit to overlook the 
Human limitations. 
4. My concern about the accuracy of the historical accounts born out of oral traditions has not yet been addressed. I hope some one will give his valued comment on it. 
5. RN bashers question his moral values (his affairs with women including the wife of his elder brother) and use those to measure and discard him. These people should not be out role models. We need to learn small things and recognize big things. We must do this when we make judgment about personalities who have changed the world.  Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 14, 2012, at 6:43 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
 Mr. Chakrabarty is a self claimed analytical man, though he forgot to spell it properly.  Some 'divine revelation' to some 'maharshi' is the 'holy book' on Islam.  Not even citations from the 'holy book' are enough to these 'anlytical' men to convince that the 'maharshi' was what was called 'a roving bandit' by Prof. Mancur Olson. The Surah I cited is a small one, but enough to prove the point that the 'revelations' always served the whims of the 'maharshi'  Fortunately, in those days even Muslims could be critical of their Prophet and their companions, now they can't. Of course, nobody should expect an iota of common sense who considers totally illiterate fools as 'avatars' and 'maharshis.'  May be the followers of such avatars and maharshis would soon reveal the truth by going into trance(samadhi).  A small dose of 'somerasha' may help to bring about 'samadhi' soon. "We expect more civility."  Who is this 'we'?  If these 'we' consisted of any moderator, my postings would be forbidden by now.  I don't have to learn 'civility' from functional illiterates.  I do not write here for the consumption for persons lacking even minimum 'anlytical' abilty.
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 9:29 PM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
1. Again the same typical "school-masterly" temper! This is not your pathsala. We expect more civility. By this time you should have recognized (a man full of himself will never do that any way) that this forum is visited by anlytical and informed people with broadness of mind. You ridiculed Vivekananda as he praised Islam and ridiculed Bankim also as he praised Muslim rulers. Now it is Rabindanath's turn. It has been revealed that he called Muhammad the maharishi of Islam. Probably you will ridicule him soon. That's your choice. I will not stoop as low as you do. Can you please directly go to your arguments without insulting a blogger? Thanks.
 
2. We have been discussing the veiling of women according to Islam. All of a sudden you have quoted a Sura (Verse CHI) without any relevance. I do not what you are trying to prove.
 
3. I read the juicy descriptions that you sent as quotes from well known references. It all sounded like myth to me. They were in such details. I simply questioned the reliability. (Let 100 percent muslims accept these as facts. I do not care. I am an analytical man. I love to go into the depths of the matter.) I did a little research and found that these accounts are not accepted by a big percentage of the readers. There are reasons. Muhammad lived during 570-632, Ibn Ishaq 704-766 (or 761?), and Bukhari during 810-870. About four genrations passed before Ishaq started recording the history and minimum eight generations passed before Bukhari strated his project. We have to take note of the fact that these accounts are not based on written documents. These are based on oral traditions. Traditions have been told and retold again and again. Volumes of traditions both Ishaq and Bukhari collected were so huge that they themselves had to use their own judgements to discard many of them. We also need to understand that when the narration of a fact travels from mouth to mouth over genrations it easily gets distorted. We the blind believers take any thing to be infallible and absolute if it comes from a revered author. We are afraid to challenge him. Only a brave inquiring mind is able to reveal further truths.       
 
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
 
Ahadith by Bukhari is the most acceptable there is.  Any half wit not appreciating Bukhari, Tabari, Waquidi, Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Kathir etc. should read the gibberish 'holy verses' and try to interpret in his own way.  Read the verse CXI.  It is a short one.  "Perish the hands of Abu Lahab, and perish he!/  .... He shall roast at a flaming fire/ and his wife,..., upon her neck a rope of palm-fiber."  Abu Lahab was an uncle of the prophet, and two of his sons were married to two of the prophets daughters before the advent of Islam.
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
In this account from WikiIslam the prophet (maharishi in Ranindranath's term) has been shown to be most open minded. This account even seems to be 
dubious. I did a little google search to discover that the account by Ibn Ishak who on time scale was closest to prophet as a biographer has not been ununimously accepted. Acceptance of Bukhari seems to be less. 
It is really almost impossible to come up with the real truth. Research should continue. Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 11, 2012, at 9:29 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
 The holy Koran has 'revelations' from earlier sources as well, e.g., Oracles of Delphi and other temples, the Old and New Testaments etc.  Other literature on Islam cites to Umar being proud on receiving the revelation on hijab before the Prophet. Now, may I add from WikiIslam,
"The reason that Muslim women wear the hijab today is not a spiritual one, nor is it a matter of piety. Covering the hair/face cannot be considered an act of modesty because Muslim men are not required to cover theirs. The sole reason they do it is because Umar bin Al-Khattab, a companion of Muhammad, wished that Muhammad would reveal verses from Allah requiring women to wear it. When Muhammad did not oblige, Umar did not pray to Allah for assistance. Umar knew he had to make it personal for Muhammad himself in order to bring the revelation down. He followed Muhammad's wives out when they went to go to the toilet and made his presence known. When Muhammad heard of this, the revelation that Umar had so wanted was sent down from Allah. Umar knew where these revelations were really coming from, which is why he pestered Muhammad and harassed his wives instead of asking Allah.
Although the revelational circumstances for the hijab were ridiculous, the consequences that we can see to this day, are not. The requirement for the hijab has had the effect of placing full responsibility for Muslim-male self control onto the females - freeing the men of responsibility for their actions if they see an unveiled woman. Lack of self control is not an inherent attribute to men, because men in non-Islamic societies do not have such self control issues; when it is rare to see a woman covered so in these societies. The hijab's purpose, as revealed and to this day, is designed to protect Muslim females from the now acceptable behavior of Muslim males; behavior which has been deemed socially acceptable precisely because of the requirement of Muslim females to wear the hijab."
One may notice that the Prophet did not prevent Umar from stalking his wives even to the place of defecation.  It might so happen that he actually instructed to spy on them.
 
Thank you for sharing the source of your post. We can learn from it as well.

However do note that, ALL revelations in the holy Qur'an were revealed to prophet Muhammad (PBUH) NOT anyone else. Hazrat Omar (RA) might have wished for the clearer direction about the level of modesty required and that is acceptable to me. Revelations only came to messengers of Allah (SWT) not to anyone else. It would be a mistake to think Allah revealed any verse to Omar (RA).

A complete body cover excluding the eyes

Also note that, the covering the whole body but eyes is not part of the revelation. It is an assumption and there are differences of opinions among scholars of Islam. Generally some scholars feel women are required to cover whole body ( Including face except eyes) but majority of Islamic scholars feel just covering head and rest of the body is required. So you may see Muslim women with face veil (Niqaab) and others cover their heads and body (Hijab). So there are differences of opinions about "Levels of modesty" among scholars.






__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?



Words naturally do not enter into deaf ears.

2012/3/24 subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
 

Where words fail, the sword take over. I will not be surprised if that is in your subconscious mind.


Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 8:49 PM

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?

 
In good old days of the 'Kazi's court, such 'teachers of civilizing' would have his limbs sliced ant tongue cut off.  Shamelessness and tomfoolery should have a limit.

2012/3/20 Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
 
I wrote this with reference to Farida Majid's post. 'Sharp' guy missed it. I think my first sentence aimed at civilizing him angered him. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 19, 2012, at 12:49 AM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:

 
What made this dull person feel that I coined 'rebel' from his posting?

2012/3/17 subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
 
The last sentence in Das's post is not only irrelevant, it also harms the environment required for a healthy debate.
 
Any way, the word "rebel" is not my creation. I have borrowed it from Prof. Ahmad Sharif who has use the word "drohee" for which I have found the closest English word "rebel". There may be a more appropriate English word for "drohee". 

From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 8:52 PM

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?
 
Taslima had every reason to be a 'rebel'.  Her mom was cheated on by his dad as she was by Rudra Md. Shahidullah.  The level of media attention drawn by Taslima across the world was enormous, Humayun Azad would have loved to have such attention.  Sure she had plagiarized a lot, but he did even more of it.  His novel, "Pak shar jamin.." was an effort to catch a cobra by it's tail, and not much of a post-modern literature.  Having a secured teaching position at D. U., Humayun Azad didn't have to struggle for a living while being a junior physician, Taslima had to do it.

The lady out to criticize Taslima here is no match for her in any respect.  Her criticism might have grown out of 'jealousy of one female for another of much wider reputation'.

2012/3/17 Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
 
There is no benefit whatsoever in denying the contribution and attention Taslima drew on the emancipation of women in Bangladesh. There may be others who are trying to do the same now in some other ways, who are undoubtedly strong winds to push the issue forward, but – Taslima was a Tornado, as far as her contribution is concerned.
Taslima brought Bangladeshi women's rights issues in the forefront of the international arena.  Now you have international attention focused on the issue, and you have NGOs working on the subject. I am aware of all these NGO activities in this field.  It seems like you are competing with her, when there is no need for it. She did her part; you can do yours.' That's how I see this issue.
I read her book, and the way she has depicted the role of women in the society, it matches my views on the subject.  In her book, she has described the role her mother played in her home, that also depicts my mother's life-story, and, I am sure, it will match stories of countless other mothers in Bangladesh. I used to think about it as a child, as she did.
My mother's world was inside the kitchen. He had to cook three times a day using a wood-burning oven, which takes quite a long time to finish the job. She used to finish cooking a meal and then she would feed everybody in the house. After that, she would eat. When she would finish her meal, it is already time to start cooking for the next meal. I have hardly seen her outside the kitchen. If she would come out of the kitchen, it was for cleaning the house or doing something else. While my mother was doing all these works in the house, my father already finished visiting many of his friends' house to gossip.  My mother never had the opportunity to do so. That's the picture emerged from her writings also. Therefore, I am not in the same boat with you.
Yes, I am aware of the recent change in the urban and suburban areas, but, I believe, very little has changed in the village, where majority of the women live. So, when you criticize Taslima, remember the condition of those women, not the women in the Dhaka-City. Also, you have to think of the time when she started her crusade, which was more than 30 years ago.
Jiten Roy

--- On Fri, 3/16/12, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?
To: "mukto-mona" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Friday, March 16, 2012, 4:28 PM
 
           I am puzzled by Jiten Roy's negligence of the history of women's movement in greater Bengal, his hyperbolic usage of the word "implant" and the funny concept of "male-dominated ancient conservative society in Bangladesh."              To be honest, such talk is very insulting to Bengali women who have always, through centuries, been a tremendous force in the glorious economic history of Bengal, and to this day, contibutes a lion's share to the economy of Bangladesh.  Stop the women from working for a week, and the whole economy will collapse!  Women of Bengal deserve much better respect.             Don't have the time now to go into detail, but the dozen or so top women's organizations in Bangladesh will tell you how Taslima fiasco damaged their work in progress and encouraged the Islamist goondagiri.  Before the Taslima affair, these fundos were at the shadowy margins of the society. They did not dare show their faces in public before.             One other quick reminder -- the inappropriateness of the word "rebel." Taslima's final confrontation with the shadowy fundamentalists was a pure political farce. There was nothing rebel-like at all other than misquotes, and misunderstanding.  It would be a gross misjudgement to call those 'molla' types the ruling authority. They did not dictate the mores of the society, though they pretended as if they did -- but it was Taslima who created that space for them which had been steadfastly denied them by other women activists. This is what really annoyed a lot of women.              It saddens me to be talking like this.  But I am a very different type of feminist than Taslima.  I do not begin by the concept of a disempowered womanhood.  I am constantly harassed by the patriarchy because I am a woman who tells the truth, but that is the male problem. You just saw an example only last week by the spectacle put on by Canada's Abid Bahar.  Do you think that Bahari act disempowered me as a woman, or was successful in belittling the truth?  If anything, it sharpened the truth.              That brings me back to the subject of a 'rebel'.  Humayun was not a rebel. He was not fighting against any 'authority' like Kazi Nazrul's bold and beautiful voice was against the British Colonizer Rulers.  Times were different. With his many important publications, his commanding position as the Chair of the Bangla Dept. at DU, and his lively, influential presence in the cultural and political arena, Humayun occupied a central Metropolitan public space.  He WAS the authority.  Consider the theatricals of the scene of his murder attempt -- Humayun walking out of the lighted grounds of Bangla Academy, he had several books out that year including the novel 'Pak Shar Zamin Shad Baad', he had been book-signing all evening at the Agami publisher's stall, the February National Book Fair was just winding down. From across the street, from under the dark shadows of trees in the park came a few goondas with sharp machete knives and attacked the unaccompanied author!              Taslima never occupied that space, that central metropolitan cultural public square. She grabbed the central stage by acts of folly. Misquoting the Qur'an is not the equivalent of telling an incontrovertible truth.                 Farida Majid
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.comFrom: jnrsr53@yahoo.comDate: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:41:27 -0700 Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ? 






__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Pakistan rejects reports of ISI Funding for BNP: We Hope Things Will end Here



Pakistan rejects reports of ISI Funding for BNP: We Hope Things Will end Here

 

Daily Star and other newspapers have reported that the Pakistan foreign ministry has rejected the allegation of funding BNP by the country's spy agency ISI before 1991 national election of Bangladesh as reported in local and international newspapers.

According to the ministry website, a spokesperson on Thursday termed baseless the news on ISI paying BNP. Those reports were not only totally baseless but also part of mischievous efforts to damage the brotherly and mutually beneficial Pakistan-Bangladesh relationship, the spokesperson said.Pakistan strictly adhered to the principle of non-interference in internal affairs of other countries and it would be ill-advised to give credence to such false, misleading and self-serving stories, the official added

We hope this will end the unnecessary accusation of some quarters against BNP.BNP has denied it all through.It is good that Pakistan has clarified the matter.

 



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?



Where words fail, the sword take over. I will not be surprised if that is in your subconscious mind.


From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 8:49 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?

 
In good old days of the 'Kazi's court, such 'teachers of civilizing' would have his limbs sliced ant tongue cut off.  Shamelessness and tomfoolery should have a limit.

2012/3/20 Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
 
I wrote this with reference to Farida Majid's post. 'Sharp' guy missed it. I think my first sentence aimed at civilizing him angered him. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 19, 2012, at 12:49 AM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:

 
What made this dull person feel that I coined 'rebel' from his posting?

2012/3/17 subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
 
The last sentence in Das's post is not only irrelevant, it also harms the environment required for a healthy debate.
 
Any way, the word "rebel" is not my creation. I have borrowed it from Prof. Ahmad Sharif who has use the word "drohee" for which I have found the closest English word "rebel". There may be a more appropriate English word for "drohee". 

From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 8:52 PM

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?
 
Taslima had every reason to be a 'rebel'.  Her mom was cheated on by his dad as she was by Rudra Md. Shahidullah.  The level of media attention drawn by Taslima across the world was enormous, Humayun Azad would have loved to have such attention.  Sure she had plagiarized a lot, but he did even more of it.  His novel, "Pak shar jamin.." was an effort to catch a cobra by it's tail, and not much of a post-modern literature.  Having a secured teaching position at D. U., Humayun Azad didn't have to struggle for a living while being a junior physician, Taslima had to do it.

The lady out to criticize Taslima here is no match for her in any respect.  Her criticism might have grown out of 'jealousy of one female for another of much wider reputation'.

2012/3/17 Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
 
There is no benefit whatsoever in denying the contribution and attention Taslima drew on the emancipation of women in Bangladesh. There may be others who are trying to do the same now in some other ways, who are undoubtedly strong winds to push the issue forward, but – Taslima was a Tornado, as far as her contribution is concerned.
Taslima brought Bangladeshi women's rights issues in the forefront of the international arena.  Now you have international attention focused on the issue, and you have NGOs working on the subject. I am aware of all these NGO activities in this field.  It seems like you are competing with her, when there is no need for it. She did her part; you can do yours.' That's how I see this issue.
I read her book, and the way she has depicted the role of women in the society, it matches my views on the subject.  In her book, she has described the role her mother played in her home, that also depicts my mother's life-story, and, I am sure, it will match stories of countless other mothers in Bangladesh. I used to think about it as a child, as she did.
My mother's world was inside the kitchen. He had to cook three times a day using a wood-burning oven, which takes quite a long time to finish the job. She used to finish cooking a meal and then she would feed everybody in the house. After that, she would eat. When she would finish her meal, it is already time to start cooking for the next meal. I have hardly seen her outside the kitchen. If she would come out of the kitchen, it was for cleaning the house or doing something else. While my mother was doing all these works in the house, my father already finished visiting many of his friends' house to gossip.  My mother never had the opportunity to do so. That's the picture emerged from her writings also. Therefore, I am not in the same boat with you.
Yes, I am aware of the recent change in the urban and suburban areas, but, I believe, very little has changed in the village, where majority of the women live. So, when you criticize Taslima, remember the condition of those women, not the women in the Dhaka-City. Also, you have to think of the time when she started her crusade, which was more than 30 years ago.
Jiten Roy

--- On Fri, 3/16/12, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?
To: "mukto-mona" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Friday, March 16, 2012, 4:28 PM
 
           I am puzzled by Jiten Roy's negligence of the history of women's movement in greater Bengal, his hyperbolic usage of the word "implant" and the funny concept of "male-dominated ancient conservative society in Bangladesh."              To be honest, such talk is very insulting to Bengali women who have always, through centuries, been a tremendous force in the glorious economic history of Bengal, and to this day, contibutes a lion's share to the economy of Bangladesh.  Stop the women from working for a week, and the whole economy will collapse!  Women of Bengal deserve much better respect.             Don't have the time now to go into detail, but the dozen or so top women's organizations in Bangladesh will tell you how Taslima fiasco damaged their work in progress and encouraged the Islamist goondagiri.  Before the Taslima affair, these fundos were at the shadowy margins of the society. They did not dare show their faces in public before.             One other quick reminder -- the inappropriateness of the word "rebel." Taslima's final confrontation with the shadowy fundamentalists was a pure political farce. There was nothing rebel-like at all other than misquotes, and misunderstanding.  It would be a gross misjudgement to call those 'molla' types the ruling authority. They did not dictate the mores of the society, though they pretended as if they did -- but it was Taslima who created that space for them which had been steadfastly denied them by other women activists. This is what really annoyed a lot of women.              It saddens me to be talking like this.  But I am a very different type of feminist than Taslima.  I do not begin by the concept of a disempowered womanhood.  I am constantly harassed by the patriarchy because I am a woman who tells the truth, but that is the male problem. You just saw an example only last week by the spectacle put on by Canada's Abid Bahar.  Do you think that Bahari act disempowered me as a woman, or was successful in belittling the truth?  If anything, it sharpened the truth.              That brings me back to the subject of a 'rebel'.  Humayun was not a rebel. He was not fighting against any 'authority' like Kazi Nazrul's bold and beautiful voice was against the British Colonizer Rulers.  Times were different. With his many important publications, his commanding position as the Chair of the Bangla Dept. at DU, and his lively, influential presence in the cultural and political arena, Humayun occupied a central Metropolitan public space.  He WAS the authority.  Consider the theatricals of the scene of his murder attempt -- Humayun walking out of the lighted grounds of Bangla Academy, he had several books out that year including the novel 'Pak Shar Zamin Shad Baad', he had been book-signing all evening at the Agami publisher's stall, the February National Book Fair was just winding down. From across the street, from under the dark shadows of trees in the park came a few goondas with sharp machete knives and attacked the unaccompanied author!              Taslima never occupied that space, that central metropolitan cultural public square. She grabbed the central stage by acts of folly. Misquoting the Qur'an is not the equivalent of telling an incontrovertible truth.                 Farida Majid
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.comFrom: jnrsr53@yahoo.comDate: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:41:27 -0700 Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ? 





__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___