• Castes, Classes Divisions of Punjabis : Part 1 to 12 September 28 - 4:04 am

i am a bajwa jatt we come from sialkot what relation we have with bajju rajput please tell me

Joyia of Hissar,
Dear all rajputs i want to know in detail about the sub caste joyia of rajpute family from hisar.

part 1

lol sikh sardar ji ok lets go by your claim that hs dulleh is a fake self historian. here is an article sourced with many other historians are all 14 of these renowned scholars fakes too? If jatts were bonded labourers then who were the kings of north indian territories? ( imaginary devtas) or factfully recorded rulers like the virks, rulers of bharatpur ( a pure jatt country), mauryas, guptas, kushans.

JATT RAJPUT CONNECTION

Colonel Tod [11] said, "In all the ancient catalogues of the thirty-six royal races of India the Jit (Jat) has a place, though by none is he ever styled "Rajput"----". In fact, on page 69 of his book (Vol.1 ) he provides a table of the thirty-six royal races. According to the table Dahiya (Dahae) Jats, in particular, are listed separately as one of the thirty-six royal races of India.

On this very issue Tod [11] wrote, "Dahiya is an ancient tribe, whose residence was the banks of the Indus (river), near its confluence with the Sutlej (river in Punjab); although they retain a place amongst the thirty-six royal races, we have not the knowledge of any as now existing. They are mentioned in the annals of the Bhattis of Jessulmer (in Rajasthan province of India), and from name as well as locale, we may infer that they were the Dahae (Scythian Jats) of Alexander".



It is to be noted here that the Dahiyas are a well known Jat clan and the author [12] of an excellent book on Jats is himself a Dahiya. Furthermore, Bingley [8] said they can still be found in Harayana province's districts of Rohtak, Karnal and Gurgaon in India. It appears that Col. Tod was not fully aware of all the existing Jat clans as his book was written in 1829.

With respect to Jat-Rajput connections Dahiya [12] said, "The change of Jats/Gujars into Rajput began after the seventh century A.D. because of the revival of orthodox Hinduism at the cost of egalitarian Buddhism. These people, mostly headed by royal houses, who were formally converted by the Brahmans (Hindu priests) by Agni (fire) stoma and other sacrifices, were called Rajputra (son of king) or new ----. Rajputs are but formally Hindunised Jats and Gujars. Those who refused to accept the conditions and dictates of rigid Brahminical (Hindu priest's) order, were not formally converted and therefore, they remain, to this day, the same Jats, Gujars and Avars/Abirs (Ahirs) of Central Asia Scythians". He added, "---at Mount Abu in Rajasthan province, India, and many of the newcomers were 'purified' by the fire. They were given the name Rajputra, meaning the royal princes or the sons of the kings which they already were".

Similar sentiments were also expressed by Col. Tod [11] and Captain Bingley [13], respectively, "The Agnicoonda (creation place of the fire born Rajputs? ) is still shown on the summit of (mount) Aboo, where the four races (of Rajputs) were created by the Brahmins to fight the battles of Achil-es and polytheism, against the monotheistic Buddhists, represented as serpents or Takshacs" and "The Ancestors of the four agnicular or fire tribes of Rajputs are generally considereted to have been Scythians warriors who assisted Brahmans in their final struggles with the Buddhists and were admitted into the ranks of the "twice born" as reward for their services to Hinduism. Some sort of story being necessary to account for their origin the ---- Brahmans bestowed upon them the title of "fireborn" to distinguish them from the original Rajput races ----".

Books on Jats

There are three books in English which are concerning Jats: History, Caste & Culture of Jats and Gujars by Bingley [8], History of the Jats by Qanungo [3], and the Political System of the Jats of Northern India by Pradhan [14].

The book by Bingley first appeared in 1899 contains 128 pages and is divided into four chapters plus an appendix. Chapter 1 essentially traces the history and origin of the Jat people (this includes Hindu, Muslim, and Sikh Jats). Also, it presents a detailed history of the Jats of Bharatpur specifically and the surrounding areas. Chapter 2 provides classification and geographical distribution of Jats and Gujars (a people also related to Jats). Population and clan names of the Jats living in Hoshiarpur, Hissar, Rohtak, Karnal, Gurgaon, Bikaner, Jaipur, Saharnpur, Muzaffarnagar, meerut, Aligarh, Agra, Mathura, Bharatpur, and Dholpur districts of India are given. Chapter 3 covers religion, customs, and religious festivals of the Jats and Gujars. The characteristics of both Jats and Gujars are described in Chapter 4. These include family life, dress, ornaments, the Jat village life, morality, personal habits, law of inheritance, and so on. The appendix is divided into two parts. Part 1 provides information on fairs and part 2 lists principal clan names of the Jats in an alphabetical order.

The second book on Jats alone in English was written by Professor K.R. Qanungo [3] in 1925. The book is composed of 205 pages and contains the following chapters and appendice:

> Chapter 1: Origin and Early History
> Chapter 2: Jat History in Aurangzip's (Moghal emperor of India) Reign
> Chapter 3: Expansion of the Jat Power
> Chapter 4: Rajah (king Suraj Mal, an Ally of Nawab Safdar Jang
> Chapter 5: Suraj Mal's Struggles with the Marathas (a Hindu people from Bombay Area)
> Chapter 6: Ahmad Shah Durrani's campaign (Afghan invader of India) Against the Jats
> Chapter 7: Suraj Mal's Great Disappointment
> Chapter 8: Reign of Suraj Mal
> Chapter 9: Legacy of Suraj Mal
> Chapter 10: Maharaja (Great King) Sawai Jawahir Singh Bharatendra
> Chapter 11: Reign of Rajah (king) Jawahir Singh
> Chapter 12: Civil War
> Chapter 13: Regency of Nawal Singh
> Chapter 14: Decline of the House of Bharatpur
> Chapter 15: Reign of Rajah (King) Ranjit Singh
> Appendix (Chapter 8): Details of the Death of Suraj Mal
> Appendix A: The Theory of the Indo-Scythians Origin of the Jats
> Appendix B: The legend About the Yadu Tribe
> Appendix C: The Jat Risings During Aurangzib's (Mughal Emperor of India) Reign

The book on Jats by Professor Pradhan [14], appeared in 1666, is composed of 275 pages divided basically into eight chapters plus an Appendix. The titles of the chapters are Economic and Demographic Background (Chapter1), Shoron (Chapter 2), Kinship Organization (Chapter 3), History (Chapter 4), Political Structure 1 (Chapter 5), Political Structure 2 (Chapter 6), The Effects of Change (Chapter 7), and Conclusion (Chapter 8). This book contains materials from Professor Pradhan's Doctoral Dissertation concerning Jats, in fact, he clearly states on page xi of his book (14) "The present volume is an abridged and revised Ph.D. thesis submitted at the University of London in December, 1961 under the title Socio-political organization of the Jats of Meerut (a district in Uttar Pradesh province of Northern India) Division".

Principal Clans of the Jats

Jat people are composed of many clans [8] and some of those are Ghatwal, Nain, Puniya, Chahil, Mann, Jakhar, Dalal, Rathi, Dahia, Hudah, Kadian, Sahrawat, Golia, Malik, Sandhu, Alawat, Narwal, Dhaliwal, Phor, Mor, Rawat, Daghar, Tonwar, Deswali, Palwal, Dhillon, Uthwal, Khokhar, Jhar, Penwar, Ponwar, Kuntel, Gaur, Sinsinwar, Gabar, Haga, Bahinwar, Badwar, Bora, Henga, Hela, Maini, Phor, Pote, Rana, Tang, Tomar, and Tur.

part 2

References
(for "History and Study of the Jats following the Two Great Faiths of South Asia" Article)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. MacMunn, G. (Sir and Lt. Gen.), The Martial Races of India, reprinted by Mittal Publications, Delhi, India, 1979, pp. 48-49, 277, first published in 1932.

2. Temple, R.C., Legends of the Punjab, London, 1893-1901.

3. Qanungo, K.R., History of the Jats, reprinted by Sunita Publications, Delhi, India, 1987, pp. 16, 90-91, 101, 111, first published in 1925.

4. Al Biladuri, in the History of India: As Told by its Own Historians, edited by Sir Elliot, H.M. and Professor Dowson, J., Vol. 1, reprinted by AMS Press, Inc., New York, 1966, pp. 119, 128, first published in 1867.

5. Sykes, P. (Sir and Brig. Gen.), A History of Persia, Macmillan & Co. Ltd., London, reprinted in 1958, first published in 1915, pp. 10-11 (Vol. 2).

6. Imad-us-Saadat (written in Persian around 1808), for more information see Qanungo, K.R., History of the Jats, reprinted by Sunita Publications, Delhi, India, 1987, pp. 24-25, 33-34, first published in 1925.).

7. Muntakhabu-L-Lubab by Khafi Khan, in the History of India: as Told by Its Own Historians, edited by Elliot, H.M., and Dowson, J., Vol. 7, reprinted by the AMS Press., New York, 1966, pp. 531-533, first published in 1877.

8. Bingley, A.H., History, Caste and Culture of the Jats and Gujars, reprinted by the Ess Ess Publications, New Delhi, India, 1978, pp. 16-17, 21, 23-28, first published in 1899.

9. Majmu-L-Akhbar by Harsukh Rai, in the History of India: as told by its Own Historians, edited by Elliot, H.M., and Dowson, J., Vol. VIII, reprinted by the AMS Press, Inc., New York, 1966, pp. 360-368, first published in 1877.

10. Sleeman, W.H. (Sir and Major General), Rambles and Recollections of an Indian Official, reprinted by the Oxford University Press, Karachi, Pakistan, 1973, pp. 378-379, 476-477, first published in 1844.

11. Tod, J. (Lt. Col.), Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, reprinted by the Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., London, 1972, pp. 88, 69, 98, 76 (Vol. I), first published in 1829.

12. Dahiya, B.S., Jats: The Ancient Rulers, Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, India, 1980, pp. xi (Introduction), 71, 101.

13. Bingley, A.H.(Captain), Handbooks for the Indian Army: Sikhs, compiled under the orders of the Government of India, Printed at the Government Central Printing Office, Shimla, India, 1899, pp. 8-9.

14. Pradhan, M.C., The Political System of the Jats of Northern india, Oxford University Press, London, 1966.

H S DALLAH IS A FAKE SELF HISTORIAN

dear author "annoyed" enjoy your read :-)

History of the Jatt Clans - H.S. Duleh (Original in Punjabi - "Jattan Da Itihas")

ajitweekly•••••/show.asp?cat_id=6


BAJWA

> Their founder was called Wajab. They are descendents of Sun god. Bajwa Jatts have resemblance with Bajju Rajputs. Their customs are also similar. Their ancestor was Baba Manga. They originated from Bajwat in the foothills of Jammu in the district of Sialkot.

> They take their newly wed brides to the Samadh of Baba Manga to pay obeisance. Baba Manga is worshipped. Like other Jatt Clans, they also give a cut to the tree of Jand. Baba Manga had seven sons. The eldest Naro established Narowal village, Deepa founded Kotli Bajwa and Chandu founded Chanduwal.

> The founder of Bajwa Clan, Bajwat used to live at Jaisalmer in Rajsashan. From there, they reached to Sialkot and Gujjranwala. One of its ancestors became ruler of Multan. Raja Shlip of this clan was ousted from Miltan by Alexander Lodhi. Raja Shlip had two sons named Kala and Lis. Both used to tend eagles.

> Lis migrated to Jammu. There he married to a Rajput girl. His descendents were called Rajput Bajju Kala married to a Jatt girl and settled in Paasroor area. Through marriage, Kala merged in the Jatt community. Kala’s descendents came to be known as Bajwa Jatts. Thus, background of Bajju Rajputs and Bajwa Jatts is same. Bajwa Jatts and Bajju Rajput, both are settled in Bajawat region of Jammu.

> Another legend is that their ancestor Rai Jaison was forced to leave Delhi by Rai Pithora (Prithvi Raj Chauhan). At one time Bajwa Jatts had 84 villages in Sialkot area.


BAL

> It is an ancient and powerful tribe. Bal Jatts are the descendents of Prahlad Bhagat’s grandson Bal.

> Colonel Todd has bracketed this tribe with 36 ruling tribes. Army General Bhatark founded Balbipur kingdom in Kuchh Kathiawad in the last days of Gupta dynasty in 527 AD. The Arab General Abru Bin Jamal of Sindh raided Kathiwad in 757 ending the Rule of Balbhi of Bal dynasty. Bal Jatts deserted Balbhi region and marched towards Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Punjab.

> The Ball Jatts who embraced Islam are called Baloch. The Hindu Jaat of Bal sub-caste are also found in large numbers in the areas of Ambala, Karnal and Hisdar.

> Bals are called Balayan in Uttar Pradesh. They have around 100 villages in the area of Sisauli. Bals claim relationship with Parmar Rajputs. Gehlot and Sisodia are also brach sub-castes of Bals.




BHATTHAL

> They are descendents of Bhatti Rajputs. Founder of this sub-caste was Bhatthal. He was son of Rao Junder of Bhatti clan. Dhaliwal and Johls are also from the same lineage.



BHUTTE

> They share their lineage with Panwar Rajputs. Founder of this clan was Bhutte Rao. Bhutee Rao was grandson of Solangi of Jagdeo clan. Panwar is one of the old tribes that have migrated from middle Asia. In Punjab there were mainly 5 branches of Panwars. Bhutte descend from Bhota branch of Panwars.

BUTTAR

> They are descendents of Jagdeo Panwar Rajput. This is a sub-caste of Panwars. They are settled mainly upper areas of Sutlej. From Lakhhi forest, they had migrated to Gujjranwala and Montgomery. There is also a famous vilalge Buttar in Saandal Baar.







CHANDARH

> Chandarh was founder of this sub-caste. They are Toor Rajputs. Chandarh was son of Raja Ravilan of Pandu lineage. In 1193 AD when Mohd Gauri invaded India, they came from Rajasthan to Punjab while some of them went to Bahawalpur where they were converted to Islam by Pir Shershah of Uchch Sharif.


CHATHA

> People of this clan are Jatts and Pathans. They relate themselves to Chauhans.

> Chatha, the founder of this Clan, was grandson of Prithvi Raj Chauhan and a real brother of Cheema. Dharo from the 10th generation of Chatha became famous. He migrated from the Sambhal area of Moradbad to the banks of the Chenab and married in the family of a Jatt tribe of Gujjranwala and merged in that community.



CHEEMA

> This is one of the larger clans of the Jatts. Cheema Jatts have descended from Chauhan Rajputs. When Shahabudin defeated Prithvi Raj Chauhan and seized his territory in 1193, Chauhan’s clam reached Kangar and therefrom to Ferozepur, Ludhiana and Amrisar.


Dhaliwal

Some historians consider Dhaliwal Jatts to be descendents of Bhatti Rajputs originating from Dhar. In fact they have originated from Dhaulpur in Rajasthan. These people used to tend Dhaul (Bulls) for their living. Earlier they were known as Dhaulpal. The name changed to Dhaliwal in Malwa and Dhariwal in Majha.


DHILLON

> They are from among the Saroa Rajputs. In 8th Centure, Toors had seized the power of Delhi from Dhillons, Sanghas, Malhis, Dosanjhs and Dhindsas who were descendents of Shah Saroa. Leaving Delhi, they moved towards Rajasthan. After some time they migrated to the Bangar areas of Sirsa and Bathinda. Some of them went beyond to Ludhiana and Ferozepur. Most of the Dhillons from Ferozepur went into Majha. Dhillons from Ludhiana went further into Doaba.


DOSANJH

> They are from among the Saroha Rajputs. They have come into Punjab from Rajasthan. In the beginning they had settled in the area of Ferozepur. There is one village Dosanjh in Moga area. In Mansa district Dosanjh are Hindu Jaats. Most of Dosanjhs from Ferozepur went towards Doaba.

DULLAT

> They are from the Chauhan lineage. Rai Bira of Dullat Clan belonged to the family of Prithvi Raj Chauhan. Bira was his younger brother. Longowal is one of the first Dullat villages in Punjab

GANDHU

> Gandhu, Gill and Jhajj are of the Waryaha Rajput lineage. They are from the dynasty of King Binepal. This king, along with King Jagdeo, came from Bhatner in the beginning of 12th Century. When Jadeo, with the help of Gandhu, Mangat, Jhajj, Mander and Parmar tribes, defeated the grandson of Mehmood Ghanavi to capute Ludhiana, Gandhus settled in Issru and areas surrounding it.



GARCHA

> Garcha Jatts are a branch of Tanwar Rajputs. At one time they ruled in Delhi. Delhi’s Tanwar king Anangpal-II had no child. Chauhans seized Delhi from him in around 1164 AD. Tanwars left Delhi and moved towards Rajasthan. From there Garchas came to settle in the area of Ludhiana.


GILL

> They are a branch of Raghuvanshi Waryah Rajputs. Most of the Gills are settled in Malwa and Majha. They lived along the rivers Sutlej and Beas and further in the foothills upto Sialkot. They claim lineage from Raja Prithipat of Garh Mathila.



GORAYA

> They are from the lineage of Saroa Rajputs. While gazing their animals, they marched from Sirsa go Gujjranwala. They had many of their villages in Sialkot, Gurdaspur and Gujjranwala areas.

GREWAL

> They share their family tree with Chandel Rajputs. Chandels are one of the 36 roral castes of Rajputs. At one time, Chandels ruled over Bundelkhand. This state fell in the middle of rivers Yamuna and Narmada. They had their fort at Kalinjar. Parimal Chandel had enmity both with Prithviraj Chauhan as well as Jai Chand.



GURAM

> They are descendents of Parmar Rajputs. Guram, founder of this Clan, was also from the clan of Jagdeo. They came to Ludhiana from Rajputana at the end of 12th century. They founded Gurmi village near Aalamgir. This village was looted and ruined by Taimur the Lame. Gurms again founded village Guram on high grounds.

KAHLON

> The founding father of this Clan was Kahlwan. They are from amongst Panwars. Kahlons consider themselves to be belonging to King Bikrmaditya of Dhara Nagri and Jagdeo Parmar. They have come to Punjab in the company of Soli of Jagdeo clan in 11th century. After staying for some time in Ludhiana, they further went to settle near Batala in Gurdaspur.


NIJJAR

> This is a very small clan of Jatts. At the same time it an ancient tribe descending from Central Asia. The people having similar surnames still dwell in Central Asia. Nijjar Jatts came into Doaba from the Eastern bank of Yamuna. They are also from the lineage of Bhatti Rajputs. At the time of invasion by Mohd Gauri, Punjab was inhabited by the tribes such as Khokhar, Bhutee, Langah, Virk, Chhina, Samra, Waraich and Nijjar.



PAWAR

> They are Rajputs from Western India. Initially, they were settled in Multan and Sind. Pawar Jatts did migrate to India from Iran during the age of Rig Vedas. Manns and Pawars were dwelling in Punjab at the time of Kanishka. Dhuma Raja from Parmar Jatts was first to convert to Parmar Rajputs.

> Pawars are one of the 36 Rajput Royal clans. Pawar, Panwar and Parmar are from the same lineage.

> People of Panwar tribe were settled along the Sutlej far and wide upto Sind. They were also in large numbers in Multan and Dera Jat areas. From Gurdaspur and Sialakot they further reached Jalandhar and Beas areas. They further went upto Hisar, Rohtak, Dadri and Gohana in Haryana. At one time, all the territory of Punjab and Haryana was under Parmars. Dreading the invasions by Huns and Mohd Bin Qasim, they left Malwa in Punjab to settle in Malwa of Madhya Pradesh.






RANDHAWA

> The founding father of this clan was Randhawa. They are from the lineage of Bhatti Rajputs. Randhawas, like Sidhu-Brars and Sarnas, are descendents of Jundhar. They came from Rajasthan’s Bikaner area to Punjab’s Malwa area in 12th century. After marrying into Mann Jatt families, they became Jatts.



RANJHA

> They are from the lineage of Rajputs. They have their origin in the Jaisalmer area of Rajasthan. They were very few in numbers in East Punjab. They are settled in small numbers in Ferozepur, Gurdaspur, Kapurthala, Jalandhar and Patiala.

RAJPUTS MARRIED BHILS AND SANSIS AND CREATED NEW HARAMI BREED CALLED JATS AND WERE EX COMMUNICATED FROM Rajput caste. Thanks Sunny singh , Rana , PCJS and many more ujajadds.

Sonyo udaas no hoya karo tusi..punjabi.net te aya karo

part 1

-------------------------------------
Maurya empire : 324 - 232 BC
Chandragupta Maurya - 324 - 301
Bindusara - 301 - 269
Ashoka - 269 - 232

Gupta empire : 320 AD - 515
Chandragupta I - 320 - 335
Samudragupta - 335 - 375
Chandragupta II - 375 - 415
Kumaragupta - 415-455
Skanda Gupta - 455 - 467
-------------------------------------
In mainstream Indian history books written by neo-Brahmanist historians, the two largest imperial dynasties which expanded eastward from northwest Sakasthana - the Mauryas (324 - 232 BC) and Guptas (320 AD - 515) - are claimed to be Brahmanas and (Ghoris) "Hindu" kings! These claims, however, are rejected by coin, inscriptional, archeological and literary evidence which points to their Jat-Saka origin. These imperial systems were essentially republican Saka coalitions in which other Saka tribes and allies (e.g. Gujar, Ahir) played an important role.

Reality and Facts:

1) In the northwest subcontinent, the Brahmanists have never formed the
ruling class over any known period of history. The recorded rulers over 3500
years of known history have been drawn from the followings groups and their
descendants: British, Sikhs/ Jats/ Gujars/ Rajputs, Afghans, Moguls, Sakas
(Scythians), Bactrian Greeks and Vedics. The ruling classes, administrators and soldiers during all periods and in all regions of the world have come to power through conquest by their sword and military prowess despite Brahmanical canards about "creating Kshatriyas". To gain the favor and employment from chieftans rising to power, the ready witted priests concocted fanciful tales of divine origin from solar and lunar lineages.

2) The fact is that there have always been two types of ruling classes (Kshatriyas) in southasia: i) those who patronized the Brahmin priesthood and
ii) those who felt no need or desire to do so and patronized other religions
(e.g. Vedic religion, Saka religion, Buddhism, Islam, Sufism, Sikhism,
Christianity). In dateless and placeless revisionist Brahmanical texts (written centuries later when Brahmins gained larger influence; eg. post-9th
century Shankarcharya revival), the latter are dubbed "malechas", "sudra", and
"low castes kings", etc. while the former are glorified with fantastical tales and showered with the blessings of their devtas. The second type form most of the known and verifiable Kshatriyas and ruling orders in the history of southasia - all in the case of the northwest!

3) The Puranas do not even refer to the largest imperial dynasties of the north such as the Mauryas (324 - 232 BC) and Dharan Guptas (320 AD - 515 as "Kshatriyas". Regarding the Mauryas, Dehiya [p.147] states "Another indication of the foreign origin (Saka) of these people is . . . The Vishnu Purana calls them (Gupta rulers) Sudras. The Markandeya Purana brands the Mauryas as Asura. The Yuga Purana called them `utterly irreligious, though posing as religious'. The Mudra Rakshasa calls these people as mlechas and Chandragupta himself is called 'Kulahina', an upstart of unknown family".

Mauryan coins have the symbol of the sun, a branch, a humped bull and
mountain (Dehiya, p.155). All these are pre-eminently Scythian MassaGetae icons who were Sun worshippers with the high mount symbolizing earth and the irregular curving lines alongside it symbolizes water. The tree branch is a symbol of productivity of the earth - agriculture and soldiering were the traditional "noble" occupation of Sakas. The historians of Darius record
that when he attempted to attack the Scythian MassaGetae (an old-Iranian
culture of central asia) along the Black sea in the 5th century BC, the Saka kings swore by the sun god and refused to surrender "earth and water".

part 2

D.B. Spooner who evacuated Pataliputra was struck by his findings and writes
in his article "The Zoroastrian Period of Indian History" as follows: "For Chandragupta' s times, the evidences are more numerous and more detailed, and
indicate a following of Persian customs all along the line - in public works, in ceremonial, in penal institutions, everything".

4) Regarding the Guptas, Dehiya [p.181] states "The coins of SamudraGupta, Chandragupta I, Kacha, Chandragupta II Vikramaditya, Kumaragupta I, Skandagupta, etc. all have the central asian long coat and trousers and boots and long swords. This is the most significant fact proving that the Guptas were in fact central asian Jats (a major Saka tribe)
. . . ".

P. L. Gupta writes "The most common gold coins of the Guptas appear to be the
direct descendants of the gold coins of the later Kushans . . .". He adds
that the standing pose of the Gupta kings at the altar is almost identical to
that of the Kushan kings, as is their dress - Kushan long coats and trousers
(uchkin, salwar/kameez). The Kushana or Kasvan tribe of the Sakas had rule
over Sakasthan (northwest) in the period from 1st century to 4rd century AD.
The early Gupta coins are significantly called "dinar" and their weight is
the same as those of westerly Kushana coins. Moreover, Alberuni (an Arab who
traveled to southasia in A.D. 1030) learnt that "the Guptas were powerful but
bad and the locals (in the gangetic region) celebrated the end of their rule
by starting a new era" (Dehiya, p. 190). This again supports the Scythian
origin of the Guptas: the end of the Saka empire in the eastern subcontinent
was a cause of celebration to the gangetic Brahmins.

5) The term "Gupta" is a misnamed version of "Jarta" found in early
texts and inscriptions by modern pro-Brahmanist historians (e.g. Majumdar,
Belvelkar, Satavalekar). "Jarta" is the sanskritized form of "Jat" as other
Saka tribal names "Gujar" become "Gurjara" and Munda become Marunda. Gupta is derived from "Goptri" meaning "military governor" as in the inscription of Skandagupta (Dehiya, p 176). It was not a surname or clan name but a title. Chandragomin, a gramarian of 6th century AD, wrote "Ajay Jarto Hunan" or "the invincible Jartas defeated the Hunas". Dehiya [p. 22] further writes

"The Jain author Vardhamana mentions Sakas and Jartas in 1139-40 AD
(Ganaratana Mahodadhi, Kasika, 201). Chandragomin, therefore makes no
mistake at all when he states that the invincible Jats defeated the Hunas.
Yasodharman (Virk) as well as the so-called Guptas were Jats . . . even
though the Hunas were themselves late-comer Jats. The clan name of Toramana
and Mahirgula, viz Jauvla, is still available among Indian Jats who are now
called Jauhl. Majumdar and Belvelkar have to revise their revision. Their
is no need to change the word Jat (Jarta) into Gupta. The original is quite
correct and was mentioned by a contemporary writer".

6) A contemporary inscription at Mandasor (558 AD) supports Chandragomin's account that under the command of Yashodharman Virk, "the Jats not only defeated the Huns but also exterminated them" (Puniya, 178). This is futher confirmed by Archarya Gopita, a Jain scholar of the 12th century
AD, according to whom "Huns were defeated by the Jats". Similarly, the
Artharva Veda says that god Rudra is the king of a people called "Garta Sada": "Gartasadam Jananam Rajanam". Many modern Brahmanist
"historians" like Satavalekar, after numerous contortions (Dehiya, p. 310),
translate "Garta" as being equivalent to a cave (Guha) !

The coin, inscriptional, archeological and literary evidence from
Jain/Puranic/Persian/Buddhist/Chinese sources clearly demonstrate the
non-Brahmanical and non-gangetic origins of the Mauryas (Maur clan) and
Guptas (Dharan clan). Both are proved to be Saka imperial dynasties which
expanded their empire into the eastern subcontinent from their home base in
northwest "Sakasthana". Jat/Gujar clans and villages named "Maur" and
"Dharan" exist even today in Punjab, Haryana, Bihar and western MP.

Selected Historical References on Sakas and Northwest Sakasthana (See Dhillon (1994) for catalogue of over 400 references)

Banerjea, J.N. (1987), The Scythians and Parthians in India, in a Comprehensive History of India, edited by K.A.N. Sastri, Vol. 2, Peoples Publishing House, New Delhi, India, 1987, pp 186-309, pp830-838.

Bingley, A.H. (1978), History, Caste & Culture of the Jats and Gujars, Ess
Ess Publications, New Delhi, India (first published in 1899).

Cunningham, A. (1971), Coins of the Indo-Scythians, Sakas, and Kushanas, Reprinted by Indological Book House, Varanasi, India (first published 1888).

Dahiya, B.S. (1980), Jats: The Ancient Rulers, Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, India.

Dhillon, B.S. (1994), History and Study of the Jats, Beta Publishers Inc., Ottawa, Canada

Eggmont, P.H.L. (1970), Alexander's Campaign in Ghandhara and Ptolemy's List
of Indo-Scythian Towns, Orientalis Lavaniensia Periodica I, pp 63-123.

Gupta, P.L. (1988), Coins, National Book Trust, New Delhi, India, pp51-52.

Hewitt, J.F. (1894), The Ruling Races of Prehistorical Times in India, South-Western Asia, and Southern Europe, Archibald Constable & Co. , London, pp. 481-487.

Herodotus (B.C. 490-425): The Histories, translated by de Selincourt, Penguin Books, New York, 1988.

Ibbetson Denzil (1916), Punjab Castes: Races, Castes and the Tribes of the People of Punjab, Cosmo Publications, New Delhi (1981).

Jats, The New Encylopaedia Britannica, Vol. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., Chicago, pp. 510.

Kosambi, D.D. (1953), The Study of Indian Tradition, Indica, Silver
Jubilee Issue.

Pradhan, M.C. (1966), The Political System of the Jats of Northern India, Oxford University Press, London.

Ptolemy (90-168 A.D.), Geography of Claudius Ptolemy, translated and edited
by E.L. Stevenson, The New York Public Library, New York, 1932.

Pawar, H.S. (1993), The Jats: their Origin, Antiquity and Migrations,
Manthan Publications, Rohtak, India

McCrindle, J.W. (1987), Ancient India as Described in Classical Literature, reprinted by Eastern Book House, Patna, India, pp 164-165 (first published 1901).

McGovern, W.N. (1939), The early Empires of Central Asia, he University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, pp 419-21.

Rolle, R. (1989), The World of the Scythians, University of California Press, Berkeley.

Sara, I. (1978), The Scythian Origin of the Jat-SIkh (Part 1 & 2), The Sikh Review, pp. 15-27, pp. 214-233.

Smith, V. A. (1903), The Kushana or Indo-Scythian Period in Indian History (165 B.C.-320 A.D.), Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, pp. 1-64.

Tod, J.(1972), Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, Vol. 1, Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., London, pp. 623(first published in 1829).

This talk of jatts having rajput descent is complete rubbish. Jatts are a much older tribal grouping. If anything the opposite is true - rajputs are the desendents of Brahminised Jatts.

paki didnt exist till 1947 so who was pure before then? lol

most jatts are derived from rajputs, whos pure when both are the same largest races of asia spanning both india and pakistan?

how will one be purer then the next? bajwa dhaliwal jatts in both pakistan and india hailed from the sial Pak kashmir) region famed for being sial ex rajputs with a lineage that migrated from jaiselmer rajistan and now settled on both sides of indo pak. jaiselmer rajputs were famed for being the renwoened fighters in south asia.

cheema jatts in pakistan hail from uttar pradesh india the western migration to present pakistan of the whole tribe meant that cheemas became muslims and sikhs. lol so whos pure? these identities we have you dont even know what they were just 500 years back in order to give them a position of purity.

dhillon jatts are hindu sikh muslim in india and pakistan which dhillon is more pure? lol

virk jatts were warrior kings are today in pakistan and india. Mirza kharral jatts were also royal kings.

remember rajput and jatt were just titles landowner royalty tiller.

todays punjabi chammars in both india and pak are ex demoted aryan and mede hindus. The proof lies in genetic make up that differs starkly from the rest of the dalit groups of india.

Nobody is pure. proove what purity is define it.

pure jats are paki jats

Farmer not mean jat AS jat were mujara/bonded labourers in Guru's time. Sodhi and rai found in other castes but Gurus' were Bedi and sodhi and from Khatri and marries to bhalla and trehans etc of khatri caste only. Farmers mean rajputs, sainis , kambojs, arains etc. jats became landowners very late.

forgot to mention the concentrated hindu jatt heartlands of hoshiarpur, and specifically jammu ( where sikh jatts and hindu jatts intermarry).

Yet we have not even touched upon the gupta, maurya and thakur ancestry with jatts all falling under the hindu dharm. As well as the sirsa chauhan rajputs known to have been jatts in the past and then switching occupations.

Now why an earth would you want to bring the sikh gurus into a jatt baiting argument when majority of jatts are not even sikhs and ironically fall into the lowest numerical minority of jatts?

This reveals how you have appeared on this thread out of nowehere specifically coming here to dirty other peoples names. What have you done for india that is first equivelent to either any guru, pir, or shaheeds for india? what have you sacrificed? What changes have you made? nothing, so who are you to critice anyone else?


coming back to sikhs. Yes some sikhs do not even look at caste hwn they marry some do, just like other religions. I am a perfect example my mothers maternal side are arya tank kshatriya, with links to arya samaj whilst my fathers descent is delhi takhars who never boast about scythian ancestry. We have mixtures of bedi and kapoor families too. I have been approached by both terkhan families and pandit tiwaris informally for marriage based upon my sanatan values. A jatt family also offered to get me married within the jatt biradri i politely refused all 3 due to my young age.

India is a diff story. Caste isnt even the right term to use to adress different sikhs. prior tyo 1947 sikhs came f4rom different parts of the land from different ethnic waves, bhattra sikhs from peshawar ( with mixed pashtu and rajpoot influences), kabuli sikhs from afghanistan, kashmiri sikhs, majha jatt sikhs from lahore amritsar, malwai sikhs, doab sikhs, sudras were in very small numbers in sikhism, chimba jhir gumara sikhs from the southerly rajpoot kingdoms, bihari and bengali sikhs. Hence your whole argument is ignorant based upon the diverse nature of different sikh groups spanning from kabul to kashmir to southern rajistan east to bengal. Caste would be the wrong term to use as it entirely denotes proffession more likely race and ethnic waves and culture mixes in different regions.

although in small numbers sikhs were very diverse ethnically, linguastically and culturally. 1947 has thrown sikhs onto one strip of land called punjab. The majha sikhs had nothing in common with the malwa sikhs although bothj were jatts prior to 47 the malwai/ patiala regions were seperate kingdoms from punjab whilst the majha sikhs were closer to lahore capital.\

Now you appreciate one thing how hard would it be for you to settle into one country coming from a different region? how easily wouyld you give up your language culture in just one day or generatyion? if its that easy then why dont tamil and kashmiri brahmins intermarry after 1947? wait let me correct you there are good souls in brahmins and other hindus who decide to take on a bramchari life and stand up for what a true bramchari should be whilst many dont because being born a brahmin doesnt always mean they want to be religious. same story with sikhs, some practice some dont. but its easy to dirty the name by saying brahmins dont do this or that. same story with sikhs. you have wrongly stereotyped. being born a sikh doesnt always mean you are one as a sheesh of guru granth sahib would be dedicated only to its message.

1947 has bought sikhs together and times have changed cultures are now different punjabiat has remereged. Its not black and white but the variances are slowly coming closer.

just a side note here most jatts in india are not sikh but hindus standing at around 50 million strong. Hindu jatts are even more bold and militant about their jatt identity than wannabee sikhs are. Hele haryana jatt hindus and Rahti jatts from delhi consider themselves the original jatts out of north asia.

The next largest group of jatts reside in western panjab pakistan standing at around 38 million. sikh jatts are barely 19 million the smallest.

The most heavily concentrated jatt belts in India are not panjab but Haryana, delhi, UP and rajistan. therefore concluding i dont understand why sikhism was picked out to bait jatts lord of the rings.

Mera Bharat Ki Shaan

sudra power writes

"Our Gurus did not performed one practical to erase casteism from society, means were not able to offend their own parents and caste/community and as their guru lineage was based on within caste or relatves so they have never taken courage to marry intercaste."

this topic has already been discussed and dusted. Talk of a gurus lineage would be pretty illogical due to the fact both lineages claimed "sodhi rai" are found not just in a khattri ghotra now or prior to the gurus time.

Take another logical fact into consideration your mom says we will only marry you to this lineage, but thats impossible because after you marry and have kids your kids cannot be married into the same ghotra because that amounts to incest, the same practice cannot be carried on for ten generations without inytermarrying your own family. The extraordinary feats of the gurus surviving in unparralelled hardships do not suggest they were from the result of incest. Whereas incest scientifically has prooven is very bad for your health which would have succombed one to defeat early.

one of the Gurus basic rules alongside the north indian culture was you study your ancestors ghotras and make sure you dont marry them. The reasons are both scientific and common sense, by marrying your own genes in a challenging primative society where hardships prevail would mean you would get inherant diseases on both sides ( in todays cases diabetes bp etc).

Although i myself see nothing wrong with intercaste marriage i dont feel you have a right to judge any guru prophet or avtar.

Caste in north indian sense is not inherant proffession, as history has bore witness indians have switched proffessions. In india jatts vary from kashmiri sikhs, rajistani sikhs, bihari sikhs, afghan sikhs, Up sikhs, and haryana sikhs. the varuiances are ethnological, lingual, cultural.

You cant blame rama or krishna bhagvan ji for tamil brahmins and kashmiri brahmins not intermarrying. You equally cant hold ramachander ji responsible for marrying sita from upper caste. Yet the ramayan sees God in all human beings too, rama himself being God could have chosen any woman but sita was the one. How would you like someone saying rama didnt have the courage to fight against caste? but you see not all people in the world are stupid enough to blame the founder of the faith. Look inside yourself and ask what changes have you made? do you follow the message he taught? do you see one god in all as prescribed?

do you really need to marry someone of a different caste in order to see god inside another human being?

India forever :-)

sudra power writes

"It is a leadre's or teacher's(Guru) duty to show the path to followers."

The point your trying to make is everybody should be intercaste married to proove caste dont exist and the gurus should have done to make followers follow suit.

Foremost caste was not the primary reason sikhi was born but to uproot tyranny of the time.

It has already been discussed the earlier proportion of sikhs were largely from khattri stock with very few hardly any jatts sudras rajputs. The reason that was the case the message starts close from home with people you know in the society that prevails . Jatts rajputs came into sikhi in large droves by the khalsa baptism well after the sikh gurus were married with the khalsa system already placed. the dominant proprtion today of sikhs are different mainly now jatts standing at 60%, whereas in the past the khattris dominated. Hence the whole scene was different to what it is today.

Now you pick a spiritual match for your son 8 out of ten are sudras with varieing bhagti levels, 1 and 2 are brahmin khattri, with varying bhagti levbels. Now you either look at the bhagti level that will match the challanges thrown in the way of the next chapter in history such as the martydoms of the gurus. you either cross your line of duty to proove caste dont exist or face the biggest challange of the time the moghul empire and pick a wife that will bear the brunt of being a martyrs wife ending up as a widow. Logic and numbers says out of studying out of the ten numbers equally you would pick the one most suited for the next chapter. That person could well be a brahmin or khattri (20%) but more likelty would be sudra ( 80%) only based upon the qualities and merit sought for the role and responsibilities to be undertaken and not the jaati.

In a similra way you r a manager looking for a potential employee 80% intevriewed are qualified indian . 20% white are equally qualified white and chinese. You either pick a person based upon their race to proove that race does not exist, or you pick the person most suitable for the job out of all ten. Whats the likeleihood that will come from a 20% bracket or 80%? its a game of chances mate.

80% v 20% is just an example dont take that as fact perhaps the khattris were in much larger numbers in 99% percentages before the khalsa baptism but facts stands out they were the overwhelming majority.

sudra power says

"Our Guru's preached against Brahminism and superstition by creating or providing practical scenes or examples like --Watering to DIRECTION OF fields to remove superstion about Ganga river and Sun worship, CURING POOR FROM lEPROSY,DINING WITH POORS OR LOW CASTES ETC."

The very first point to be made is there is no evidence to suggest the gurus married in their own caste as sodhis and rais are found in virtually most punjabis and north indian castes.

The Gurus did not preach against brahminism as such. They preached against some corrupt practices of priests who were brahmins. Brahmins have contributed to the development of mankind, thinkers, seers, prophets thesemlves. If you read dasam granth and guru granth sahib you will find qoute after qoute which speaks of sanatan dharm, how a true brahmins really is ,chaubis avtar, karma, etc etc. Who created the vedas? brahmins? the guru granth sahib says the vedas contain naam but many dont want to search for that.

Your picking and choosing events to arrive at your conclusion without studying the mission of the ten gurus and the entire philosophy. Sikhism does have a lot to do with hinduism period!

sudra power writes

"But Guru's created a change, and Khatris , farmers and Dalits started performing religion practises and started Nam Japna in language other than Sanskrit(wasa must at taht time for religion practice)"

sanskrit has been pretty much dead in north india under the moghuls and tarters. It is Guru Gobind Singh who revived braj basha in dasam granth and rewrote sarbloh granth in complete sanskrit out of respect for indian heritage.

Farmers ( if your reffering to jatts) were broken down into segments, in the east past haryana delhi and UP jatts had a lot of pandit influence indeed the gupta maurya and haryanvi jatts are probably the most staunch militant hindus in north india. The maurya and guptans are from the same stock as jatts. In these regions sanskritised brahmins had created a new class of brahmins out of jatts called the maghi priests. The central punjabi jatts had more sufic and buddhist influence whilst the western jattlands past lahore embraced islam. Its not a question of occupation here but tribal settlements over many regions which is why you have to be careful when lumping people into one pot.

dalits were not very big numbers in early sikhism.

hence we conclude there is no small black and white picture to declare that the gurus were against anything or everything hindu or brahmin or sanskrit.

Sudra power writes
"but they never created or pracitsed intercaste marriages themselves so people/public never done that too."

The ten gurus sat and ate with all kinds of people on the floor, but today sikh public have opened their own seperate caste gurdwaras in direct violation of their tenets. Whos to blame?

sudra writes

" Still today people are on Gaddis of Bedi Vansh etc."

the bedi surname is found in three entirely seperate unrelated castes. What to talk ot vansh or lineage then?

sudra power writes

"If our Respected Guru's would have taken this practical and real courageous step to erase the practice of casteism from society we would not be suffering from this leprosy among sikhs today, Our Guru's found able sikhs from their followers to marry their daughters etc.eg. Bhai Lehna Ji of their own castes but never of any other caste for 3 centuries."

Your statement would stand invalid as the overwhelming majority were khattris at the time of the ten gurus, hence a chance of numbers. jatts rajputs and lower castes flocked to the call of the khalsa later in 1699 which then changed the caste balances and bought more numbers from diff castes.

According to Shoan Lal Soori - Umaadat Twareekh

out of 120 000 mammoth gathering of the 1699 event about 20 000 men had gathered and stood up and promiosed to obey him.

sudra power writes

"Our Guru's found able sikhs from their followers to marry their daughters etc.eg. Bhai Lehna Ji of their own castes but never of any other caste for 3 centuries."

immature and ignorant statement!

the mission was for 150 years for 10 bodies. During this time the majority of sikhs were khattris till 1699. 1699 is the foundation day for the khalsa at the end of this 150 year mission. On this day flocked numerous castes in large numbers

sudra power writes

"I think at that time, they were not able to bring that much big change in society."

how many people in the world do you think want salvation?

The gurus came with the same message that existed in all the 4 yugs, its nothing new. The panadavas sacrificed their land and position for dharm did the rest of india follow suit? duryodhana replied he wont even give space back thats the size of a needle. Krishan bhagwaan came with the message in dvapar yet his whole vansh was destroyed. How large was this vansh if you were to fit them in india today? If the direct vansh descendants acted against krishnas calls does that make krishan bhagwan a lesser entity? of course not so why nit pick any guru?

if you are not interested in being godlike or japping naam its not the fault of any prophets. look at your own self.

sudra writes

"They found able sikhs to fight from all castes."

why do people fight? who is to blame? the founder of the persons religion or the person themself?

have you forgotten the dalit sena v rajpoot thakar and brahmins sena wars in bihar just 2 years back? according to your logic all the great brahmin seers, thinkers, and avatrs ever to have set foot on this earth for sanatan dharm were just meaningless with empty messages that didnt create any impact.

What about the raj that krishna , rama, parusram, bharat, pandavas had created? what about the glorious heritage they left behind? what about their war with wrongdoers and victory which led to a climate of good. what about the meditation knowledge without which there would be nothing and the inspiration to seek the inner self. Hence you have nitpicked only made ignorant comments.

sudra writes

"They found able sikhs to fight from all castes."

why do people fight? who is to blame? the founder of the persons religion or the person themself?

have you forgotten the dalit sena v rajpoot thakar and brahmins sena wars in bihar just 2 years back? according to your logic all the great brahmin seers, thinkers, and avatrs ever to have set foot on this earth for sanatan dharm were just meaningless with empty messages that didnt create any impact.

What about the raj that krishna , rama, parusram, bharat, pandavas had created? what about the glorious heritage they left behind? what about their war with wrongdoers and victory which led to a climate of good. what about the meditation knowledge without which there would be nothing and the inspiration to seek the inner self. Hence you have nitpicked only made ignorant comments.

sudra power writes

"Rajputs and Brahmins were never alligned with Sikh Gurus as they not seen (Sikh Gurus) them as their leaders as they were having higher status than Khatri community at those times."

rajputs come in various tribes spread across masses of lands. Many jatts today are ex rajput clans such as the sidhu brars were bhatti rajputs just 300 years ago. You will be surprised to learn there are even punjabi brahmins who share the marwaha and bassi clans with jatts. maghi brahmins in haryana are jatts. Jaiselmer rajputs also became jatts in recent times.

Some rajputs didnt have any occupational heirarchy such as the lohars terkhans and gumaras. Who do you think bhai sati das and mati das, chibber, were? brahmins! their photo hangs in every gurdwara

sudra writes

"Brahmins used or expoited Sikh Gurus against Mugals only when our Gurus gained some socio-political and military power."

The ten gurus took their own stand against the moghul empire. What position were the brahmins in to exploit the ten gurus when the entire kashmir valley which was a brahmin heartland was being mass converted to islam?

sudra power writes

"Our Sikh Guru Sahiban failed (or never attemted-- may be there were too many things to be done to bring social revolution and this was the most courge demanding or our Guru Sahiban ancestory in later part started struggle to uplift Khatri caste above Brahmins and Rajputs of those times by becoming leaders of the ignored masses) at this front against casteism eradication."

what power did the brahmins have in the moghul times? they themselves were downtrodden. Rajpoots we have discussed are tribes of different varieing natures and not collective. Most jatt tribes today are ex rajputs. you speak confidently about the gurus intentions as though you was actually there inside his head. can you please tell me who will win the next football league match?

the gurus didnt need to bring social revolution it was already there in all parts of the country. Marathas took their own stand against moghul empire, jattsand ex rajputs of different religions and regions revolted themselves against the moghuls after aurangzeb. The only thing the gurus did was bring back sanatan values which belong to the common man. Its upto the common man if he or she wants that.

the gurus are perfect role models for not just sikhs but for all people in many walks of life depending what a person seeks. The spirit to fight for whats right, love other beings seeing god inside them and even sacriricing for them, bringing zeal to peoples lives. you carry on....

Our Gurus did not performed one practical to erase casteism from society, means were not able to offend their own parents and caste/community and as their guru lineage was based on within caste or relatves so they have never taken courage to marry intercaste. If people can unite by getting baptism from same Amrit/nectar bowl why they cannot unite by intercaste marriages. It is a leadre's or teacher's(Guru) duty to show the path to followers. In case of Sikhism, Our Guru's preached against Brahminism and superstition by creating or providing practical scenes or examples like --Watering to DIRECTION OF fields to remove superstion about Ganga river and Sun worship, CURING POOR FROM lEPROSY,DINING WITH POORS OR LOW CASTES ETC. At those times when illitracy was prevalent, the only way to provide new direction or light to people was by creating examples in front of them and by becoming their role models to bring social change, eg only Brahmins were allowed to worship or become saints to attain Godliness, But Guru's created a change, and Khatris , farmers and Dalits started performing religion practises and started Nam Japna in language other than Sanskrit(wasa must at taht time for religion practice) but they never created or pracitsed intercaste marriages themselves so people/public never done that too. Still today people are on Gaddis of Bedi Vansh etc. so I think If our Respected Guru's would have taken this practical and real courageous step to erase the practice of casteism from society we would not be suffering from this leprosy among sikhs today, Our Guru's found able sikhs from their followers to marry their daughters etc.eg. Bhai Lehna Ji of their own castes but never of any other caste for 3 centuries.I think at that time, they were not able to bring that much big change in society.But They found able sikhs to fight from all castes. Unless you provide yourself as a role model as a leader, only then Illitrate public adopts new change. eg Sant Bhindranwale were full Amritdhari and so 80% 0f punjabi rural people became amritdhari in 3-4 years during Sant ji's times. Rajputs and Brahmins were never alligned with Sikh Gurus as they not seen (Sikh Gurus) them as their leaders as they were having higher status than Khatri community at those times.Brahmins used or expoited Sikh Gurus against Mugals only when our Gurus gained some socio-political and military power. Our Sikh Guru Sahiban failed (or never attemted-- may be there were too many things to be done to bring social revolution and this was the most courge demanding or our Guru Sahiban ancestory in later part started struggle to uplift Khatri caste above Brahmins and Rajputs of those times by becoming leaders of the ignored masses) at this front against casteism eradication.It is understood , in those times there was no mass media of communication like TV, RADIO, PRESS OR BOOKS PUBLICATION TO AWAKEN THE MASSES, AND THE ONLY WAY TO AWAKEN THE MASSES WAS BECOMING A SELF ROLE MODEL FOR THEM TO PREACH NEW IDEAOLOGY AMONG THE MASSES. Otherwise all the Bhakti movement saints of all provinces of India, have preached same ideology as our Sikh Guru's.

Sonyo udaas no hoya karo tusi..punjabi.net te aya karo

lord of the rings what are your sources? jatts mauryas and rajputs are pretty much the same thing interchanging occupations in different times.

some jatt tribes must have had aryan lineage such as the rais who share their ghotras with khattris.

indigenous = natives. However the sheer quantity of different jatt rajput and maurya tribes indicate countless waves of settlements from central asia to india. Hence how could it be possible to brush jatts as natives? the poorbia brahmins were in india before the jatts so wouldnt they be more indigenous than jatts?

Aryans are thought to be of european descent. Perhaps jatts may not fit that definition in your eyes but who else does in india right now? who are the aryans?

whats wrong with intermarrying a different tribe to make a new breed? the americans are a mix of different racial blood ties and rule the world. how far have you and your fake aryan superiority got?

what is aryan in sanskrit? a race or nobleman? what makes a nobleman? his deeds or his blood? if its his blood then what of jefrey dhamler? he was a white aryan male who dated black males drugged them, had intercourse with them and finally cut their pieces up stored them in his refrigerator and ate them. So now does a race make a nobleman? or does the nobleman get made by his deeds?

jai hind

Bhils of central India are caleed as Sansi bhils in Punjab region. they are indigenous people meann non aryans. When rajputs married them the new breed was called as Jats nor Sansi nor Rajput.

which is the surname for sansi or chura caste?

what is a sansi?
my friend told me he is sansi but its the first time i heard of this caste.
i am marathi and we dont have this sansi in maharashtra state.
is it some punjab only surname or caste?

RAJPUTS MARRIED BHILS AND SANSIS AND CREATED NEW HARAMI BREED CALLED JATS AND WERE EX COMMUNICATED FROM Rajput caste. Thanks Sunny singh , Rana , PCJS and many more ujajadds.

insane argument put forward is intercaste marriages do not work by giving one example out of 100. what about the other 99 love intercaste marriages that do and have worked? given half the chance!

what about taking ONE example of an arrangd marriage within the same caste and saying same caste marriages do not work? lol oh my!

get real! its the committments and ideals you take forward to keep the marriage concrete for the future. There is no seperate kind of decency in and a lower morality rate in one caste to the next. There are hard working decent people in all walks of life and louts in all kinds too.

the whole argument of gurus marrying khattris for caste is silly. its a known historical fact most sikhs in guru jis days were khattris with a smaller presence of jatts.you do not marry somebody to proove a point of caste not existing.

A sikh marries another sikh according to their spirituality for spiritual pursuits . Now the Guru sent from God knew the best match to pick for their kids based on the qualities of a sikh. To say they picked somebody based on caste goes against the message of sggs and their own rehetnaes which clearly proscribe u do not look at the caste of ur kids prospective partner.
The jattist argument of the gurus keeping marriage in the khattri caste with using the sodhi rai bedi lineage argument is more absurd. Sodhis are found in jatts and khattris for a start. Bedis are found in khattris and sheembai. Rais are found in khattris, jatts ( muslim hindu sikh), sheembai, brahmins.

Bhardwaaj bhai caste is truly meaningless many people of different castes have switched over due to economic reasons. Nobody can truly say i belong to this its an illusion.

hindu Jatts in haryana and jatts in punjab and lahore have the same surnames, yet the central punjabi ones seem to be lighter while the lahoris and haryanvis tend to be wheatish in colour but just as muscular in build. Sikhs seem to think this is some miracle, contrary nay!

Mohsin fani a contemporary of sikhs describes fighting sikhs in his day as black faced dogs, Dark. So how did some central punjabis get light? colonial and moghul times rapes and forced intermixing occuring foreign blood. The argument of sikhs and jatts being a seperate race is the silliest thing. The argument holds only if ALL jatts were tall light skinned blue eyed and brown bearded. The fact is you get a large number of small skinny dark faced jatts too. You get some who resemble arabs and afghans and british due to rapes and intermixing as sikh jatts were the ons who led campaigns againt all 3 during times of retributions the brit moghs and afghans decided to teach the sikhs who were majority jatts a lesson by raping their women in those days their was no abortion and this is what led to infantcide culture in punjab to this day.

Some sikhs think their different looking genetics r seperate its down to a spread of genes forced on their great great grandmothers. How can u explain a jatt dhillon from haryana wheatish and a central punjabi sikh whos white? wheatish again in lahore? to the left n right their different to whats in the centre. The build, the mannerisms r the same just the gene diff.

The Jatts just happned to be the majority in central punjab during 1700s. They were exploited for centuries b4 by the moghul feudul system of rajputs pathans moghuls being landless labourers. Jatts came into the sikh faith first few scattered here and there, then in large waves during guru gobind singhs khalsa initiation. After initiation banda bahadur and maharaja ranjit singhs fauja were comprised heavily of jatts in whos hands land was transferred after victories.

Its this that makes jatt sikhs feel their more seperate and different. You never find muslim or hindu jatts boasting about their jattness or physical features. Judging from someopf these posts you can see their elitist propaganda of seperatenss, load of crap! some jatts share same surnames as hindu rajputs and jatts chauhan, mann, bagri, uppal dheswal and dhes jatts in haryana are sidhus gills hayars and chahals, hailing from the same people. Play it down as much as you want, end of the day jatts are just a mixture of indians , arabs, afghans, british and won a few victories and got some land thats all.

the eliteness is dieing out. Punjabs land is not big enough to keep farming in proportion to the population growing which means jatts wont be able to be landowneres andfarmers all the tyme. they will have to do normal jobs like every1 else. punjabs face is changing.

Sikhs in a caste system are living a 1900s life which is dieing out. as our friend sidhu said and myself have seen a lot of sikhs are married to gujratis in england at least and mixing with other races.

If you live in a 3 bedroom house in england your no diff from each other, the culture u live around u is the same here.

theres thousands of jatts n jattis nowdays in west london marrieing into gujratis lol forget caste mate.

in western canada nuff jatts marriedinto gorai and worked out fine for at least 2 generations.

caste is not important times have changed people

im from london and from what i have seen personally a lot of people are marrying out of caste nowdays nobody can stop this in brum southall london all ova.

there was a time when our parents used to arrange marriages, then many failed. Then they said you can find your own if he or she is a jatt. This severly limits choices down what if you dont find the jatt or jatti of your choice? but somebody else? n thats whats happening now.

In a few years more caste will be dead in sikhs abroad. the argument of anon is silly by taking it from intercaste to inter religion. i can honestly as a jatt sikh say i would prefer to marry any sikh than a muslim or hindu only for reasons because i wanna get into sikhi later in my life and take amrit with my p[artner. no offence to either religion but pracrtically u cant when somebody is a diff religion.

A lot our girls are running off with the paks who take advantage of converting our kurris only because our kurris r fed up of the culture their in. Their parents limit them down to caste, now if they cant find their perfect match in a jatt but find it somewhere else the parent says no. So parents cause rebound effects to extremes. Now this pak problem has woke people up which is why more inter caste marriages r now taking place.

Ps no offence to our muslims im only addressin the paks who deliberatly take advantage of the situation not the islamic community.

The rss ideology is growing big tyme in punjab in the khets, would u like to see the day when sikh jatts marry hindu jatts in haryana and rajistan bagris?

see thats how we can take the argument anon to many lentghs. thats crazy

bottom line is the gurus gave clear hukamnamas to marry your kids to sikhs. the akhal takhat rehet also says do not look at the caste of the person u marry ur kid to. the akhal takhat rehet is based on 20 years of research into sikh rehetnamas dating from guru jis days.

Your trying to call the Guru a hypocrite by saying theyr preaching one thing and practicing another by marryin into khattris.

The picture isnt black and white. Khattris were in larger numbers in early day sikhi thats a fact, jatts were less. Look at bani on caste then ur sayin guru picked a woman on caste? ur degrading guru to ur level.

dont use dat as an argument ur making a joke out of ur faith. read the 40 odd verses of bani soak in what they say.

read the rehetnamas their very explicit about what a sikh shud do when marrying. if guru wanted sikhs to preserve caste and marriage they wud have sed so

this is getting silly. my family is what you would call punjabi bhamins. we are from the pind so culturally we are more like jatts then anyone else. we dress and speak like them (appa, aho). my uncles drink a lot . my point is that caste system wsa made for a reason but is exploited by man. jats are so proud of being jatt but it is because of the caste system that ppl can call themselves jatt after these many years. even the sikh gurus who came from the hindu khatri caste married khatris their sons married khatri wives. there is nothing wrong with marrying in caste . often times you have more in common with someone of the same caste. the culture would be the same. kohi farq nahi penda.i think where i have problems with caste is when ppl discriminate on the basis of it. lets be honest sikhism and other movements like the arya smaj and swami viveknand have tried to get rid o f caste to no success. you can never get rid of caste . what you can do is stop oppression and the so called superiority of one catse over another.

oe u r forgetting me i am paapa from
pindi.i dont know anthining abt my caste status could anyone of u pls explain it to me whats paapa
paapa

Waheguru ji ka khalsa waheguru ji ki fateh!
people can say anything but i sa caste is one big load of shit!it is a bigger threat to our religion than anything.the fact is that if marriage is only inter caste than a jat or khatri singh have to marry out of their religion which reduces our numbers even further.
i am a khatri and have more jat, ramgarhia and other caste friends and except for a few jat guys nobody gives a damn.i myself appreciate the qualities of every sikh caste as an english historian had said that sikhs are so specialised that if united nothing can stop them from succeedingunfortunately we have got scattered .brothers and sisters as it is we are such a small community our duty is to keep the flag flying high nobody can give up anything fast but the first step should be removing the last name and instead writing khalsa.some people may criticise me but just give it a thought there are so many good gursikhs who are well educated outside punjab when they came to punjab in 1984 they faced casteism like anything but do you know that paiyyas of uttar pradesh and bihar have voting rights in punjab.sikhs outside punjab should be part of the mainstream and these paiyye of UP AND BIHAR who have been planted to mess up punjab should be kicked out.sisters and brothers we know ek khalsa sava lakh de barabar hai .hun aapan noo kattha hona chahida hai te hinduise hon to bachna chahida hai.i am studying in england and am planning to grow my hair and get baptised only then can i start doing anything actively but i appeal to all of you if anybody wants to do anything ffor the community send me amemail .let us start from the grassroots and educate sikhs in the villages of our motherland punjab,let us stop speaking hindi and not commit my mistake of removing hair which is invaluable .we should get more and more deprived sections to our community and increase our strength and ahukumnama should be passed which bans using derogatory references like chuda, chamiar jatt-boot,bhapa and so on.it is our duty that singhs walking won the roadwith pugghs fullbeard and kada are respected and not made fun by other communities(especially the hindu lalas who are jealous of our communitys PROGRESSin every sphere) .
any one with any ideas email me at poa00tsm- at - sheffield.ac.uk
RAB RAKHA
YOUR SIKH BROTHER
T SINGH


my email is poa00tsm- at - sheffield.ac.uk.
anyone email me about your views
WAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA WAHEGURU JI KIFATEH!
T singh

Sort yourselves out people! Get back to the objective.

O SHIT!!! I AM OUTA HERE

you know you wanto ram it up my wet slippery sweet black hole

DR PUNJABI WHAT THE HELL IS THAT ALL ABOUT??

I am a gay black guy want some?

Sat Shri Akal...Key Hall Ha???

I am Sikh too!!

Dr punjabi are you Sikh, well sounds like you are a kala. act punjabi not kala man

anyway goodluck with your wedding. I hope everything go's well..

karan

why don't you understand. I want to make silly childish comments to get a reaction,...it's obviously working, i do this to wake people up-it's hurts their feelings what i say, this will tell them how others feel.

chill but don't forget to eat them

Hey y'all Dr Punjabi is back 2 cure da world. All y'all better recongnise. Aanki boy, I'z is jat just like u but I'z got da brains 2 know dat being jat ain't gonna get me anywhere. Y'all gotta recongnize dat we all r Sikh first and onl first. My girl ain't jatti but she is sweet and me and da girl are tying da knot real soon. All yous best be waking up to da truth and dat is dat y'all better educate urselves and realize da power of Sikhism.
Dr Punjabi agaya 2 cure da world of stupidy

KARAN KUMAR I AGREE. ITS PEOPLE LIKE THESE I HATE THE MOST. THEIR ONLY PURPOSE IS TO START A CHILDISH ARGUEMENT.

I JUST WANT THIS TO BE KNOWN

THIS KUMAAR GUY IS THE SAME GUY LEAVING RACIST REMARKS ON THE OTHER THREADS. HE MIGHT SEEM LIKE HE DOESNT CARE ABOUT CASTS BUT READ HIS OTHER REMARKS AND JUDGE BY YOURSELF. HE IS NOTHING BUT ANOTHER DUMBASS MORON.

To All My Brothers & Sisters...WaheGuru Ji Ka-Khalsa WaheGuruji KeFateh!
I wish that I could in life be a fair,just,graceful,
caring,loving,considerate,compassionate human that will not be blinded with self-pride,jealousy,
greed,power-craze,creed-conscious,so as to achieve self-actualisation in the service of Waheguru-ji.And I pray that every soul would be blessed with total spiritual intoxication in SatNam Sri Waheguru Ji,to perform the best for "Truthful Living!"
Thank You.

jat pinjabi

in fact im a punjabi and am proud of my origins,
i believe in the ten Guru's and am Sikh but thats a completely different state of affairs.

Explain why you class me as a hindi-or is it that no non-jatt is able to be Sikh.
Im probably more Sikh than you will ever be.

I practise what I believe I don't go boasting about how supreme I am to others. I share a common characteristic with you and that is I am a punjabi, but I practise my religion as well, all jatt practise is their caste. What a load of nonsense caste is BUT you people think its more important than religion, this is why you get abuse from other castes.....

gerit!

Remember other castes don't think they are lesser than jatt, we just want you to realise that to boast about a background which may have a history BUT at the same time is causing you people to move away from Gods teaching you are merely stating that you are better than anything our Guru's said and that in all honesty is why we will cuss, use bad language.

Remember anyone can fight, for a just cause i certainly would, and I would still be standing at the end of it because I would have GOD on my side.

Forget about bull such as GOD will punish me when Im up there, don't you people understand GOD has fgiven us that opportunity now on this earth to put it right ourselves.

Fear GOD, that's the only way we can rid ourselves of evil thoughts such as ego, arrogance and looking down on others when really everyones alike.

To whom it may cocern!!!

Still got time before we have to party!!!
The Sythians came in as a tribe ,with wives and children .En masse ,hence inter marriage was minimul .

The Greeks came as an army .Hence only guys and intermarriage was encouraged .

There are many Jatt Generals in the army ,Anky .Too many and not all faithfull to their own .A lot are tho .

Why does it matter if Dr Punjabi is a chudi or a chumar. Does the latter make his viewpoint anyless valid???
You know some non-jatts say that Jatts are hotheaded and do not have brains, but only brawns. I guess that stereotype would make your viewpoint invalid right???
Or are you just stereotyping Dr. Punjabi the same way in which some people stereotype Jatts.

aankhi jatt:

well said. keep it real in cali. sayin hi from nj!

?* Dear sir or madam i think u may have taken what i said out of context. I was saying that I don't agree with ppl discriminating on the basis of caste - i didn't say anything about sikhs should/could marry muslims or hindus. My personal bleef is that we should marry only within our own religion and not marry out cos there are too many differences in religions or approaches are different. The caste thing is complicated.

DR. Punjabi,
I dont believe there are any jatts living in Ny area, maybe lubana's, chamiar or churras. There is no point in hating jatts, you guys dont owe us anything, and there is no real conflict here. I believe its some people insecurities about themselves that are making them unhappy. Hey, maybe your grandfather or greatgrandfather was jatt, no need in getting mad at us. I dont think any of you dudes been to cali, but we do a lot of jatt celebrating here, from san diego all the way to vancouver. You gentlemen, are new in this country, so i suggest sticking daily activities, we cali jatt have a lot of time on our hands. Keep away from ebonics, i dont listen to crap music and cant make much sense of it. How is NYPD treating you there, i know a couple of friends in NYPD. Take it easy boys.

Bushra, I dont think all people hate muslims. One of my best mate is a muslim I eat dinner around her's(meat) and she eats around my place. When me & my brothers were young our parents drumed it into us that we could find a Hindu partner if we wanted to but not a muslim, as there religion is too different from ours. Also which in some cases is true is that most muslim guys go for sikh girls on purpose to convert them to Islam as if they do that all there sins are forgiven. A couple of months ago we were invited to a wedding reception, on the card it only said the girls name, no parents name or last name. The Wedding was huge and everyone was gossiping to find out the girls religion. The girl was walking around saying Sat shri akhal which confused everyone. Later on in the wedding we realised she was a muslim.
they had been with each other for 7 years and the parents had to agree with the wedding. This is a Jatt sikh married to a muslim. I from my views would never marry a muslim because of the differences. These day's evey other marrige is out of caste or religion. When i have children I want them to marry someone they love and can live a happy life with I would not teach them not to go with this caste or that religion.
Sohal well said.

why do ya people don like muslims?

past is past isnt it?

ANKHI Jat,
please stop bouncing on your head. For heaven's sake talk some goddam sense. You are a fool and its hard to understand how can you even believe in the nonsense that you keep writing. I think that you are a very mixed up individual and definitely need some help. Please get your head scanned and let someone help you out. You are a disgrace to your religion and community. Please seek help before you loose it completely.

MR SOHAL,
I AINT GOING TO SAY ANY THING BAD TO YOU, SINCE I HAVE SOHAL RELATIONSHIP IN MY FAMILY. MY UNCLE BACK IN SOHALA IS STILL A BOOTLEGGER AND MAKES HIS OWN LIQUOR. I AM PROUD OF HIM AND INFACT THIS TIME I GO BACK I AM GOING TO TAKE A RED LABEL JOHNNY WALKER FOR HIM. WHY IS THAT WHEN I SAY I AM PROUD OF BEING JAT, THAT YOU SEEM TO HAVE A DIFFUCUTLY. MOST MODERN JATT I KNOW WHO GROW UP IN THE US DONT EVEN WRITE THE NAME SINGH BETWEEN THERE FIRST AND LAST NAME. YOU SEEM TO STOP WORRYING ABOUT OTHERS AND DEGRADING OTHERS BECAUSE YOUR ARE MORTAL LIKE ME.

BEST OF LUCK TO YOU!

ankhee u r a stupid, ignorant fool and long may that continue. What is the point of havin an ego when u know inside urself that u will never be at ease with life generally cos u think so narrowly about ppl and peoples,.. meaning (other communities) if ur slow!!?
u really r a clown, i have read what u have to say on numerous occasions and u certainly have some homework to do - u take pride and use to ur advantage things done by others so that u can walk around with a chip on yer shoulder, that is an act so low in my opinion,

As a jat wat do u consider more important, culture, religion, the Guru's word, Sikhism-How much does Sikhism mean to u and is being a jat the best things since sliced bread???????
Get off ur ass pick up a book - yes i know there are countless authors who have written books on jats BUT what I mean is a book about Sikhism, pick out good points in this religion - u will find that u have been left behind and ur thinkin is so narrow minded, what did the Guru's teach us - we r all equal, who r u to distinguish between ppl from different communities - GOD!!?!!!

Let me tell u it's cos of ppl with ur type of views which let Sikhism down, u sending it down to your children and it just carries on in that way - remember the great deeds done by Sikhs in the past, and todays Sikh are too busy fighting over things such as caste - oh pardon me, i mentioned caste and
sikhism in the same sentence.(THEY DON'T MIX) BUT U ANKY CERTAINLY R A MIXED UP Individual who needs to learn about life.

It's a long process but I wish u well

ANKHI JATT,
Hey Bud, first of all, just by yelling out( or writing in Caps) you are not necessarily making the right point. The fact is that it does not make a difference as to who you marry so long as you are happy. I am a Khatri and will be marrying someone out of my caste come july. FYI, it is an arranged marriage. Caste and all has never bothered me or my family and nor am I genetically challanged.
(Ankhi jatt you are not only ignorant, but a stupid fool. Please stop make an ass out of yourself)

I am really surprised that so many of young sikhs believe in this caste system. I have seen so many opinions posted by so many people on this site, where two people in love just could not marry each other because of this stupid caste system.

I hear a lot of guys saying that a girl from out of his caste will not be able to adjust in his family. Frankly speaking this is just a hokus-pokus bs. further, I don't even know who are the people looking down upon intercaste marriages, as mentioned by you.

I think a lot of this caste non-sense has to do something with ignorance. I have a lot of sikh friends, who all belong to different castes. I donot find my one friend different in behaviour than another.

As far as India is concerned, trust me, no one gives a damn about caste system in cities. You are right in saying that in Pinds in punjab, this practice is prevlent. But again that is due to lack of exposure.

During the 84 riots, no Sikh was asked before his excecution as to what caste he/she belonged to. For rioteers, the mission was to burn or slaughter any Sikh. This just goes on to prove that for the rest of the world, we all belong to one group and one group only, which is called sikhs.

The very base of our religion is equality amongst all. We were made sikhs from Hindus, so that we may not indulge in this caste system. But the sad part is, that even after so many years, we are still no different than what we were back then.

My message is that we are all sikhs and lets concentrate more on Gurbani and less on all other things and we might be able to do what our dear Gurus had wanted us to do.

I had a friend who was Sikh and her parents were really strict and they only wanted her to marry a Jatt. However, the girl fell in love with a Ramgharia Sikh and her parents said no.
Now she has ran off with a Muslim guy (he's jatt)
What would have been better? If this jatti married the Ramgharia Sikh or the Muslim Jat?
Is caste really that important that we should single out our Sikh brothers and sisters.
Abolishing caste is a concept that permeates throughout the Sikh teachings.
Enforcing the caste system is a concept that is prevelant in the Hindu scriptures?
The question I ask myself are Sikhs then really regressing to Hinduism and are they really different than Hindu's culturally???

Heera you go girl...

I AM A SAINI AND I WANT TO MARRY A JAT.....

I DON'T CARE IF MY VEGETABLES ARE CHEAPER THAN HIS

HEERA,
WHAT CITIES ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT MAN. MOST JATTS FROM PIND GO TO COLLEGES NOW, AND MANY HAVE SETTLED IN THE CITY. I NEVER HAVE HEARD OF INTERCASTE MARRIAGE IN THE CITY. EVEN IF ITS A LOVE MARRIAGE THE NEWSPAPER USUALY HAS IT ON THE FRONT PAGE WITH THE GIRLS FATHER AND MOTHER. LOVE MARRIAGES ARE DISCOURAGED IN THE CITY AND VILLAGE CULTURE IN PUNJAB. THERE IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE THAT 1% WHO ARE GOING TO BE GENTICALLY CHALLENGED AND WILL FALL IN LOVE AND MAKE A FOOL OF THEMSELVES THE REST OF THERE LIFES. THATS THE WAY SOCIETY IN URBAN AND VILLAGE PUNJAB IS. THERE IS NO INERCASTE MARRIAGE AND EVEN IF ANY INTER CASTE MARRIAGE HAPPENS IN US OR ENGLAND THE NEWS REACHS THERE FAST, AND THE PARTIES INVOLVED ARE GENERALLY LOOKED DOWN UPON. PLEASE DONT ASSOCIATE JATT WITH OTHER CULTURE, THERE ARE NO SIMILARITIES, MAYBE YOU HAVE A JAT FRIEND WHO SAYS HE DONT BELIEVE IN CASTE. BUT DEEP DOWN INSIDE JATT BLOOD IS THE SAME. YOU CANT CHANGE IT MAN, JUST LIKE YOU CANT MAKE A LION A PET AND TEACH AN ELEPHANT HOW TO CLIMB A TREE.

Heera, I was merely answering a personal question as asked by Anon. My beliefs are personal, thus I didn't feel I need the GGS support. I'm not telling you to agree with me or do as I do; I'm just telling my personal view. Of course there's nothing wrong or right with either intercaste or caste marriages; it's a question of compatibility. That's why I said I would prefer a Jatti. In my opinion, it has better CHANCES of working. Now, if you think that I'm saying Jatti's are better women; I'm not. All castes are equal. I just want a Jatti.

To Sunny Singh,
Your reason to marry a Jatti is totally personal. But at the same time I feel that it is a little conceaded one. To say that a girl from another caste will not understand you is a false impression. Are you trying to say that no Ja_t husband/wife have ever had an arguement, or are you trying to say that girls from other castes will not understand your culture. If this is the case than I would like to know what culture are you referring to. As far as I can visualise, Sikhism is more of a culture than religion.

I have all kinds of friends and let me tell you that when we guys are all together, its hard to say as to who is a Ja_t and who is not. It is all in one's head. If you ever go to a city in India, there you will find that this caste system does not even exist. It is only in the villages, where caste system is so prevelent, the reason is ignorance. Sunny Singh, if you truely believe in Sikhism than you will never worry about this rediculous issue of caste.

As far as caste issue in Bani, my answer is a line from Bani - "Jin ke Bhitar hai antara, jaise pasu tiwe oiye nara". People who believe in inequality, are like animals.

If you want to make point about same caste marriage, than try making it without giving a refernce to the Bani because as far as castism is concerned, I can give you quite a few qoutes from Bani, prooving you wrong.

Sorry for being so blunt, but I feel that you are a young guy and to lead your life with a biased attitude is only going to have adverse effects on you. So open your mind and if ever a good girl comes along, than do not worry about her caste, just look at the good qualities and see if she would give you happiness for the rest of your life.

As far marrying a white guy, if it pleases someone than there is nothing wrong with it.

Just a humble brotherly advice:)

Anon, I probably wouldn't. There are 3 conditions in which I would. 1)If I couldn't find nice Jatti. 2)If I fell in love with a girl from another caste. 3)If this non-Jatti has shukkel and ukkel. I'm not castist. I just feel some things in my family would only be understood by a jatti. Growing up on a farm in California, my parents were able to bestow Punjabi culture and Sikhism on me. Some may argue that those things are contradictory and maybe so. My parents had more non-jatt friends than jatt friends, so I didn't know what a Jatt was until around 17 years of age. I thought Jatt=Sikh. As I went to college I had many friends Jatt/non-Jatt. My generalizations were that Jatt's tended to be more straight forward, open, agressive, and loud. Non-jatts tended to be more reserved, complex, and quiet. I'm not saying one's better just different, in fact, I'm more like the latter personality. However, once in a while I get into the "Jatt Mode". Intercaste marriages are rare here in California, because most Indian people here are Jatt. The promoters that I've seen just want see Jatts not boast about themselves; nothing to do with Sikhism. Why don't these same inter-caste marriage promoters promote marriages between White Sikhs and Punjabi Sikhs; what happens to their open-mindedness then? To make a long story short, Only a Jatti would understand me and my family, not anyone else. Plus I want my children to have both a religious AND cultural background.

to sunny singh ,

woul u marry out of caste or not, why if not?

I've been reading these discussions about intercaste marriages. First of all would someone please show me where in the Guru Granth Sahib it talk about the need for intercaste marriages. Sikhism in its pure form is the relationship between Guru and Sikh (disciple). It has nothing to do with caste. Caste is man made, however, why should intercaste marriages be promoted so much? Castes have become so separated that they now are separate mini races. Whites usually marry whites and black marry black. People marry someone who has something in common with themsleves. Jats tend to stick with Jats, Tarkhans with Tarkans, etc. Promoters of intercaste just want to eliminate the "Jatt Chowdur" or they're in love. Sikhism's main point was that anyone can realize god and as far a god is concerned there are no castes.
In the physical world we have races, breed, castes, etc. Why can't we just live in harmony together. Sikhism is a beautiful religion. Lets not bring cultural thing into our religion and use religion to support our actions(ie. marrying intercaste and using religion as support).

I am the grandson of the 7 Taseeldaars in Namoli. Nanke are Sihota with also strong relations to the Rai family. Closely related to Shaheed Bhagat Singh. My personal credentials are a Masters Degree in Structural Engineering and I am presently attending UC Berkeley (part-time) for my MBA in Management/Project Management. I work full time designing bridges and freeway overpasses. I am 23 years old.

Anon, my "Tachalus" is Sunny Singh. I am Sundeep Singh Bains, Taseeldaar from Malpur Area.

Well done heera, incidently what is your background sunny singh should shut it

To Heera

I certanily agree with you heera.
Its been after such a long time I have heard such words from anyone.
I also believe the same.
Regards
Ramanpreet

Caste System:

Personally, I don't beleive in caste system. I have people of all castes in my family like Khattaries and jatts. Being a Sikh, i can definitly say that Sikhism does not recogonize any caste system. So when I hear people talk about there castes, it just makes me laugh. I think it is complete ignorance. Today, a person's status is based on the kind of job one does.

The reason, I have decided to write this article is just to clearify the fact, as claimed by the Jatts, that they are of the highest caste. First of all, caste system is all based on Manu's Smriti (an ancient Indian Philosopher, born around 800BC). In order to have a progressive society, Manu divided the society. Given below is how various castes were created:-

BRAHMIN: This class comprised of scholarly people, whose main job was to preach and teach. These were the most educated people. A Brahmin's son automatically became a Brahmin.

Kashatriyas: We punjabies call them Khatries. This was the class of soldiers and kings. It was considered to be a birth right by a Khatri to be a fighter. All of our Gurus belonged to this class. According to Hinduism, all the Gods belong to this class (Krishna, Rama etc). Furhter all ancient kings belonged to this class.

Vashya: Punjabis call them Vash. This was the working class. Tradesmen, Merchants, Farmers (Jatts) and businessmen etc belonged to this class. People from this class were directly related in the development of economy. During Maharaja Ranjit Singh's time, biggest Vash class lived in Lahore and the city was also the biggest trade center of the North. It is on the basis of this class that a lot of prominent cities of Punjab (like Amritsar and Lahore etc) got developed.

Sudar:This was the class that was assigned the duties of providing services to all the above classes. This class had people like Mochies(Cobblers), jamadars(cleaners), barbers, tailors etc.

Given above, is just a breakdown of caste system. Also, what i have tried to write is that in the olden times, clases were formed for socio-economic purpose. One was recognized on the basis of his class. Today, ones is recognized on the kind of job one does.

In today's world any one doing the work of teacher can be said to be a Brahmin. Anyone doing farming can be said to be a ••••. like earlier times, today no one is bound by hereditary work.

We should all try to get above the ignorance of caste system. Punjab has been devided so many times before, lets not try and divide it further.

A note of information:-

Undivided Punjab is the Eigth Largest Nation in the world i.e size and population wise.

Anon, here's some information for you about castes since you seem so interested. The caste system was started my Manu in his Manu Smriti thousands of years ago. We were all Hindus then. He layed out what he called the 4 varans or castes. Brahmin, Khyshatri, Vaisyas, and Sudras. I believe it was created by the Brahmins to maintain economic, political, and religious domination. They have been successful. They have, over thousands of years, convinced the uneducated people of India that one should stay in their castes for jobs, social circles, and marriage. Thousands of years of tradition could not be broken as even the Sikh Gurus weren't successful in abolishing this division. It has been accepted that the caste system will not be abolished for some time. I personally don't believe any caste is better than another, but I am a hippocrate since I believe marriages should be preferably within castes. I've seen what intercaste marriages become. People within their castes generally do act and think similiarly, therefore, leading to problems with intercaste. I'm going to leave the touchy subject of intercaste marriage alone for now.
I would however like to correct you and other on your innaccurate classification of Punjabi Castes. Khatris and Rajputs belong to the Khsyhatri Varn. J a ts, Ramgharia, Saini, Kambooj, Lavane, etc. belong to the Vaisyas caste, Hari-jans and others belong to Sudras varn.
To clear up anything about Saini's and J a ts. J a ts, Saini, Kamboj, and Levane are farmers. There may be others I forgot to mention. J a ts own higher valued crops: mangoes, sugar cane, wheat, musturd, etc. Sainis grow vegetables. Kambooj and Lavane similiarly.
Ramgharia mainly consists of two castes Tirkhans and Lohars. Carpenters and metal workers, respectively.
The reason I'm talking about this is if you're going to talk about other castes you should at least know what they do!
Now you can see that a J a t is in middle on the hierarchy of caste yet most are very proud of themselves. A punjabi saying goes, "Jey Bakhi jatha new jath puche oh guse karde, Jey J a t new J a t kayha oh chorha ho janda!"
Let me finish with a quote from the Guru Granth Sahib. This quote is from a saint who has divine wisdom. First, in no way do I mean this offensive to Harijans. Kabir ji says, "Bin name chare varne chamaar" (With the Name of God all 4 castes are low caste!)

Friends
Between 16th and 18th Nov we could not offer the updated messages as we had a server problem. Today we are resuming all messages as they were posted..
Sorry for the incovenience.

Hi Anon,

This is just an add on to your train of thoughts, Guru Nanank's companion Bhai Bala was a Sandhu Jat and the first priest of the golden temple a Randhawa Jat-Bhai Budha. Regards

Hi Savraj.....how are you.re the point of man made things..religion is also man made...to believe in God is universal..so why do you limit yourself to sikhs only??thats been my point all along.All roads lead to God..so why ignore one thing ie. caste but dig the goalposts in after.Of coz I am saying I am against intercast marriage and I am being labelled narrow minded but thats okay.Why question one point of view..mine..but do the same later on down the line????we are saying..move it once..then thats the logical conclusion..other races...other castes.You say that Khatris were Sikhs in large numbers and thats why the Gurus married Khatris.Jats have from day one being Sikhs in large numbers.In fact the ratio has always been highest in JATS.sO WHEN THE GURUS WERE HINDUS THEY HAD KHATRI WIVES AND WHEN THEY WERE SIKHS THEY WERE KHATRI.SAYS IT ALL...CASTE WAS THE CONSTANT DENOMINATER.Thats why 98% jats have followed this to this day.I hope you will take this just as a discussion.Know that I like your sentiments.speak you soon.

TO anon
i guess everythingh depends on the way we are raised. in my case i canot imgine not marrying a person because of different caste.

the limitis and bounderies are man made and your point is a good one.

to savraj...hello..your actual personal limits obviously stretch to sikhs only which is good.but you have to admit that marrying in, as been the norm for all sikhs castes.certain sections extend the limits,in your case sikhs only ..others asian only and others all and sundry.i am saying this in decending order.so for people like me...we say if we are considered intolerant..what about those in the decending order???why have they imposed limits to sikhs only.asians only..these are folks who try to say education and westernization is the key to everything.its not.look at western society and the moral decline.do we really want it too??from what i know its usually a love marriage if its out of caste and religion.i have never come across an arranged marriage in those circumstanes,but i would not condem it.as i have said i am jat sikh and i am at uni. and i speak for myself and others like me.while i have been here i have met people of all kinds and been asked out by a takhan girl and 2 jat girls and a muslim girl from lahore.i liked the latter the best..really the most beautifull girl you can think of and we have remained friendly from a distance if you like.she is tall,fair beautifull as a person and a decent,sincere girl.so what i am saying is that....even so i could not even comprehend anything more.something inside of me stops me everytime.its like i know the hassle and the difference are too great and that in the long run i could ruin these true and innocent feelings of friendship we have.a lot of my friends have been thru this and exp. pressure to be out of caste and religion..just to show how smart,how educated,how modern we are and its backfiring.here anyway.so iwas not under parent presure but under peer presure to conform to what i was meant to be doing but didn't want to do.the same applies to others too..but i have made the decision to be true to myself and background only.

Anon

This was response to my moving goalposts. My parents do not believe in caste system neither do I. For us good Sikh religious background and good education is enough.

If people do not feel confertable marrying out of caste that then that is their choice.

savraj hello...you have a choice so do jats.lets agree to disagree..right.whats wrong with marrying someone of a similiar background anyway.caste is one similiarity,education and socio -economic background is another right.and we do have a choice in arranged marriage.i can say yes or no.

Hi anon

By similar background I meant my parents will look for education level and good sikh religious back ground not the caste.

hello savraj...i can understand what you are saying now and can agree on your personal statements.i have been to usa and canada too and the same applies there too.its not confined to country its to do with atitude,the education and social and economic situation of a family and society.i personally am friendly with sikhs,muslims and hindus.they are like brothers to me and i to them.but i cannot see the need to marry out to prove how tolerant i am and as i say my circle is 100%jat sikh,educated and professional.i have no problem with those who do but my point is you move the goalposts..now take the consquences.but have a good day and no offence.bye.

Dear Anon

I know things are bad in some places in England. I have a few relatives there. I live in the U.S. and my mother took me to England when I was a teenager just to show me what was happening in the Indian community there.

I am a very traditional person and will have an arranged marriage. I believe many parents in England have lost their Kids by trying to be too modern.

I am a strict believer in arranged marriage because parents are not our enemies and they will never hurt their kids. The parents will look for sombody who has a similar family backgroud where you could fit in easily.

Dear XXX

Please correct youself

The Sikh Gurus were not Prophets. They considered themselves teachers. They believed in the equality of mankind. They believed they were one of us not above us.

That is the beauty of Sikhism. It openly declares the brotherhood of man where no one is above or below. Guru Nanak Dev Ji called his companion Mardana "Bhai", a brother, his equale. If you compare it to other religions:
Christianity: Jesus is the true son of God and the was the only one without a fault.
Islam: Only their Prophet could talk to God thru Angles
Hinduism: Only Brahmin can read vedas because they are the most pure of Hindus and are the priests.

Guru Nanak Dev Ji openly declared in Japji Shaib.
There is only one God who is merciful, formless, without fear, without vengence, before time there was God, when time started God was the only truth, It is the only truth in the present, it will be the only truth in the future.

to ranjeet...please dont take anything personally.you are a good guy..you heart is in the right place.i am saying when people start moving the lines ,there are always others who will draw them further..savraj,please note.what gives you the right to say that you cant marry another religion.the Gurus also said "na koi hindu,na koi musselman"you are using a defunct argument to say why not be hindu.how come you know more than previous scholars and why didnt previous generations,who were closer in time follow your theory of marrying out. Ranjeet re garding those airport workers...they are the kind of parents,who give carte blanc to their kids to go wild because they think they will appear to be modern.the people i know are traditional in morals,not in education or standard of living or knowledge.if you want or should need to marry out..do it..its not the end of the world.right..as i say you are a good and decent guy too.if i can have a rational and meaningful discussion with my muslim friends and sikh friends..you are a sikh and my broyher.right.please get my drift....i am from a educated and business family and social society..100%.they have had a choice since they were in india.they did not go into anything blind.but certain families..jats had no freedom or education or whatever thru no fault of their own.so here they want to exp.everything ..good,bad and indifferent.they want to show they are in advanced of those they left behind.so in jats there are different stratas of people,but jats nevertheless.sorry but all castes should marry in,jats in particular...follow the Gurus example.more than that lets restrain from another no,no drink/drugs/smoking.all good wishes ranjeet.o by the way i am 23,i have cut hair and i do not smoke and drink.my parents are receptive to spending money on a decent house,clothes and nice holidays.they need to know i behave.i know my limits.i must say tho a decent muslim is pretty near to a good sikh.i do know of a sikh guy..jat..beard turban,going out with a muslim girl with a headscarf!!!!!so its not all one way.even the muslims laugh..they say well they are both religious.what more say i say..they are being fair there?but i might be educated,westernised but you can put me down as narrowminded..so were my ancesters and the Gurus. sat siri akal.

Hi Ranjeet,

First of all, I firmly believe in the equality of mankind.

As you are a proponent of inter-marriges among the different ethnic groups because of the common denominator,i.e., religion, therefore I simply asked you was that if any of the Sikh prophets ever married outside their ethnic group- if no why not?

By addressing this kind of issues in an open and frank manner,I hope one day we could be better citizens of this already turbulant world. Regards.

To Mohinder

If you want to follow caste system you should go back to being a Hindu.

Like I said the Gurus married their kids among their followers. The largest amount of followers at the time just happened to be Khatris.

Two people of the same religion should be able to marry each other. Sikhism absolutley prohibit Caste System.

I am absolutely against marrying into another religion because you loose your identity that way and your kids end up a confused mess.

To Ranjeet

A correction please.

It is a total different reason why Muktas were given the title of Muktas.

When Guru Gobind Singh and the Singhs were In Anadpur and the Hindu Bhaidar Rajas surrounded the Kila and cut off the food supplies, 40 Singhs now known as Muktas deserted Guru Ji. They wrote on a piece of paper they Guru Gobind Singh was not thei r Guru and they were not his Singhs.

Once they got home Mai Bhagoo got angry and told them if they had deserted the Guru then why had they come home at all. After that Mai Bhagoo led them back to the Guru and Fought alongside with these 40 Singhs in a battle against the Mugals. The place where this battle took place is now called Mukatsar. The Singhs won this battle and in the end only on of the 40 Singhs was alive but he was badly wounded. His name was Maha Singh. Guru Ji came to him and took his head in his lap. Maha Singh requested Guru Ji to tear up the peice of paper and Guru JI obliged.
Mukt means freedom so this way the Muktas were freed of the letter they had wrote to Guru Ji.

Ranjeet.....its you who is missing the plot....people like you and the Slough lot are the ones who encorage this decadence , you think you are westernised if you let everything slide.You lot have stretched the rules and then want to pull back.No way does Sikhism say marry out.No Guru ji married out so how can you mis interprete an undisputed fact.I am with anon here.Of course the Gurus wives were Sikh.They also just happened to have arranged marriages and just happened to be Khatris.The Guru ji's happened to marry their children to Khatris too.O don't take this personally.I respect your opinion but use another lot of facts.This one cannot hold up.

To XXX,

what Savraj was saying was that the Gurus married with women who follows Sikhism, they just happened to come from the same caste. They did not marry them because of their caste. It seems to me that are using this as a justification to discriminate against fellow Sikhs just because they happen to belong to another caste. We are Sikhs, that is what should matter.

To Anon and XXX,

I found an exerpt from a book regarding inter-caste marriages in Sikhism:

Inter-Caste Marriages

When the Muktas (the select group of Sikhs in the congregation of Guru Gobind Singh at Anandpur who were given this honorific title for being the foremost in living upto the ideals of Sikhism) advocated inter-caste marriages, the other Sikhs openly expressed their inability to follow this line. The matter was represented to the Guru himself. He said, "The four castes are one brotherhood. The Guru's relationship to the four castes is common (i.e. equal). There is no doubt about it.... Muktas are my own life. What they do is acceptable." (Rahetname, pp.68-69)

In "Anand Karaj", inter-caste marriage is actually advocated. We should see ourselves as Sikh, not as Jat or Tarkhan or whatever. That is my opinion, that is how our gurus wanted us to see ourselves. If you guys want to go back to the old Hindu ways that your ancestors gave up in order to become Sikhs, well that's your decision. This is how Sikhism would be in danger of being absorbed into Hinduism.

To Anon,

if you are a sikh and want to marry another Sikh, then that it is what should matter( we are Sikhs), not caste.
Punjabi girls are going to do what they like, they are worse than white girls in a lot of ways,it is inevitable, that is what is happening now. The more you try to impose these traditional values, the more you will antagonise these girls, that is one of the reasons why these girls are doing all sorts of things. If you think that these girls are corrupt because of westernisation, you should see what the older generation of punjabi women do (the ones from India with all these traditional values). Have you ever found how some Indian women get supervisors jobs around Heathrow Airport, they sleep around. Have you seen these women knock back shots and get drunk as a skunk. We Indian people are hypocrites.

To ranjeet, Sorry ..I am aware of caste..remember saini and rajputs?the only crossed wires are of those sikh parents in slough.My point is that they and others like them,bend, stretch the boundries to suit their situation, as if there is some merit in being married out.Whats to stop another set of people marrying a paki as you put it?.this set says at least they're asian and punjabi.another set may say a white is ok.at least its not a paki or a black.would you believe this.. a case i have only heard of, where a takhani married a black!? right.. apparently the tahkanis family pass him off " he's just like a punjabi"!!??this is how low we have sunk.you know the reason....we are pushing people to be westernised..to be modern.the most modern and fashionable are the least educated and knowledgable.some of those parents who condone this mad trend can't even write their name but let our kids drink ,yaar smoke, yes put themselves around.. its a modern zamanna!!!and we need to push back everything..our girls need the most makeup..the highest skirts..of course as i have said i am from a total jat society where all this is alien..in fact this is the first i have heard of this and we are known to stick in the muds.i would rather stick.but if you have pushed back the goalposts why blame the likes of aseem.he is a good guy.i would far rather him than some "winston".these girls who run off with pakis..usually end up marrying them.whats wrong with that?.westernised..why not.but look at those you see sometimes with blacks.do the gossiping housewives or old babas or more inportantly the macho goondas, bat an eyelid.no no no.hear not see not.but see aseem and rupinder and tova tova!!!no, altho i condem mixed marriage and out of caste marriage i cannot get het up about this one,at all.all these has had the green light from the likes of those slough parents.please don't use sikhism to push these marriages.the gurus and thier children married in caste..that is undisputed. they wanted respect for all castes..which you can do without marrying them.if we want to score points..take that on board. and while we here they asked people to refrain from drink/drugs/smoking etc.how many of these promoters stick to that?? all i can say is i am westernised,doing an M.A. my father is a businessman but its okay and right to marry in.right.i would rather be narrow minded than slip so far.

Hi Savraj,

I am really grateful for your explanations. It means all the ten great ones married within their caste.
Once again, thank you for your time and effort.

Hi xxx
I want to correct the mistake I made in the last message

The Gurus from Guru Ram Das Ji to Guru Gobind Singh Ji(except for Guru Harkrishan Ji) were married to Sikh women. The parents of these great women had belonged to the Khatri Caste of Hindus before they started following Sikhism.

To xxx

The first three Gurus were married according to their parent's wishes.

As you know Guru Nanak Dev Ji started Sikhism. When Guru Angad Dev Ji became his follower he was already married. Same thing is true for Guru Amar Das Ji. Infact Amar Das Ji came into Sikhism in very advanced years. One of his daughter was married to a nephew of Guru Angad Dev Ji.

Guru Amar Das Ji's younger daughter was married to Bhai Lehana who would later become the fourth Guru Ram Das Ji. Guru Ram Das Ji belonged to a lower Khatri subcaste that Guru Amar Das.

During Guru Angad Dev Ji's Guruship Sikhism became a distinct religion. So all the Gurus after that tried their best to stop the caste system penetrating Sikhism. To stop caste system from forming in Sikhism Guru Ji invented Langar and started intercaste marriages among their followers.

After Guru Ram Das Ji all of the Sikh Gurus belonged to the Sodi subcaste of the Khatri Caste.

All of the Gurus after Guru Ram Das were married to the daughters of the followers of the Sikhism.
At that time Khatris were the biggest group of people to convert to Sikhism. So it is not surprising that the Wives of all the Gurus belonged to Khatri Caste.

Hi Ranjeet,

Please educate us whether the founders of Sikhism married within their caste or not? If so why? Thanks in advance.

I think Jats Sikhs need to stick to their roots so theri kids won't marry a bhaapa or a kuslim.

To Anon,

I think we have had our wires crossed here, you are talking about caste within the whole punjabi community, whether they are hindu, sikh or muslim. I was referring more to the caste issue within the Sikh community. Firstly, caste is not even allowed in Sikhism, so I wonder why we Sikhs discriminate against each other in this regard. In Slough if two sikhs of different castes get married, people are happy (maybe more of a sense of a relief) because they think at least they got married to a sikh,and their duaghter had not "run off with a paki"

To Jas,this marriage took place in the registry office.Remember none of the parents knew but this couple did do it as properly as you normally would..red lengha,jewellry,desi food,venue,laddoos.Out of 100 guests there were 20 sikhs.I am against mixed marriage or out of caste marriage.In fact its alien to my circle..we are happy to remain 100%jat,but I mention this marriage to all those promoters of out of caste marriages and say why would you draw a line here.ranjeet was indicating how often it happens in Slough.Why draw a line at this one or on white or black???My line and most jats line in the sand is at jats only.This is the reason why.But I have less probs with this than the others because this guy Aseem mentioned to us,sikhs..we eat the same food,our history and culture is the same,our language is one.He said I did not look to make it happen but it did.He respects that girl and gave her a wedding that her father might have given her.He and his family did not gloat.They have tried to pacify her father.The dad is in deep depression and Aseem says he will try everything to make it up to him.His parents go to the sikh father to comiserate and to show understanding.They said if She'd run off with a white or black..then what??Here you know we are looking after her and treating her as well as you would wantNow we sikhs went because he is a good and sincere mate..she is not related to us and truely she has won the lottery.He is tall,fair ,blue eyed and rich.But most of all he is a Punjabi..But I am sorry ,I am still a pro jat and am against any form of out of caste marriage."westernised" holds no magic solutions,neither does education.In fact these ,like in my social cirle hold on because they know the inplications.

I have never attended a muslim-sikh marriage but I have one question and that is when a muslim-sikh get married do they get married in a mosque, or a gurdwara?

sorry I was in a rush and could not finish re the sikh and muslim marriage.the guys parents were horrified and scared and very sympathic to the sikh family .They called them and his mom,dad and grandparents went round and tried to assure them that she was in a respectable asian family.that they did not req.this girl to work and she would be respected and they wanted her to see and respect her parents at this late stage.to this end they send this couple to see her parents every week.A year has gone by but the father cannot bring himself to say the guys name or to visit them.the muslims live in a large mansion and are better established.my point here is that you cannot say let's not worry about caste,so folks won't marry muslims.if you don't care for caste ,you won't care if its muslim,white,black!!!now this guy is punjabi and from jullundar!!so is sh!!to be educated or westernised does not mean anything as the other examples show.those people were under pressure to have a boy or girlfriend.to show that they were not into caste but some of those were noy happy with it and went back to what they really wanted.you cannot draw any lines once you go out.its your own choice of coure. now i am a jat and my cirle is jat.i want to marry in.but i went to this sikh/muslim wedding too because i did not want folks to say i was narrow minded.

punjabi

i beleive we should not worry about castes .... i mean we dont want our kids marrying muslims do we ???

ranjeet,I respect what you say but my answer is to your comment re jats and farming.i am westernised too.my parents are educated and lived in the west for 3 generations.i am at university too.so what does it mean?i know what caste i am,as others do too.eg.a jat sikh girl at uni.went out with a takhan but then by choice had an arrangrd marriage.two muslim brothers went out with one hindu girl and one takhan girl.bear in mind the people are law graduates and the boys from a wealthy background.the hindu girl married thru her parents.the tahkan girl married her muslim boyfriend.he paid for her jewels,clothes,caterers,venue and none of the parents knew.100 uni mates were invited.one year later her took her home,and his parentXXXXX the roof for him causing so much distress.they have accepted the girl and have given her status and she has not converted.his parents got in touch with hers and made it up to them altho they are still angry.

To Anon,

not only can jats be doctors, lawyers, accountants and other professions so can other castes too. How does some forefather's profession in a country 6,000 miles away have any baring on who I am now?

a lot of us live outside India, I very much doubt if we are ever going back to live in India. Think about your descendents, fifty years down the line, your children and grandchildren (if born outside India) are going to be westernised, they will start to look for their own partners because the environment they live in influences them considerably, their way of thinking will be different and so would their attitiudes. If they decide to decide to get married to a person of another caste, caste will become less of an issue, it will be irrelevent. They are going to think "Why can I not get married to that person just because my great-grandfather was a farmer eighty odd years ago, and my partners great-grandfather was a carpenter in a country and society that is another part of the world from the environment I have lived in now". The only society they are going to know of is the society they are living. That would be in an industrialised, urbanised , westernised country ie Canada, USA, Uk, not agricultural, rural village life in Punjab.

One thing I have noticed is that if a Jat Sikh boy got married to a "lower caste" it is not shunned upon as much as if a Jat Sikh girl got married to a "lower caste", because some how they would be lowering the status. Tell me people how can you be lowering yourself just by marrying someone of a lower caste, suppose that lower cast family has done well for themselves and are quite wealthy. Does that mean that higher cast people are better than lower caste people.

Suppose a Jat Sikh girl in UK who's family is poor gets married to A Chamar boy in UK whose family are well educated professional and extremely rich, who is lowering their status to whom?

This is the way I see things, I am third-generation british, both my father and grandfather, grandmother were born and raised outside India, my great-grandparents have lived most of their lives in the far-east. This is how I perceive things, for all the american and canadian punjabis, if you have recently moved from India, do not expect that your children or the next generation to have the same values, they will have been born and raised in a different environment, a different society. Things that make sense to you will seem nonsensical to them ( cast issue for example). A lot of you guys probably disagree with me, but time will tell.

dear Ranjeet,you asked a question and we answered.If one is English..or Irish...what do you do?So if you are a Jat,...you do not have to garden or farm or anything.Thats just common sense.How many Jat doctors or dentists are there or businessmen.Being jat does not stop you doing these things.Its relavent to a lot of people...even to you .you did ask,mention??

To harry, xxx, anon,

ok,ok i get the message people, you have convinced me there is only one kind of jatt, please do not keep on telling me that there is only one kind of jatt,I understand now.

How relevent is caste for people living outside India, I mean are there are there certain characteristics of different castes, are there different personality traits between castes? Does being a Jatt mean that you have be more rowdy. I am a Jatt but that does not mean I have green fingers, I am not a natural gardner, my parents struggle to ge me to mow the lawn! You should see what Indian folk (great proportion of them from jat caste) in UK do to their front lawns, they concrete it and turn it into a giant driveways, so much for jat/farming instinct!The new craze among Punjabis and Indians in UK is to use red crazy paving brick tiles, you can always tell an Indian persons house, because they don't have a front lawn, also they like having extensions built. Where you have Punjabis and Indians concentrating in an area in UK, the area becomes a building site.

ranjeet, there is no such thing as jat saini or jat rajput.you are one or the other.jats have no subcastes.there is only one ...jats.of course you will get varities of jat depending on your education,job and economic status,but they are still jat.a family as jaswinder is on about,is a khandaani family.she has not said,but its a class family.khandaan means class.probably explains why they all are of one criteria.like attracts like usually.

Hi Ranjeet,

In relation to the Jats the qualities and shortcomings of all the non-Jat Sikh castes are discussed by the following three authors- who were happened to also born in UK!:

. Falcon, R.W., Handbook on Sikhs for the Use of Regimental Officers, Printed at the Pioneer Press, Allahabad, India, 1896.

.Bingley,A.H., Handbook for the Indian Army: Sikhs, Compiled under the orders of the Government of India, Printed at the Govenment Central Printing Office , Simla, India ,1899.

.Barstow,A.E., The Sikhs: An Enthnology,Reprinted by B.R. Publishing Corporation, Delhi, India, 1985.

I am sure after reading these documents, you will have a very good idea about the Brit Rulers thoughts concerning the Jats and the non-jats. Enjoy reading and Regards,

re;sainis and rajputs.these two are numerically small castes and are not jat.fact.if they were they would be called jat.sainis usually have the surname saini.they are like aroras and alluwalias.small castes usually a busness type.nowadays rajput has been used by people who do not wish to reveal their true caste.all these are distinct castes but usually people just say blah,blah blah these are like jats or takhan etc.i am not saying anything detrimental about them or anyone else for that matter.jat is jat,saini is saini,arora is arora,alluwalia is alluwalia. jaswinder,i am pleased to see there are traditional people here,too.makes me feel good.best of luck.there are jats and jats and what you say tells me you are from a khaandaani background.its economics and class that causes different types of jat,but jat nonethelss.i like that you describe yourself a jat and hope your dad gets what he seems to be looking for.as you say your family got that, in the past,so you will too.best wishes.

To Anon,

forgive me on my ignorance, I am telling you from what I have been told, please explain the difference between Saini and Jat.

Thank You.

good afternoon everyone..Ranjeet, Yes we too heard about the case you speak of and its wrong and dishonest.The girl should not have agreed to this marriage if she had someone.ITS THAT KIND OF THING THAT MAKES MY DAD WARY,AND ITS NOT RIGHT.I am traditional,only because of my family and background.I have caring and loving parents,who are frank and honest,with us.They are both graduates,My father is of a very progressive and educated background from India and thats why he is looking for a well established,positive and cultural aware family,that have good traditional values.Even here, some people think,they have a boy whose been to University,and they think they are all educated and ask you what have you got?You can imagine,all my Dads family are businessmen and graduates,well set,and they don't look to the girl to be a wage earner,but you get these..and thats what they are really looking for and of course my Dad can tell and he won;t have it.Another little thing that you come across is everyone wants a tall girl,even short guys.Well I am 5ft 6tall so of course my dad is looking for a reasonable height at least,5ft 9.Usually if the guy is shorter they will say it does not matter.well it doesn't if its someone else making the concession!!These are just little titbits that make you laugh!!Make us laugh,anyway!!However the more you see and hear the more I am proud of my family and hope I get someone of the class, of the boys and cousins in my family.They are of high amibition and a sober profile,and all the sons in law that there are already here ,are also of that criteria,so I am happy to wait for the best.As I have already stated,people please do not take exception.This is real life and real issues facing us.One last thing is that Ranjeet is right here,people are dishonest and they cause heartache to people who do not diserve it,like that girl did to her husband.its wrong by any standards.So if you have a girl or boyfriend,don't,mess people around.Why should Dads like mine have to checking this little lie,out.He has better things to do.If you have the guts to have a commitment,have guts enough to tell your parents and keep out of the arranged/introduced/marriage.Its not fair and not right to saddle other people with your choices.Please excuse and no offence intended.Take care and good day.

sainis are not jat.fact.there is only one type of jat.saini is saini sikh.rajput is not jat.these words are used by people who do not understand and who try to identify themselves as being similiar to.

Does anyone knows what "CHHAND" is? What I know groom has to sing during wedding. If anyone knos, please post it.

To Jaswinder,

thank you for replying. You have raised some good points about arranged marriages, there is choice in arranged marriages, you can say no, it is more "Marriage by introduction" than "arranged marriages", however I have to re-iterate that love marriages are on the increase, it is amazing how many weddings that I have been to where people who have been going out with each other in college or uni end up getting married.Now I am not saying that arranged marriages are bad or love marriage are more successful or anything like that. Maybe it happens less frequently in the Midlands where you are from, but me being a Londoner, I see more of this.I can tell from your postings that you hold traditional values, which is good, but what I have observed that Punjabis from Midlands seem to be more traditional than us Punjabis down in London. I have even been told this by Punjabis from Leicester,Coventry,Leamington Spa,Birmingham,Wolverhampton.

A lot of parents fear for their children when getting married off, and they do want to look further into the prospective partner's background, I agree with this point with you also, but it is not hype, it is fact.You live live in a totally different environment from me, we Indians like to be secretive, but just becaise it is swept under the carpet doesn't mean it does not happen. We Indians like to show one face to the outside world and do something completely different on another face, we are a very two-faced people, the hypocrisy of our community astounds me. I remember a few months ago, I read about a couple from Wolverhampton who had an arranged marriage, went to Barbados for their honeymoon, and on their flight back, the bride goes to her husband, "I am leaving you, i'm going back to my boyfriend", the groom goes mental and starts a fight with the bride on the plane. Now don't take it the wrong way, I am not saying that arranged marriages are bad, but the brides family hid that secret very well from the grooms family, that she had been involved with someone else, that poor guy got duped and the bride got a free vacation out of it. Never judge a book by it's cover.

To XXX,

I only just recently found out that there are different subcastes of jats, I always thought that a Jat was a jat. But there are saini-jats,rajput-jats, I don't know the other types. Here is an example, my mother's friend is thinking of getting her son married, but she will only marry her son to another saini. I asked my mum what's a saini?she told me that they are jatts, but slightly lower kind of jat. so i told my mum if they are jat, what's wrong with a marriage to another jat, my mum goes to me, she will only marry her son to another same kind of jat, these kind of jats are very fussy.I am not born in Punjab, I was not brought up in Punjab and I cannot even begin to comprehend these castes and subcastes and subcastes of subcastes, it just gives me a headache thinking about it!

Hi Ranjeet,


Please educate us on the different levels of the Jats as well as about the discrimination factor among them. Thanks in advance.

hello everyone,Ranjeet, I am from South Staffs and my cousins are in Harrow,Vancouver,Montreal,New York,Toronto,New Delhi and Ludhiana.I am, we are all westernised.My dad is a local Gov.officer and while I can understand what you are saying,I am not sure this is widespread.I have been to 5 weddings this summer,one in Slough,and despite,all the things you hear of I can say they were arranged and the couple were happy with it.I consider that I am lucky in that my parents accept a no from me if need be.I want to know that I will like who I choose,arranged marriage does allow for that!The thing is because of all this hype,my parents need to check the guys out even more closely,in case they have a prior commitment.not a pleasant matter!It is true there are jats and jats.Like we,in my family are only looking for guys from our type of background, ..educated/business/professional and while it might seem silly on the surface,it is not.You see,we want to get married and stay married and its important that,you like and love that person.If you are from the same kind of family its easier to adjust.little niggles don't creep in and erode this couple's life.while its not cut and dried,in every case,thats how its been in our family and social circle.Also love marriages,should work because of thier very nature,but 1 out of 2 don't.Interesting but true.I respect everyones opinion,so please don't take exception.I am only saying that arranged marriages with feelings and love are what I have seen and I am born in this country and am westernised.My mother was born here too .She is jat and had an arranged marriage with my Dad.What you say about Canada is very true.We have been there and thats how it is.

To Ramanpreet,

thanks for your reply. I have been to Canada and what I have observed is that there are Indo-Canadians who have lived there for decades. However there has been larger scale of punjabi immigration in 80s and 90s, especially after 1984. From what I have been told that the punjabis who came to Canada in the 60s are a minority compared to the punjabis of more recent immgration. From my observations, what I found (I could be wrong) is that there are two different Punjabi communities, the older more established lot and the more recent immigrants. From visiting various cousins who were born and raised there, they do not like to mingle with the more recent immigrants, they say that they have nothing in common with the recent lot. If there are any other Punjabi Canadians, tell me is this true?

Jaswinder

Where in England do u live? If you and your cousins feel happy that you marry someone in your own caste and your parents introduce and arrange your marriage for you that's fine,nobody has any problem with that. The point that is being iterated is that the younger generations are more westernised and beginning to look for their own partners, the no. of love marriages is increasing, you would be very surprised. I had to go to six weddings this summer and half of them were "apna murzee" weddings, there are also weddings I have been that I thought were arranged only to afterwards find out that it was love marriage. Things are changing, some people choose arrange marriages like you for eg, others have love marriages, there is choice.
About the marrying muslim, it is not marriage, we are talking about sikh girls running away with muslims,sikh girls going out with muslims, it has happened, ask anybody in Slough about this problem.

Did u guys know that there different levels of jatt, and there is discrimination between these levels too?How petty can they get?

excuse me please.i live in england too and i am one of 26 cousins,first cousins,and all of these have had arranged marriages to our own caste.jat and are happy.there are 3 of us to go and we will do the same.our parents let us say no if we are not compatible and they they check out another guy and family before introducing us.this may be against the trend of which you speak,but i really think not,because everyone i know in our social circle,is similiar to us.it is something we want and are happy with.and i am a graduate,as well as my siblings,cousins and in actual fact ,my parents,also.rarely do we hear of someone marrying say a muslim.it is rare.and the most example i can give is a jat and a ramgardia.the parents accept it but are none too happy on both sides because as has been said it is a sikh,after all.just thought you might like to know what we see.going on some of the stuff on this site i do wonder if i live in the same country.!!!!!!!!!!!!