|
Post by Harj Cohen on Sept 21, 2008 0:46:21 GMT
In order to understand caste system in relation to Sikhism it is important to scientifically analyse the society in Punjab during the formative centuries of Sikhism and earlier.
Before the Muslim rulers established themselves in Punjab during the early centuries of the second millenium the main ruling group in Punjab was that of the Rajputs.
Rajputs did not belong to the Indian caste system and were foreigners belonging to the migratory groups of white huns who arrived in India during the fifth century AD from their earlier home in present day Turkmenistan in Central Asia. They were initially referred to as Malechas and it was taboo for Hindus to socially mix with them.
They were instrumental in destroying the remainants of Hindu Gupta Empire and establish their small autonomous principalities. The fact that they were rulers forced the brahmins to acknowledge them as part of the caste system and arrange for them the Kashatriya status.
These Rajputs that arrived during the fifth century AD had displaced an ealier predecessor migrant group from their lands in Punjab and Sindh known as Sakas, Scythians, Shesh, Sace etc. and reduced them to mere share-croppers or tenant farmers keeping revenue collection and ownership in the hands of Rajput families.
The present day Jatts are descendants of these Saka tribes that had entered India in Sindh during the fifth to first centuries BC through the Bolan Pass and moved into Panjab later.
Many of the Jatt tribes were minor rulers in Sindh during the sixth century AD (e.g. Bal, Sekhon, Samra, Toor, Bhangoo are mentioned in early Arabic accounts of Sindh) and were Budhists.
A contemporary news writer for the Mughal court writes in April 1699 that when Guruji asked baptised Sikhs to partake food with others without any consideration of caste a large number of Rajputs and Brahmins protested and left the congregation.
When Banda Bahadur established the first Sikh kingdom in foothills of Eastern Punjab he immediately removed the hindu Rajput and muslim Rajput Chaudharies from their influential positions of revenue collectors and instead installed Jatt chaudharies and gave the tenants the property rights.
Although these rights lasted only a few months and were immediately withdrawn when Banda Bahadur was killed the Jatts had a taste of power and ownership for a few months they could never forget.
The Jatts gained the most in the sense that most of the Sikh confederacies or Misls were those of the Jatts and finally Ranjit Singh was also a Jatt.
In principle the Jatt and other Sikhs might proclaim that they are true Sikhs and do not practice casteism however, in practice they unconciously display their superiority brought about by Sikh struggle and tend to use their surnames to declare their upward mobility as do Ramgarhias and Ahluwalias. Rarely you would see Ravidasia Sikhs using their surnames. I would be surprised if one could even recollect or quote a single Chamar surname.
This is one reason that the untouchables are joining the Radha Soami sect in such large numbers that appears to them to be more egalitarian. The other castes such as goldsmiths, barbers, and watermen joined the Nirankaris in large numbers. They rarely felt proud of Ranjit Singh's rule or Sikh movement which they considered bypassed them and was for the Jatts etc.
|
|
|
Post by punkra2000 on Sept 21, 2008 0:57:40 GMT
nigg
nice research..but this music board
nehow..I have been doing parallel research
seems the saka were central asian brethren of the hun, they were displaced from their ancesterol homes by the yu zhi who had been defeated by the chinese...in effect a domino effect ensued and the sakas moved southward towards punjab
so in heinz sight
from documentary I remember...the Huns, were enemy of chinese as well (later the Roman empire)
THE CHINESE ARE COMMON ENEMY OF THE RAJPUT KHATRI AND THE JATT
signed
Pinka the Hun
incidentally..now I know why the phemale boss refer to me as hunny
|
|
tinku
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by tinku on Sept 21, 2008 10:35:29 GMT
Hello shaun... ur chattin a lil bul S#!t.... the original rajpoots where not foreigners mate. When the cast system started, everyone was grouped.
Farmers = jatt Goldsmith = lohar Leather maker = chamar People working with wood = tharkhan
etc..
som1 of them i cant spell or translate in English but every1 thing was grouped..
But the rajpoots were in the times of Akbar, Jalaluddin Mohammed, Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb.
The rajpoots where hindu (that time every1 was hindu), when the mughals converted the rajpoots, the ORIGINAL rajpoots made a book(called the kapardi) and the 1s who stayed loyal aka prithviraj chauhan, rathours, powar etc were the original rajpoots and they are booked.
Mate do some research ok. lol aa jande neh jatt..pagal kese thaan de.
Casts were jobs. they wernt ment to be offensive like 2day. ppl where proud to be chamar because thts what they did, they polished leather, made it and sold it.
Rajpoots where the raje right? so thats was their job.
Now days cast dont matter much.
|
|
|
Post by Pendoo on Sept 21, 2008 10:55:37 GMT
well said mate...people place too much importance on such an irrelevant banding - i..e notorious jatt!!
|
|
|
Post by andabread on Sept 21, 2008 12:25:05 GMT
Ranjit Singh was also a Jatt. Dude you chat bare tatti... Maharaja Ranjit Singh was actually a Sansi Rajput
|
|
|
Post by Harj Cohen on Sept 21, 2008 22:04:45 GMT
Hello shaun... ur chattin a lil bul S#!t.... the original rajpoots where not foreigners mate. When the cast system started, everyone was grouped. It has been proven that rajput were ethnic white huns who invaded india around the 5th centuary c.e. Which means they were post vedic. The whole rajput being created form fire, is mythology form the mouth of the bahman. But the rajpoots were in the times of Akbar, Jalaluddin Mohammed, Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb. The rajpoots where hindu (that time every1 was hindu), when the mughals converted the rajpoots, the ORIGINAL rajpoots made a book(called the kapardi) and the 1s who stayed loyal aka prithviraj chauhan, rathours, powar etc were the original rajpoots and they are booked. Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni conquered north west india in 1026. At this time the first rajputs converted. Four hundred years later during mughal times some rajput retained their hindu faith whilst others converted. Casts were jobs. they wernt ment to be offensive like 2day. ppl where proud to be chamar because thts what they did, they polished leather, made it and sold it. Rajpoots where the raje right? so thats was their job. Now days cast dont matter much. In reality Caste doesn't even exist in the sense that caste is a foreign word originally form the portuguese casta. There has never been a caste ssytem in India, only varna-jati. The highest varna are the mosts piritually oure i.e. the brahmins. Sicne the cow is considered sacred, those that deal with leather are seen as impure hence inferior. It was the brahmins who made an alliance with the foreign rajput. So it was decided they should be included in the varna system as warrior kings, rajeh.
|
|
|
Post by Harj Cohen on Sept 21, 2008 22:11:34 GMT
Dude you chat bare tatti... Maharaja Ranjit Singh was actually a Sansi Rajput How so? Chaudhry Ranjit Singh Sandhu Jatt He was either Sandhu or Dhillon Jatt.
|
|
|
Post by Harj Cohen on Sept 21, 2008 22:13:25 GMT
JAT A DEFEATED AND SUBJUGATED CASTE
Most scholars believe that the Gypsies left India sometime in the tenth century. A considerably earlier departure date is favored by those who seek a heroic portrait of the early Gypsies: a group of "Zotts" arriving circa 700 in Persia (then part of the Arab Empire). According to this theory, which is based on the work of a nineteenth-century Dutch historian, M. J. de Goeje, the Gypsies came not by land but by sea. And they came by force.
|
|
|
Post by JackWilshere on Sept 21, 2008 22:15:36 GMT
one word, 2 f**king Syllables........ JATTTTTTTTTTT-YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by JackWilshere on Sept 21, 2008 22:17:06 GMT
THE CHINESE ARE COMMON ENEMY OF THE RAJPUT KHATRI AND THE JATT Really? I never knew that my cousin is married to a chinese girl
|
|
|
Post by Harj Cohen on Sept 21, 2008 22:17:39 GMT
quote: Brahmins/Lalas calling Jats "shudras" is like a cow trying to swallow a Lion! They have a bad habit of calling their actual rulers as "shudras" (e.g. British, Jats, Muslims, Sakas, Mauryas, Gopitas misnamed "Guptas" - this is most of the known history of northern india). The LOGIC of HISTORY is that those with the rule, power, armies, villages and land are the REAL "upper castes"! Dillusional Brahmins looking at astrological charts for a living and scribbling their social dreams in secret "shastras" is jibberish (otherwise, anyone defeated by "monkey armies" can become the "highest caste").
HISTORY WRITTEN ABOUT YOURSELF BY YOURSELF IS NOT HISTORY, JATTS ARE LOW CASTES AS COMAPARED TO HIGH CASTES OF INDIA :/quote
B.S. Dehiya, 1980, "Jats: The Ancient Rulers"
|
|
|
Post by Harj Cohen on Sept 21, 2008 22:22:54 GMT
Why don't you tell us about the Brar Jat mercenaries who tried to kill Guru Govind Singh in the jungles simply because their pay chech was a few days late...Luckily the other Sikhs surrounded the precious Guru by quickly drawing their sharp swords ,ready to cut down these insolent Brar Jats if they even dared to touch so much as a hair of the Guru. Not surprisingly,these cowardly Brars stepped down as soon as they saw the sharp swords of the faithful Singhs.. Did you know that the Guru never trusted Jats after that?also tell us about the 40 Dhillon 'mais' who ran away from battle.Their wifes were ready to take up arms in their place.These Dhillon Jats truly saw a mise as a lion.
By the way,Banda Bahadur the Brahmin,Kirpa Ram Datt,Mati Das,Sati Das etc. more than made up for Gangu's betrayal.I think Gangu was probably a Jat(Shudra)-Brahmin,not a real Brahmin!
Rama Randhawa-- Rama,a randhawa Jat,was a tout of the Mogul.He got several Sikhs arrested and killed by Zakaria Khan."
Half of the Mogul armies were composed of Rajputs since the times of Himayun and Raja Mann Singh was the Commander of the Mughal army at the ascent of Akbar - yet, they are still your "kshatriyas"
A brahmin named Gangu sold out Guru Gobind's two youngest sons to Wazir Khan of Sirhind and another brahmin in his service got them bricked even after the Qazi, along with the Nawab of Maler-Kotla, asked for merci.
|
|
|
Post by punkra2000 on Sept 21, 2008 22:28:09 GMT
THE CHINESE ARE COMMON ENEMY OF THE RAJPUT KHATRI AND THE JATT Really? I never knew that my cousin is married to a chinese girl he is avenging trust nigg general dyer and Xiongnu are eternal villains in punjabi folklore "Chinese sources describe the Guishuang (Ch: 貴霜), i.e. the "Kushans", as one of the five aristocratic tribes of the Yuezhi, also spelled Yueh-chi,[3] (Ch: 月氏), a loose confederation of supposedly Indo-European peoples.[4] The Yuezhi are also generally considered as the easternmost speakers of Indo-European languages, who had been living in the arid grasslands of eastern Central Asia, in modern-day Xinjiang and Gansu, possibly speaking versions of the Tocharian language, until they were driven west by the Xiongnu in 176–160 BCE. The five tribes constituting the Yuezhi are known in Chinese history as Xiūmì (Ch: 休密), Guishuang (Ch: 貴霜), Shuangmi (Ch: 雙靡), Xidun (Ch: 肸頓), and Dūmì (Ch: 都密)."
|
|
|
Post by JackWilshere on Sept 21, 2008 22:31:17 GMT
Really? I never knew that my cousin is married to a chinese girl he is avenging Silly me, there is me thinking he just fell in love
|
|
|
Post by punkra2000 on Sept 21, 2008 22:34:42 GMT
your cousin knows....everytime..he asks her "can I have an extra roti dear?"..under his breath he whispers...
"this is for 2000 years of subjugation ...and alienation from our homeland..central asian steppes/grasslands....this is to you Xiongnu (pron. jugnu)"
"jallldddi karrrrrr"
|
|
|
Post by kachdadil on Sept 22, 2008 1:25:13 GMT
your cousin knows....everytime..he asks her "can I have an extra roti dear?"..under his breath he whispers... "this is for 2000 years of subjugation ...and alienation from our homeland..central asian steppes/grasslands....this is to you Xiongnu (pron. jugnu)" lolllllllllllllllllllllllll hahahaha...fukk!!
|
|
|
Post by punkra2000 on Sept 22, 2008 2:17:10 GMT
not funny nigg
Ive seen it
Ive seen niggs marry and then mistreat innocent white girls just to avenge general dyer in their minds
eh happen hundeh
back to threat
"His [Kujula Kadphises'] son, Yangaozhen (Vima Taktu) (punjabi putt...sheraan de putt sher), became king in his place. He conquered Tianzhu (Northwestern India) and installed a General to supervise and lead it. The Yuezhi then became extremely rich."
hence,
Punjab =Tiānzhú (in Chinese), Tenjiku (in Japanese), Cheonchuk (in Korean), Thiên Trúc (in Vietnamese)
usage: the ancient Yuezhi love story from Tianzhu is about Hir of zhiang (known for making really good chu ri (traditional chinese porridge))) and the boy Ren Chen (an avid player of wan chilli (bamboo flute)),who lived near the ancient river Chen Ab (a tributory of the xiandu (pron. Sindhu not ganzdhu)) river. For twelve years Ren chen herded ma chian (cows), ate Chu ri and played the waan chili in the fields around zhiang
tian = heaven in chinese, this area was called heaven by budhist monks as this was the stronghold of budhiism.. (Re: tian (heaven festivel) da teyuhaar celebrated by Yeuzhi phemales in Tianzhu to this day)
double hence,
tian + xiandu = tianzhu = heavenly river = punjab
|
|
tinku
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by tinku on Sept 22, 2008 8:20:32 GMT
LOL shaun..ur gettin all ya stuff from the internet...wikipedia lol..u dno anything..
I really dont know what your trying to prove.
I cant understand you. maybe im retarded or ur just ur a child with no importance.
Tell me what cast are you.. dont say i dont belive in cast beacuse ovs u do, thats why your writting this much.
You cant be rajpoot i guess
|
|
psp
Full Member
Posts: 211
|
Post by psp on Sept 22, 2008 9:27:32 GMT
INteresting post Shaun, one which the motives must be questioned?? You have stated your post is one which relates caste to Jatt tribes, but you have come in at a wrong angle, the foriegn tribes were never asked to or given a chioce, you have totally excluded the 'bhramical' forces and agenda which is the driving force of the 'varna' system, which govern and were the majority power. You have taken one source, which I must say isn't a very analytical or authoritative way of 'proving' anything, all this post of yours does is give a brief historical account of jat history, nothing else, it gives no insight on how, why, who, etc???!! Your sources and info are flawed and biased, For one, Banda Bahadur was never a jat, hence the rule was never Jat, it is well known that Banda gave jagirs to those of a village that revolted, which included chamars and other tribes. Infact the ruler, Banda, had generals and high rank officers from many tribes, the jat effect was assimilated into a casteless Sikhism!! That bit about Rajputs reducing the saka's to mere land croppers is another bit of bull, the foriegn tribes were already land croppers and artisans, as stated in another previous bull thread of yours, these tribes never assimilated to the varna, they never got involved in the judiciary, they kept themselves to themselves. According to Khuswant Singh (scholar), during Moghul invasions the Rajput soldiers would flee from battle whereas the Jatt could never leave his land and his livelihood and would die for his tribe!! And you fail to address the well known fact of Rajpoots maintenence of there authority by marrying there daughters to the invaders,...........not quite the 'reducing powers' as one would suggest. Rajputs were foriegn also, but there arrival into the indus valley was alot older then the majority of the sikh tribes. They were assimilated by the Bhramins as a neccessity to fight foriegn forces and buddism, they were given the name Rajput and added into the 'kashytria' varna!! The articale claims that they were huns, and of various Sakas. However to say Jatts\Sikh tribes were descendants is however dubious, it fails to address the rise of the turks, Iranians and various other tribes which were moving towards the 'indus valley'. Yes there is alittle cross over between all the tribes but the latter tribes were also foriegn to the Rajput tribes!! Again the article shows bais, the Sikh confedories leaders were mainly Jatt, but all tribes had other tribes\caste within them. Notably the Ramgharhia tribe who had many Jatt generals within the misl, infact the tribe was initially was formed by a Jatt and going against your article Jassa Singh Ramgharhia was the first Sikh ruler of Delhi, a tarkhan NOT a Jatt!! The conflict between the tribes was never related to heritage but wealth and power!! Shaun the last two paragraphs of your article has given me some insight on what type of S#!t your trying to propogate. It states that Jatts Sikhs always had a superiority complex and that chamars have been subjegated into an inferior, post guru's. Utter garbage, the guru's were khatri, so which tribe would have a superiority complex? ? Banda bahudur was a non Jatt, a large proportion of sikhs were non jatt. Jatt's in early sikh history were never in a large majority, infact only until Banda's uprising, and the Misls did the Jatt's in there droves become Sikhs. All tribal clans, ate together, faught together and died together, no one group was ever isolated!! The persecution and hinduisation (castisation)of the Sikh faith occured during and after Ranjit Singh's reign, when hindu and many massands elements began to take control of Sikh institutes and began practicing Bhramin belief's. Many Sikh temples including harmandir sahib were only available to high caste and the majority clan (Jatts)!! This opened a can of worms and history was repeating itself ie death of budhism' Shaun, people like you disgust me, you use history and articles to back up, your own beliefs and agenda's etc. Stop spouting S#!t and trying to corrupt young minds with your nonsense!! Your historical cources are bias and incorrect so foook off!!! FAO MODS, please can you delete such threads in the future, they have no use on a music forum and will only add hate amongst us!!!
|
|
|
Post by masalafish on Sept 22, 2008 10:12:10 GMT
SHAUN GOT TOLD YOU KNOWWWW!!!!!
It seems to me as though you're a chumar, or another non-jatt caste, and have hatred towards jatts, maybe because you've had a bad experience of being 'dissed', because of the caste you are.
Or maybe you just hate the song 'Putt Jattan De'- I don't know, but whatever it is mate, PSP's right, sort yourself out, stop trying to come out with 'historical knowledge' to back up your own polluted and incorrect beliefs. It aint right...
|
|
|
Post by londonLIONjatt on Sept 22, 2008 15:30:47 GMT
I sense insecurities in some posters,
maybe they need to find a suicide bombaa to blow up dee jatts?
|
|
|
Post by Harj Cohen on Sept 22, 2008 21:51:59 GMT
Rajputs were foriegn also, but there arrival into the indus valley was alot older then the majority of the sikh tribes. They were assimilated by the Bhramins as a neccessity to fight foriegn forces and buddism, they were given the name Rajput and added into the 'kashytria' varna!! Interesting post. I take it your a regular at jatt world or you take a keen interest in punjabi history & anthrapology. Anyways you have failed to address the fact the king ashoka converted to budism and helped spread the religion all over the far east. Buddha is also an avatar of krishna, 9th reincarnation i think.
|
|
psp
Full Member
Posts: 211
|
Post by psp on Sept 23, 2008 7:51:23 GMT
Shaun, being a Sikh it's my duty to 'learn', and the truth is what I seek!!! Yes, I do go on this forum quite abit, I enjoy bhangra music!! My knowledge of Sikh\Punjab History is exemplory, my knowledge of bhraminism, because hinduism is a british concept, including it's purana's including the gita is well above the average hindu!!
Shaun, your a cluts, your post was relation to jatts and caste system, so why would I delve into Budhism and it's history!!
Shaun, you make the lousiest assumptions, why don't you ask the budhist if budha was a hindu incarnate??? You should read Ambedkar's opinion on the matter, being a former hindu and dalit it will give you some insight!! It was the hindu's that stated Budha was an incarnate, not the budhists!!
Shaun, your sources seem to be very pro hindu, maybe RSS, the fact that Budha denounced braminism tete a tete like Nanak and the SIkh gurus, your post seem to try conform top those beliefs
|
|
|
Post by Harj Cohen on Sept 24, 2008 1:21:34 GMT
Northern india was a buddhist stronghold, was it not?
so would you agree that modern day buddhism is watered down and corrupt.
if the bahman can screw buddhism why can't he screw the aboriginal dravidian over.
and yes you are correct hinduism is a british concept which incorparates a whole bunch of different beliefs, founded some time around the 1820's.
|
|
|
Post by punkra2000 on Sept 24, 2008 4:32:48 GMT
the hindu is actually a collectino of minorities in india
the tseeks of tianzhu need to form a similar alliance with the budhists of the peoples re pube lick of China fore they revere tianzhu as heaven on earth
hope you are all having a wonderfull tianh (heaven) tau mhela
|
|