Sikhs v Mughals

[Big_Tera]

Athough I agree and respect Jats were brave and did many good things. At the same time there is no need to exaggerate these things. lets not forget that Bhatts and Khatris were the earliest Sikhs who lay the foundations for the faith to flourish. Its only then that Jats converted much later on.  Hence being relative newcommers. Iv heard many stories how Bhats were some of the bravest and feared warrior Sikhs who were skilled fighters who even taught Jats a thing or to about how to use swords as they the Jats were a more docile and laid back group who prfered to live life on farms watching the sun go down. 

If Jatts are such a notable and super hereo race. Where is the evidence in muslim and hindu Jats? Its Sikhism that instills anything good in you. All our strengh and power is derived from our Gurus. This alone superceedes anything else. 

Not belonging to some man made caste.

 

 

[Mahakaal96]

50 minutes ago, JSinghnz said:

This is how the British started dividing and ruling Sikhs and the dumb accepted their slavery to them most willingly and agreed to be cannon fodder for their pommy masters.

Although that was the aim within the highest ranks of the British it is absurd to think that all colonels, soldiers, historians & travelers were 'all in' on the plot. The dates of the sources provided cover from the 16th century upto the 20th century so that debunks your theory. Most jatts in panjab today can't read English so how on earth were accounts written in the 16th 17th & 18th centuries used to divide & rule?! The bristish have historical accounts about Africans, native Indians of America, the Aboriginal tribes of Australia to name but a few. For the most part these are just historical accounts, whether they were used as reconnaissance material by the higher ranks of the British may well be true but the bottom line is that they are eye witness independant accounts... there are many about the Akali Nihangs as well... I suppose they were written to divide & rule them as opposed to just an honest observation.

I sometimes wonder why the panth is in this current state, coming on this website & seeing the level of intellect & logic explains a lot.

[dallysingh101]

1 hour ago, Akalifauj said:

Brar's are named in Zafarnama as well for being loyal to Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji.  Satguru says to Emperor Aurangzeb, the brar community won't harm you, if you plan to come down and meet me.  Where credit is due, it is given by the Guru, regardless of origin of the person.   

Did you read what Bhangu had to say about the children of these same Brars and how they treated the Khalsa?

[Mahakaal96]

1 hour ago, Akalifauj said:

Claiming people who didn't even know how to speak English were brainwashed by English speaking gora writings. LMAO    

This guy has been swearing at other members and certain communities.  But now we know how intelligent this guy is.  It's not his fault.  lmao...

I've noticed his language towards other members & in particular his casteist views hence why I decided to post. His intelligence (or rather lack of) is quite evident to see. 

He obviously has some kind of psychological problem with jatts which was most probably caused by some kind of trauma, maybe bullying or a beating received 

[Akalifauj]

Just now, dallysingh101 said:

Did you read what Bhangu had to say about the children of these same Brars and how they treated the Khalsa?

You are only here for one reason.  Hoping from one forum to another you are only on forums to divide Sikhs in whatever way you can.  You have no respect for anything in Sikhi.  If claiming the caste system is false and majority of the members are responding in this manner.  You choose this side and start swearing and degrading anyone who brings an oversight view of the caste system.  You give them a bad label and then start your propaganda against these members.  Similarly, you use the same tactic to divide Sikhs on other topics.  You have no shame by swearing either, which is evident in another thread, where you justify your swearing.   

One of your team members from Sikh Philosophy Network past away and it was a victory for the Khalsa Panth because the propaganda she was spreading was dividing Sikhs.  The same victory will be claimed when you leave this earth, if you don`t change your ways.

[Akalifauj]

Just now, Mahakaal96 said:

I've noticed his language towards other members & in particular his casteist views hence why I decided to post. His intelligence (or rather lack of) is quite evident to see. 

He obviously has some kind of psychological problem with jatts which was most probably caused by some kind of trauma, maybe bullying or a beating received 

Brother, he's purposely causing conflicts between Sikhs.  He's been on a mission for the last 20 years. 

[dallysingh101]

10 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

I've noticed his language towards other members & in particular his casteist views hence why I decided to post. His intelligence (or rather lack of) is quite evident to see. 

He obviously has some kind of psychological problem with jatts which was most probably caused by some kind of trauma, maybe bullying or a beating received 

Nothing you can say can detract from the low levels we've been dragged to by your type of thinking. Let's have a good clean look at the most powerful juts today, supported by the majority of juts of Panjab:

 

 

Real master race. Great job guys. 

[Big_Tera]

17 hours ago, Mahakaal96 said:

A British Officer, Captain Falcon, in his Handbook on Sikhs [1] wrote, in 1896, "The back-bone of the Sikh people is the great Jat Race, divided and sub-divided into numerous clans. The Jats are thoroughly independent in character, and assert personal and individual freedom, as against communal or tribal control, more strongly than any other people". As far the origin of the Jat Sikhs or in that matter other Jats, Major Barstow [2] remarked in 1928, "It is from these Scythian immigrants that most of the Jat tribes are at any rate partly descended. They thus colonized the Punjab, Northern Rajputana (modern Indian state of Rajasthan), and the western half of the Gangetic Doab (western part of the modern Indian state of Uttar Pardesh in northern India), and a considerable proportion of the inhabitants of these countries are undoubtly of Scythian origin". 

In regard to the characteristics of the Jat Sikhs Captain Bingley [3] quoted Thomason in 1899, "they are manly without false pride; undemonstrative; independent without insolence; reserved in manner, but good-natured, light-hearted, and industrious. No one could be associated with them for any time without conceiving both respect and liking for them". 

Approximately one third of Jats in South Asia follow Sikhism. They make up the majority of Sikhs. Even though there are no up to date accurate available statistics, some people say their number is as high as 85%. As per the A.D. 1888 census returns [4,5] figure for the total number of baptised Sikhs in India was 1,706,909 and the Jats accounted for 66%. Their association with Sikhism is deeply rooted. For example, two of the well known followers of Guru Nanak (born in 1469), the founder of Sikhism, were Jats: Bala (a Sandhu Jat [6]) and Bhai Buddha (a Randhawa Jat). 

Furthermore, Latif [7] said, "This vast delta (area surrounding the birthplace of Guru Nanak in Punjab called "Richna Doab"), during the period immediately preceding the establishment of the Sikh religion, was inhabited by the Jats and Bhattis (to the best of my knowledge Bhatti is also the clan name of some Jats). In addition, the world reknown Professor Ellsworth Huntington [8] of Yale University remarked, "…the Sikhs are the only one of these… …that has experienced any appreciable selection…. That as important religious selection took place among them in early days seem clear. People do not accept a new faith unless there is something in their temperament which responds to that faith…. Most of the original Sikhs were Jats…". Professor Huntington's assertion of the original Sikhs belonging to the Jat background is supported by several European eyewitness account writers of the eighteenth century: 

Colonel A.L.H. Polier (died in A.D. 1795) [9] wrote, "Originally and in general the Siques (Sikhs) are zemindars (landowners) or cultivators of land, and of that tribe called Jatts (Jats) which, in this part of India, are reckoned the best and most laborious tillers, though at the same time they are also noted for being of an unquiet and turbulent disposition. This tribe of Jatts (Jats) is very numerous and dispersed in all the country from the Sind (presently, a province of Pakistan or river Indus) to the southward far beyond Agra (a city in northern India). 

In another document Polier [9] said, "But what is more to be admitted is that those Seik (Sikh) Sirdars (Chiefs), whose territories border on the King's were but very lately of the Jauts (Jats) and of their race and tribe ---- they have put on their iron bracelet, fifty of them are enough to keep at bay a whole battalion of the king's forces, such as they are". 

Griffiths, J. (his document dated February 17, 1794 A.D.) [10] said, "The Jaats (Jats) are said to observe some institutions similar to the Seiks (Sikhs), wear their hair and beards in the same manner, and are part of the same people, who under Swrudge Mul (Suraj Mal----consult Chapter 5 for more information on this powerful king of the Jats), etc., formerly possessed many of the countries in the North India---". 

Francklin, W. (Documented during A.D. 1798-1803) [11] wrote, "Considerable similarity in their (Sikhs) general customs may be traced with those of the Jauts (Jats); though these, in some districts, apparently vary, the difference is not material, and their (Sikhs) permitting an interchange of marriages with the Jauts (Jats) of the Doab and Harrianah (probably same as the modern Haryana state of India) amounts almost to a conclusive proof of their affinity of origin. 

The Seiks (Sikhs) allow foreigners of every description to join their standard, to sit in their company, and to shave their beards, but excepting in the instances of the Jauts (Jats), they will not consent to intermarriages----. If indeed some regulations which are in their (Sikhs) nature purely military ----be excepted, it will be found, that the Seiks (Sikhs) are neither more or less than Jauts (Jats) in their primitive state". 

Browne, J. (Major and who written the first book in English on Sikhs "History of the Origin and Progress of the Sikhs" in A.D. 1788) [12] said, "The people known by the name of Sicks (Sikhs), were originally the common inhabitants of the provinces of Lahore and Multan (now both in Pakistan), and mostly of the Jaut (Jat) tribe ----". 

Francklin, W. (documented during A.D. 1798-1803) [11] wrote, "The Seiks (Sikhs), in their person, are tall, and of a manly erect deportment; their aspect is ferocious, their eyes piercing and animated; and in tracing their features a striking resemblance is observable to the Arabs who inhabit the banks of the Euphrates (river in modern Iraq)". This is an interesting observation on and appears to have some historical connection because General Sir Sykes [13] says in his book that a large number of Jats from the Indus Valley were taken to the marches of the Tigris (river in modern Iraq) in eighth century A.D. For more information on this topic the reader is directed to Chapter 3. 

Regarding the founding of Khalsa (baptised Sikhs or saint soldiers in A.D. 1699) by Guru Gobind Singh, the tenth and the last Guru of the Sikhs, 

Lt. General Sir MacMunn [14] wrote, "The Jats of the Punjab, sturdy and quarrelsome, flocked to the new brotherhood (Khalsa), and he (Guru Gobind Singh) soon had a force which enabled him to try conclusions… …with the forces at Delhi (Emperor of India's). A strong religious sense did animate these warlike, muscular Jats…. The Jat tribes about the Sutlej and the Ravi rivers hastened to join the faith…. No longer would they turn the cheek to their persecutor, and they began to group themselves by tribes and confederacies known as Misals…".

 

 

Is there any similar articles by the British on Muslim Jats or Hindu Jatts? 

The answer is no. Because all this praise comes from attributes that is derved from the Sikh faith. Not Caste or race. If you are anything it is because you are Sikh or you would be just another Hindu and Muslim Jatt that are not recognised at all. You have been watching to many Bhangra videos and glorifying caste nonsence its time you woke up and smelt the expresso. 

[Mahakaal96]

36 minutes ago, Big_Tera said:

Is there any similar articles by the British on Muslim Jats or Hindu Jatts? 

The answer is no. Because all this praise comes from attributes that is derved from the Sikh faith. Not Caste or race. If you are anything it is because you are Sikh or you would be just another Hindu and Muslim Jatt that are not recognised at all. You have been watching to many Bhangra videos and glorifying caste nonsence its time you woke up and smelt the expresso. 

The only thing I've done is research historical accounts & posted them here because of the constant casteist views of a certain member. At no point did I say I agree in part or completely with the accounts posted. It is what it is... independant eye witness accounts by non Sikh individuals from a vast period of time. 

By your very logic, why are there no similar accounts about Sikh tharkhans or Sikh chumars?

Similar British accounts about the attributes of other tribes such as native Americans, abhoriginis, zulus & middle eastern tribes can be found. Likewise derogatory accounts about sikhs (mainly about nihangs) by the British are also available. Of course the praise & large part of the whole picture is down to Guru kirpa but why are similar accounts about other tribes like tharkan or chumars not found to this extent? They received the same kirpa after all 

[Big_Tera]

29 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

The only thing I've done is research historical accounts & posted them here because of the constant casteist views of a certain member. At no point did I say I agree in part or completely with the accounts posted. It is what it is... independant eye witness accounts by non Sikh individuals from a vast period of time. 

Similar British accounts about the attributes of other tribes such as native Americans, abhoriginis, zulus & middle eastern tribes can be found. Likewise derogatory accounts about sikhs (mainly about nihangs) by the British are also available. Of course the praise & large part of the whole picture is down to Guru kirpa but why are similar accounts about other tribes like tharkan or chumars not found to this extent? They received the same kirpa after all 

 

 

You failed to answer the question. Where are articles of Hindu and Muslim Jatts?  Dont dishounour the Sikh faith by attributing any 'greateness' to being jatt then comming from Sikhi. The Turban-Kesh. Beard - Dhari ect instill the warriorness in us and the people we are and were.

Its also a numbers game. The British saw the Jats were in the majority at the time. Why not praise these people and concentrate on them as they will be the most valuable assets to exploit and use. Most of Jatt praise comes from actual jatts themselves. Be it in bhangra songs or movies. Dont blow your own trumphet pal. Have some common sence and manners and decency.

Also many Jatts are stealing the limelight away from other communities who did great things at the early stages of Sikhism.  There were no racist colonials to note this down as they had not reached India at that early time. Remember these people who helped establish Sikhism or you would probably be a muslim or hindu today had it not been for their great sacrifices.