How did your ancestors become Sikhs?

[GurjantGnostic]

On 1/25/2022 at 4:12 AM, ipledgeblue said:

 

you are in the uk right, whereabouts?

Sorry bro. Missed that some how. In the us, yes. 

[justasking]

probably hindus

[Jacfsing2]

My ancestors were Hindus, 4th generation

[proactive]

It really depends on what background a Sikh's ancestors came from.  If they were Jat, Kamboh  or any other agricultural castes then their ancestors were never Hindus at all. These groups followed their own tribal religions which consisted of ancestor worship such as Jathera. The Sikhs who come from the Khatri, Brahmin, Arora backgrounds had Hindu ancestors. The Sikhs whose ancestors' background was so-called lower castes like Chamar, Chuhra etc, they also followed older animalist gods which were eventually incorporated into popular Hinduism. 

If you look beyond the Hindu propaganda that anyone who lived in south Asia prior to the Muslim invasions was a Hindu then technically possibly less than 10% of Sikhs today had Hindu ancestors.

There was a minor census done by a British officer in 1848 of Lahore which was cited in an article in the Punjab Past and Present journal of Punjabi university which I read a few years ago. He classed the Sikhs as either Muslim-Sikhs and Hindu-Sikhs, ie those who came from a Hindu background and those who came from a Muslim background. He found that around 9 or 10% of the Sikhs of his time in Lahore came from a Muslim background and 90% came from a Hindu background. This wouldn't be the same all over Punjab because Lahore being the centre of Sikh power, Muslims would have been more likely to become Sikhs there than in other parts of Punjab. But it does show that the 'Sikhs all came from Hindus' slogan is complete BS. 

[5aaban]

49 minutes ago, proactive said:

It really depends on what background a Sikh's ancestors came from.  If they were Jat, Kamboh  or any other agricultural castes then their ancestors were never Hindus at all. These groups followed their own tribal religions which consisted of ancestor worship such as Jathera. The Sikhs who come from the Khatri, Brahmin, Arora backgrounds had Hindu ancestors. The Sikhs whose ancestors' background was so-called lower castes like Chamar, Chuhra etc, they also followed older animalist gods which were eventually incorporated into popular Hinduism. 

If you look beyond the Hindu propaganda that anyone who lived in south Asia prior to the Muslim invasions was a Hindu then technically possibly less than 10% of Sikhs today had Hindu ancestors.

There was a minor census done by a British officer in 1848 of Lahore which was cited in an article in the Punjab Past and Present journal of Punjabi university which I read a few years ago. He classed the Sikhs as either Muslim-Sikhs and Hindu-Sikhs, ie those who came from a Hindu background and those who came from a Muslim background. He found that around 9 or 10% of the Sikhs of his time in Lahore came from a Muslim background and 90% came from a Hindu background. This wouldn't be the same all over Punjab because Lahore being the centre of Sikh power, Muslims would have been more likely to become Sikhs there than in other parts of Punjab. But it does show that the 'Sikhs all came from Hindus' slogan is complete BS. 

I'm not too sure but there's data from the British era which shows a major decline in Hindu-Jat population in Panjab over the years and at the same time a big increase in Sikh-Jat population. Jathera worship wouldn't be the dominant religion followed by a family during the British times but more so practiced on the side (similar to how people visited Peers/Deras but follow another faith too) and some still carry it out on the side today. 

We know it's propaganda that "Sikhs all come from Hindus". Like Sant Syed Prithipal Singh (né Mushtaq Hussein) was born in a famous religious Muslim-Mirpuri family but became a baptised Sikh. 

[proactive]

The British generally classified all non-Muslims as Hindus especially in the early days of the annexation of Punjab. The 1855 Census of Punjab did not even count Sikhs and just Hindus and Muslims, the same was true of the 1868 Census apart from the Majha area where they counted Sikh numbers as well. In all the other areas Sikhs were not counted. This is why in the 1881 census when they first counted castes, they counted the non-Muslims and non-Sikh Jats as Hindus. Just because the British counted these Jats as Hindus does not mean they were Hindus. 

One just needs to look in the villages of Punjab, how many Mandirs are there in our villages? If there is a Mandir then either it is a small Mandir as part of a family residence of a Brahmin or Hindu Khatri family. According to the British censuses,  Ludhiana district up to 1881 had almost equal numbers of of Sikh and Hindu Jats. If these non-Sikh Jats were really Hindus then you would see hundreds if not thousands of Mandirs in the villages of Punjab and yet very few exist. This is because these Jats were followers of either tribal Jathera worship or were Sakhi Sarwaria followers or a combination of both. I don't know about Majha or Doaba as I have not spent any time there but all over Malwa every village either has dozens of Marhiya - small memorials to ancestors in which lamps are lit or has an old Dera of a Pir. 

Historically whenever a Jat chaudhry achieved some high position or managed to become independent and establish his rule then in order to gain acceptance in Hindu society he would build a Mandir in his area, this was especially true of the areas outside of Sikh influence such as Haryana and west UP. The Mandirs in their villages are either built by their chiefs after they established their rule and wanted acceptance in Hindu society or date to the time of them coming under the influence of the Arya Samaj or other Hindu reformists movements. 

 

[5aaban]

On 2/1/2022 at 9:30 PM, proactive said:

The British generally classified all non-Muslims as Hindus especially in the early days of the annexation of Punjab. The 1855 Census of Punjab did not even count Sikhs and just Hindus and Muslims, the same was true of the 1868 Census apart from the Majha area where they counted Sikh numbers as well. In all the other areas Sikhs were not counted. This is why in the 1881 census when they first counted castes, they counted the non-Muslims and non-Sikh Jats as Hindus. Just because the British counted these Jats as Hindus does not mean they were Hindus. 

One just needs to look in the villages of Punjab, how many Mandirs are there in our villages? If there is a Mandir then either it is a small Mandir as part of a family residence of a Brahmin or Hindu Khatri family. According to the British censuses,  Ludhiana district up to 1881 had almost equal numbers of of Sikh and Hindu Jats. If these non-Sikh Jats were really Hindus then you would see hundreds if not thousands of Mandirs in the villages of Punjab and yet very few exist. This is because these Jats were followers of either tribal Jathera worship or were Sakhi Sarwaria followers or a combination of both. I don't know about Majha or Doaba as I have not spent any time there but all over Malwa every village either has dozens of Marhiya - small memorials to ancestors in which lamps are lit or has an old Dera of a Pir. 

Historically whenever a Jat chaudhry achieved some high position or managed to become independent and establish his rule then in order to gain acceptance in Hindu society he would build a Mandir in his area, this was especially true of the areas outside of Sikh influence such as Haryana and west UP. The Mandirs in their villages are either built by their chiefs after they established their rule and wanted acceptance in Hindu society or date to the time of them coming under the influence of the Arya Samaj or other Hindu reformists movements. 

 

What about Hindu Jats who have the same last names as Sikh Jats? 

Yuzvendra Chahal, a Hindu Jat 

Simarpreet Kaur Chahal, a Jat Sikh actress 

On religion of Jats in 1901 and 1931 (source Instagram) 

The late colonial period in British Punjab witnessed the collapse of the Hindu Jat population. In 1901 Hindus were 32% of all Jats, by 1931 that figure was 16%. To fully appreciate this phenomenon however, we need more detailed analysis.
Consider first the Majha Jats. (pic 1&2)
While the Muslim Jat population held steady, nearly all the Hindu Jats had returned themselves as Sikhs by 1931. A similar trend is seen in the Doab region of Punjab. (Pic 3&4)
Also the Malwa-Puadh region, which was already heavily Sikh in 1901, but became even more so by 1931, at the expense of the Hindu population. (Pic 5&6)
This phenomenon however seems to be largely restricted to punjabi speaking areas. A sample of Jats from hindi speaking areas of Punjab (present day Haryana) show little religious change from 1901-1931, as Hindus remained above 90%. (Pic 7&8)
Note: The Malwa-Puadh samples are restricted to Ferozepur, Ludhiana, Malerkotla, and Faridabad, as the rest of the region was split by princely states that also encompassed parts of Haryana, so they were left out to avoid polluting the sample.

Majha

Doab 

 

Malwa-Puadh 

 

 

[Jacfsing2]

5 hours ago, proactive said:

It really depends on what background a Sikh's ancestors came from.  If they were Jat, Kamboh  or any other agricultural castes then their ancestors were never Hindus at all. These groups followed their own tribal religions which consisted of ancestor worship such as Jathera. The Sikhs who come from the Khatri, Brahmin, Arora backgrounds had Hindu ancestors. The Sikhs whose ancestors' background was so-called lower castes like Chamar, Chuhra etc, they also followed older animalist gods which were eventually incorporated into popular Hinduism. 

If you look beyond the Hindu propaganda that anyone who lived in south Asia prior to the Muslim invasions was a Hindu then technically possibly less than 10% of Sikhs today had Hindu ancestors.

There was a minor census done by a British officer in 1848 of Lahore which was cited in an article in the Punjab Past and Present journal of Punjabi university which I read a few years ago. He classed the Sikhs as either Muslim-Sikhs and Hindu-Sikhs, ie those who came from a Hindu background and those who came from a Muslim background. He found that around 9 or 10% of the Sikhs of his time in Lahore came from a Muslim background and 90% came from a Hindu background. This wouldn't be the same all over Punjab because Lahore being the centre of Sikh power, Muslims would have been more likely to become Sikhs there than in other parts of Punjab. But it does show that the 'Sikhs all came from Hindus' slogan is complete BS. 

Aren’t there Hindu Jatts?

[shastarSingh]

6 hours ago, proactive said:

It really depends on what background a Sikh's ancestors came from.  If they were Jat, Kamboh  or any other agricultural castes then their ancestors were never Hindus at all. These groups followed their own tribal religions which consisted of ancestor worship such as Jathera. The Sikhs who come from the Khatri, Brahmin, Arora backgrounds had Hindu ancestors. The Sikhs whose ancestors' background was so-called lower castes like Chamar, Chuhra etc, they also followed older animalist gods which were eventually incorporated into popular Hinduism. 

If you look beyond the Hindu propaganda that anyone who lived in south Asia prior to the Muslim invasions was a Hindu then technically possibly less than 10% of Sikhs today had Hindu ancestors.

There was a minor census done by a British officer in 1848 of Lahore which was cited in an article in the Punjab Past and Present journal of Punjabi university which I read a few years ago. He classed the Sikhs as either Muslim-Sikhs and Hindu-Sikhs, ie those who came from a Hindu background and those who came from a Muslim background. He found that around 9 or 10% of the Sikhs of his time in Lahore came from a Muslim background and 90% came from a Hindu background. This wouldn't be the same all over Punjab because Lahore being the centre of Sikh power, Muslims would have been more likely to become Sikhs there than in other parts of Punjab. But it does show that the 'Sikhs all came from Hindus' slogan is complete BS. 

Many Sikhs were followers of Sakhi Sarwar sect before becoming sikhs.

Bhai Manjh ji was also a follower of Sakhi Sarwar sect before becoming a sikh.

https://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Guru_Arjan_Dev_Ji_And_Bhai_Manj_Ji

[proactive]

5 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Aren’t there Hindu Jatts?

Up to the 10th century Jats were tribals having a tribal religion, nothing to do with 'Hinduism'. 12th century and Muslim invasions, the Jats fought against them in areas around Rawalpindi and some tribes succumbed to forcible conversion to Islam after being defeated by the Muslims. Move further east and these Jats remained Jathera worshippers up to the times of Aurangzeb who forcibly converted them in the 17th century. There might have been some converts via Sufis but majority of the conversions were by force. Move more further east into Majha area, these Jats were Jathera and Sakhi Sarwar worshippers. In the time of Guru Arjan Dev and Guru Hargobind about 1/4 of these Jats came to Sikhi and discarded both Jathera and Sakhi Sarwar worship. The other 3/4 remained Jathera and Sakhi Sarwar worshippers. During the time of Guru Gobind Singh and the Misls, most of the non-Muslim Jats had become Sikh, the ones who remained non-Sikh and non-Muslims were classified by the British as HINDUS. 

In Doaba, it was similar but Sikhi came later to those Jats than the Majha Jats. In Hoshiarpur especially these non-Sikh and non-Muslim Jats remained worshippers of Sakhi Sarwar and Jathera up until the the first decade of the 20th century. These Jats had also been influenced by Devi worship from the hills. The greatest crossover from  British classed 'Hindu' Jat to Sikh Jat occurred during the Akali movement in the 1920s. 

In Malwa, the Sakhi Sarwar and Jathera worshipping Jats come under Sikh influence during the time of Guru Hargobind who fought a battle with the Mughals at Mehraj near Bathinda. In the western Malwa - Ferozpur, Moga, Jagroan, Bathinda, Mansa - in these areas the Jats were majority Sikh by the time of Guru Gobind Singh. In the eastern Malwa - Ludhiana, Samrala, Rupar - the Sikh Jats were a minority up to 1911. The non-Sikh, non-Muslim Jats here were also classed as HINDUS even though they were Sakhi Sarwar and Jathera worshippers. In these areas the first world war and heavily recruitment of Jats into the British army and the Akali movement led to the shift from the British classed 'Hindu' Jat to Sikh Jat. 

In Haryana - there was never a heavy influence of Sakhi Sarwar, the only Jats who become Muslims were ones who had been kidnapped by the Muslim rulers from time to time and forcibly converted. These Jats are called mulay Jats. Here Jathera worship held sway and in some areas in the late 18th century was displaced by  popular Hinduism such as Devi worship from the hills. These Jats were never accepted as Hindu by the Brahmanical order and in the early 1900s various groups of these Jats applied to be admitted into the Arya Samaj and 'purification' ceremonies were performed before these Jats become Arya and hence Hindus.