28 posts / 0 new
Last post
TurleWaalaChaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/24/2011 - 10:35
Points: 4
A cheap shot at the Jatt history and culture by bhapas and their "radical post-1984 version of Sikhism"

The video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EirpKMlkIY&feature=related

(apparently a 'slap on the Jatt Bhapa issue', but all it really is, is poor acting and a bhapa's attempt to look like a bollywood hero)...obviously there was too much danger in interviewing a real Jatt about what they think of Bhappa's.

Well, here are my points towards the fallacy of the bhapas arguments in the video:

1. The bhapas attempt to portray Jatts as having to give land to debtors (1:40 to 1:45)...well, all I can say about that is, I can assure you the bhapa that they're are still plenty of Jatts whom have not provided security to any creditor for their land...they're are still plently of wealthy Jatt yeoman/gentry around, don't have to look very far.

2. The way the bhapa try's to portray the Jatt (being an agrarian, and thus income based on Land and agriculture) hating the bhappa (a shop-keeper) because he is a trader. (2:09 to 2:20)

Well, all I can say about that is, what a poor attempt at skewing the hatred between Jatts and Bhape. That is not the reason why Jatts look down on (or over, if we regard all as equal) Bhape. The most common reason is simply the Jatt stereotype of Bhape as being "pathetic", and "sneaky". In Doaba, where there are many Bhappa girls who have been in wedlock with Jatt men for several generations (my great grandfather being one of them, having two khatri wives along with two bahmini's and two Jattis - one muslim Jatti, and the other sikh Jatti), they are usually seen as the those who will offer a marriage proposal to any wealthy and well respected zamindaar...infact, many wealthy Jatt Sardars can recall of such episodes in their lives, I once came across an old man of my grandfathers generation whom not only hated bhapa's due to the religious polarization caused within the community of Punjabi zamindaars by master Tara Singh (a bhapa, whom had no land of himself, and was thus minimally affected by what he did to stir violence during the partition in 1947) but also because he recalled of an episode in his life where his own friend (a bhapa shopkeeper in phagwara) introduced him to his sister (whom he later told by her, had been instructed by her brother to act flirty to engage in a wedlock with the Jatt Sardar so he could have a grab at his land). IT IS THIS STEREOTYPE THAT JATT'S TEND NOT TO ASSOCIATE THEMSELVES WITH BHAPA'S.

3. 2:30 to 2:35, where the bhapa states that Jatts weren't the only people to have participated in the independance of India...

Though Jatts weren't the only people, they sure as hell have the right to be proud of the contributions Jatts did make. Apart from Shaheed Bhagat Singh and the Babbar Akali Lehar (both of great Jatt influence), the most feared reason for the British administration to leave India was the uprising mutiny in their most highely regarded and powerful regiments, The Sikh Regiment (where according to Cp. Falcon, and Phillip Mason, the main recruitment was 90% Sikh Jatts and wealthy Jatt Sikh yeomen/gentry), the Jat regiment (recruited from a majority Hindu Jat yeomen, and muslim Jats too), and the Punjab Regiment (where atleast 80 to 90% of the recruits had to come from a Muslim Jat or Rajput Zamindaar background)...a handbook on recruitment by the respective regiment's captain well confirm this (I don't even need to quote them, since most of Captain Falcons work in available via Google Books nowadays, quoted in many secondary sources). The very well researched book "Islam and Empire", and "A matter of honour" by Phillip Mason, and also old Kent and Norfolk regimental officers/soldiers (whom had close ties with Punjab's regiments) will only testify the fact that British administration left due to growing support of soldiers (and their yeomen/gentry families) having been influenced by Marxist ideologies (as was the case with Shaheed Bhagat Singh, and we all know the affect of that was heard in London).

4. 2:40 to 2:55, where the Bhapa states that lt. general jagjit singh arora is a famous bhapa general.

Well, suprise suprise bhapa, but thats only one officer (whom was in the first place lucky to be recruited within a regiment who where not a fan of recruiting bhapa's), throughout the history of the Jat Regiment, the Sikh Regiment and the Punjab Regiment, and even a majority of the Armoured and Cavalry corps saw MANY (a great number infact) of high-ranking Jatt officers which includes generals, major generals, brigadier generals etc...infact the history of these regiments relies on the basis that they where formed due to the availibility of high-quality Jatt husbandman, yeomen and landed-gentry recruits, men of honour and martial valour (something the non-rural "castes" and especially bhapas will always lack!)

5. 3:00 to 3:03, where the bhapa states that the PM of India is also a bhapa!
seriously, this must be a joke right bapa ji! First of all, not only does one get to hear the impotency of the one and only bhapa PM of India throughout the nation, but bhapa's affected by 1984's Delhi Riots too complain about his ability too do nothing about it, even whilst sitting on the highest present administrial post of India as a Prime Minister. Thats not something the Bhapa's should really be proud off.
And did I mention the fact that Jats as an ethnic group probably have the highest number of ministerial seats in North India (as Chief Ministers of various states including Punjab, Hariyana, Rajasthan, Madhya Pardesh, Uttar Pardesh, etc...)

Infact here is a list of Jat leaders:
http://www.jatland.com/home/Category:The_Leaders

Besides, I didn't even mention that the 6th's PM of India was a Jat too. Wait till Bhapa Ji hears this!

6. 3:20 to 3:25, where the bhappa blames Jatt Sikhs for being biased towards "lower castes" or "chamaars" (or practically speaking, members of certain ethnicities who have menial roles in society)...
well, the bhapa-ji in the video seems to be very ill informed about the social structure of modern India and it's laws. Besides, bhapa's seem to be the biggest castist around, especially as they have a greater affinity to brahminism and claim a pure "kshatriya" descent according to Manu's scriptures (bhapa, and a warrior at the same time? must also be a joke).
And most of all, can I ask the Bhapa community to state what they have actually done to uplift these so called "lower castes" themselves? Jats have provided overwhelming support throughtout history to actually uplift such communities, many Chaudhries of villages provided funding for such children to attend schools, and even funded the residential area of chamaars to build their own school (within "chamaarli"). Infact, in Doaba, Jatt leaders prior to reservation provided the greatest support for oppurtunity of "lower caste" reservation in politics, whose affect is still clearly evident today (most of Doaba's leaders are of "chamaar" descent). Again, may I stress that this is due to Jatt support and funding, what on earth have the so-called bhapa "gursikhs" done? I found such "blames" by the bhapa community absolutely hurendous.

7. 3:30 to 3:38, where the bhapa refers to Jatts as "thusi lok" is clearly an evident sign that bhapa sikhs to have bias towards Jatt Sikhs...and nothing could give a clearer indication than this directed youtube video.
The bhapa-ji in the video should really calm down, but he knows it's a directed video and their is no danger of a real Jatt, or in his words "Jatt Sikh", involved.
Also he claims that bhai daya was a bhapa who was the first to stand in the panj piare well Guru Gobind Singh asked for heads. This is a very silly argument, as the second man to stand was a Jatt of Histanapur (bhai daram), what is this supposed to prove? maybe bhai dharam wasn't really paying attention to Guru Gobind Singh's speach until he actually saw the first man get up and see his head chopped off. What is the bhapa trying to prove? that because one bhapa (amongst five men) was the first to stand up and offer his head to Guru Gobind Singh makes a bhapa the number one contributer of the Khalsa army at the time? there must be something wrong with the bhapa's logic here, surely.
And besides, I could argue that the second man who stood up (the Jat of Hastinapur whom was given the name Bhai Dharam Singh) probably had more courage than the first, because he actually saw what was going to happen to the first man (as the legend/account says, he had his head chopped off).
We all know that 9 of the 12 misls where founded by Jatt Sardars (where "Sardar" is actually a Jatt Chaudhary title equivalent too the muslim "Nawaab"), and even the remaining 3 misls relied on their local Jat zamindaar support (wether Chaudhries or not) to contribute to functionioning of the misl, and it was a martial confederecy and relied on Jatt recruits, who joined the army in larger numbers than other communities because at the time, the soldier was expected to fund for their own horse, armour and fodder (and Jatts just happened to be the most resourceful people at the time, because economy was based on Martial and Agricultural persuits, both of which the Jatts as a community have ALWAYS excelled at, naturally).
Source? well try Tribes and Castes of North-West India by H.A. Rose and Chiefs and families of note in the Punjab (published by a Bhapa in the 1940's!), Chiefs and families of note in the Delhi, Jalandhar, Peshawar and Derajat divisions of the Panjab (1890) by Charles Francis Massy.

8. 3:40 to 3:55 where the bhapa acts as if he is not aware of the "gadhari" or acts of deceit by the bhappa community.
He is portraying Sahib Rai Sandhu and Rama Randhawa as gadhaars. This must be one of the most insane and ludicrious argument the bhapa has put forward in the video to put down the sacrifice of many Jatt men for the Sikh movement and teachings (by many, I actually mean atleast 85% according to historical sources, where many of the men of Khalsa army have Jat gotras).
My counter argument for this is, "if one is not a Sikh himself, than how can he ever be classified as the gadhaar of Sikhs?", he may be an enemy, but NOT a gadhaar (trator). Sahib Rai Sandhu or Rama Randhawa where just wealthy zamindaar chaudhries who had nothing to due with the Sikh movement, and therefore opposed it (as they had no reason to become a Sikh, the teachings didn't appeal to them, and they had enough respect within the court of the Mughal empires to make them faithful and loyal to the present Mughal goverment.). Those men where simply enemies of the Sikh movement at the time, and by no means gadhars.
Infact, what really is devious is the gadhari Master Tara Singh bhapa-ji (a malhotra bhapa) did with the sikh community and punjabi community as a whole. He slowly and very deviously started to join hands with the right-wing RSS alligned politicians and societies, and had an active role in actually creating the VHP (Vishva Hindu Parishad), infact the very first issue of the VHP gazette is signed by him and openly available on Google Books!
Not only was he the instigator of many anti-muslim attacks (affecting sikh-muslim harmony, which is surely against the Sikh religion), but he denied Punjabis the oppurtunity of a seperate homeland, because he was in favour of a religious/secular-state rather than a language/cultural state. All his works stress that Sikhs must be alligned to Hindu movements to oppose the Muslims, this had a highly negative and violent impact on the Punjabi society currently living in harmony at the time. Obviously, none of this actually affected Master Tara Singh or his family(especially when partition did occur) as he was not a Zamindaar Jat or Rajput (whom actually suffered the worst of the partition), but just a bhapa (and thus had already established himself in urban Amritsar - stronghold of the Majhail Jatt Sikhs before the partition occured, so he had ample protection from Sikh-Muslim riots). If there was ever THE MOST EVILEST MAN TO INHABIT PUNJAB, the title would surely go to Master Tara Singh...No wonder he is called a "Haraami Kootha" or a "bastard dog!" by Zamindaar (Jatt and Rajput) men and women of both sides of Punjab!
Sources: try "Empire and Islam" by Gilmartin, its a great read!

by now we all know that the bhapa community have a heritage of betrayal and deceit. Not only did they cheat the Sikh Gurus, but even the Sikhs, and the wider Punjabi community which they lived in! Infact, what makes bhapas the most dis-honourable and shameless of people is the fact that they don't mind being "bastards". What I mean is, Jatts and Rajputs, no matter what religion or spiritual sect/cult they belong to, are PROUD of their Jatt and Rajput ethnicity and bloodline. The opposite is true with the bhapa community, whom become "guru's" or "gursikhs" when they become "sikhs", "kshatriyas" when they become hindu's, and "sayeds" when they become muslims, they actually have no blood-line or ethnicity of which to take pride in...they simply just adopt an honourable title used in the religious scriptures/traditions of the religion they convert too...possibly to only serve the purpose of hiding their identity and their affliation with their family/community/blood-line, only to make the gadhars/trators within their community harder to spot. It is a well known fact that the bhappa sayyeds only reveal their caste/gotra in public during time of marriage...shameless beings!

9. 3:55 to 4:00, where the bhapa is stating that todays jatt sikhs are gadhaars? well let me tell the bhapa that none of the 100,000 bhape in delhi would have been massacred during 1984 if it weren't for his devious bhapa forefather master tara singh (had he have allowed Punjabi's their seperate homeland instead of politically siding the Sikhs with Hindu's on a religious basis!)...and who's the PM in behalf of the "congress party, so called responsible for the 1984 massacre?" cough cough, it is infact the bhapa Manmohan Singh!

10. 4:40 onwards...i'm not even going to present a counter argument for this, as basically all the bhapa is doing now is claiming the Jatt Shaheeds of the Sikh faith as his own (because there are so many of them)...what did I say earlier about 'bastardisation amongst the bhapa community'?

However, I must state that many Jatts fought for the Sikh faith because it appealed to them and they thoroughly believed that the teachings should survive to be passed on to the next generation to make Punjab a better place (for all ethnicities, clans, communities etc...).
It wasn't about creating a seperate "so called Sikh quom" whom would merge Jatt, bhape, chamaar, tharkhans etc. into one "quom" -- that was not what Sikhism was, this is just a recent menial re-invention of Sikhs and the Sikh history by certain historians and organisations (pointing no fingers).

the "niyarakhalsagroup" is obviously a bhaba-led organisation (well, not even that, its seems like a petty youtube channel and a blog).

LordJatt's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/11/2010 - 09:21
Points: 0

@TurleWaalaChaudhry, Good Points. Let me put some of my views to this as well. If you search on YouTube, you will come across many more videos such as these. One of the common pattern you will find in these videos is that Jatts are always deliberately shown in the negative limelight. E.g. They will try to stereotype all Jatts as Drunkards and the "other" Non-Jatt fellow in these videos as a good samaritan who is trying to put his message across to the "Evil" Jatt fellow (who is a drunkard obviously).

The only problem with these videos is that in actual life, Jatts do not bother to give arguments that they are claiming in these videos that Jatts give. They are deliberately trying to create an issue when there is none. E.g. it's true that Jatt people respect Maharaja Ranjit Singh. Not just because Ranjit Singh was a Jatt but because Ranjit Singh was a good administrator. But at the same time, Jatt people respect Hari Singh Nalua as well. But in these videos, they deliberately try to show as if there is some sort of competition between Ranjit Singh and Hari Singh Nalua. Same for Bhagat Singh and Udham Singh. In contrast to what this video shows, Jatt people certainly are proud of the fact that Bhagat Singh was a Jatt. But there is nothing against Udham SIngh who was not a Jatt who is equally respected.

So at the end of the day, videos such as these are created by noxious and cunning minds to create trouble when there is none. And at best, these should be ignored.

bajwajatt's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2011 - 17:10
Points: 0

Stupit blog............ Master Tara singh was a true leader of sikh panth ..99.9% of jatt sikh has great respect for master tara singh ...Who so ever has written this blog should control his tongue and fingers

TurleWaalaChaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/24/2011 - 10:35
Points: 4

contrary to your belief bajwa, alot of intelligent Jatt Sikh zamindars (along with Jatt Muslims of Pakistan) celebrate his death...

he was responsible of breaking the unity of zamindars (especially Jatts, whom it was so easy to split apart by religion) during the time of the Unionist Part of Punjab (headed by Jatt legends such as Chaudhary Chhotu Ram, Chaudhary Sikandar Hayat etc... Khan who did their best to maintain an independant unsplit Punjab)...this was the time where Jatts where truly refered to throughout India as Sardars, Chaudhary, Nawabs etc... regardless of religion or their financial condition, and not only did they dominate politics in Punjab (and Punjab being the breadbasket of India and a majorly respected state due to military contributions, Punjab's politicians had a major say in the nation's poltics as a whole - unlike the sad state of affairs today!)

Master Tara Singh polarized the nation/state of Punjab between religion and introduced a religious split, this is clearly evident in:

1... Master Tara Singh playing a major role in the formation of the VHP (esp. as a leader of the self-created 'akali' leadership - which proclaimed to represent all sikhs)... he signed the very first VHP gazette and is available on google books for proof. This split Punjab between Muslims and Sikh/Hindus

2... Even after the partition he split East Punjab into 3 smaller states by introducing the Punjabi Subbha,...this is why Jatt Sardar Partap Singh Kairon (CM of Punjab) took an absolute firm stand against this proposal, as he believed that the larger undivided East Punjab had a greater political and cultural influence on India, this was evident not only in politics, but even in bollywood and culture of other states where they where slowly adopting to punjabi terminology, food, fashion and even culture at the time...Sr. Partap Singh Kairon even concluded that due to this affect, the whole nation eventually start referring to themselves as "Punjabi"...and according to those whom where in Punjab during the early 1970's, this certainly seemed very plausible....

but lala tara singh malhotra, being a typical urbanite sikh of a merchant bania background would rather see East Punjab split into three to reduce the political power of the Jatt dominate politics of the undivided East Punjab at the time (and therefore not only did he split Punjab by religion once during 1947, but TWICE, in 1966, where Hariyana and Hamachal where carved out of East Punjab)...

and now, we end up with a Jats split between Hariyana, todays "Punjab", hamachal pardesh, and west Punjab...a great slap on the face to the military power and political power which Jats dominated when Punjab was a single united state before the religious divide of 1947...East Punjab should now really be called dho-ab (as it only has two rivers remaining).,

*--------------------------->>
Turley Waalaa Chaudhary

JasVIRK's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/28/2011 - 09:07
Points: 0

Those haterz who posted that video on youtube banned me after I posted a comment that such videos are in bad taste no community should be singled out and shown in negative light. This is an abuse of our sikh religion if they are going to be using such propaganda against jatts in particular in the name of religion.

And if they are so sure that what they are doing is right, why did they ban me?

cowards.

bajwajatt's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2011 - 17:10
Points: 0

TurleWaalaChaudhry veer ji .. master tara singh is not responsible for all things what u r saying...Chaudhary Sikandar Hayat was also playing cheap political games ... he only let muslam leage to enter punjab and make pact with them

after 1947 aklai dal was totally dominated by jatt sikh so no need to blame master tara singh for futher division of punjab in 1966.......being a jatt sikh i will say the only man who stand for united punjab is sir Chaudhary Chhotu Ram...

Sarabjit Singh ...
Sarabjit Singh Ahluwalia's picture

[Moderator Note: This comment has been edited. All comments targeting Sikh gurus, or Masters of other traditions, in a negative manner, violate our moderation guidelines and are subject to removal]

I have one question. The world Bhapa ji was used to refer to big brother or the father. You can check with anyone who has lived 2 generations back. Youth of today are ignorant of history and have fallen trap to this division. This division has already caused enough damage to the panth and is a big tool that is available to panth dokhis. Can someone explain me the Bhapa caste or group. [Edited. Remaining comment removed.]

bajwajatt's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2011 - 17:10
Points: 0

Sarabjit Singh veer ji u are absolutely right

TurleWaalaChaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/24/2011 - 10:35
Points: 4

Sarbjit Singh: "I have one question. The world Bhapa ji was used to refer to big brother or the father. You can check with anyone who has lived 2 generations back. Youth of today are ignorant of history and have fallen trap to this division. This division has already caused enough damage to the panth and is a big tool that is available to panth dokhis. Can someone explain me the Bhapa caste or group. "

Well if it was used by those of Rawalpindi to refer to big brother of your father, in Doaba and most part of modern day Punjab it is used to refer to khatris or khatri immigrants. Well Sarabjit, there's your question answered.

Sarbjit Singh: "You can check with anyone who has lived 2 generations back. Youth of today are ignorant of history and have fallen trap to this division. This division has already caused enough damage to the panth and is a big tool that is available to panth dokhis."

Sarabjit Singh, What on earth is your definition of "panth"?
A panth is basically a spiritual path (of the spirit), NOT a "quom" (or community). You cannot call Sikh a "quom", its a panth. And you cannot call Jatt a panth, as it is a "quom". A quom is a paternal lineage which one cannot change...but the "panth" or spiritual path/school which one chooses, can be changed a million times (if the mind chooses too).

Now tell me what you mean by this so called "division"?

*--------------------------->>
Turley Waalaa Chaudhary

BainsJat's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/03/2011 - 09:25
Points: 1

Spot on Chaudhry turle wala. My 2 cents. what you call as 'radical post-1984 version of Sikhism' is actually a british inspired sgpc version of sikhi which has nothing to do with the philosophy of Guru Nanak paatshah. it is sgpc-ism not sikh-ism.

Chaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/19/2011 - 13:53
Points: 0

TurleWala Chaudhry saab ne boht ala bata kitya . I could'nt agree more being a muslim Jatt. tara singh was not just a khota but a khote da putt! He is responsible for a genocide.

These bhappa/bahman converts are who are destroying pakistan today.

Sarabjit Singh ...
Sarabjit Singh Ahluwalia's picture

The word Bhapa is used in derogatory sense to refer to khatris. We shall keep one thing in mind that all our Guru's were khatris. The world bhapaji was not limited to Rawalpindi alone. It was quite frequently used even in rest of Punjab including Doaba. Can u tell me what word was used in Doaba?
If you follow Sikh panth then paternal lineage is a rejected idea in Sikh faith. Your definition of qaum has divided the sikh panth. If you don't follow Sikh faith, u r free to say whatever u want to. Don't call urself Sikh if u can't follow it.

TurleWaalaChaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/24/2011 - 10:35
Points: 4

"The word Bhapa is used in derogatory sense to refer to khatris. "
not really, it is what khatri's refer to themselves

"We shall keep one thing in mind that all our Guru's were khatris. "
no doubt, their paternal lineage was khatri.

"The world bhapaji was not limited to Rawalpindi alone. It was quite frequently used even in rest of Punjab including Doaba."
I know, and it still is lol.

"If you follow Sikh panth then paternal lineage is a rejected idea in Sikh faith. "
I have countless quotes to prove you wrong. Sikhism in no way, shape or form (unless fanatically interpreted by brainwashed extremists) rejects paternal lineage. And besides, why would Guru Gobind Singh write about the origin of bedi's and sodhi's in Bachhitr Natak, Dasam Granth if he was to reject paternal lineage. It is only ritualistic high/low-ness of the brahmin panth which was rejected by the guru's, not tribal and paternal lineage. Infact throughout gurbani, bhagats are referred to by their caste i.e. "Dhana Jaat", "Ravidaas Chamaara" etc...

quote 1:
"It may nevertheless be justly observed that Gobind abolished caste rather by implication than by direct enactment, and it may be justly objected that the Sikhs still uphold the principal distinctions at least of race. Thus the Gurus nowhere say that Brahmans and Sudars are to inter-marry, or that they are daily to partake together of the same food: but they laid a good foundation for the practical obliteration’s of all differences"
History Of Sikhs, by J. D. Cunningham, 1849

quote 2:
In Bhai Gurdas Ji's Vaars (written under the supervision of Guru Arjan Dev), all mention disciples by their caste (and village) identity, as do the puratan Janam Sakhis.

The Vars of Bhai Gurdas
9 Khatris: Taru Popat, Mula Kirh, Pirtha
Soiri, Kheda Soiri, Pirthi Mal
Saihgal, Rama Didi, Bhagta
Ohri, Shihan, & Gajanh Upal
18 JPS 17:1&2
3 Jats: Chaudhary Ajita, and Burha Randhawa,
Firanha Khehra
1 blacksmith: Gujar
1 barber (nai): Dhinga
1 Muslim singer(marasi): Mardana
Guru Nanak’s Life and Legacy: An Appraisal, Gurinder Singh Mann

quote 3:
"Baba Nanak Vedi Patisahu din dunia ki tek"
Bhattan de Svaiyye, obviously there is no doubt that this would not have entered any pothi without Guru Nanak's consent lol.

and the list continues...

besides, can you think of any other logical reason why all guru's had wives from khatri caste alone and not of brahmins, chamaars, etc...?

"If you follow Sikh panth then paternal lineage is a rejected idea in Sikh faith."
no its not, i've just proven it above. How can one forget/disregard his lineage/parents, which as a Sikh has been chosen for him as "hukam of Akaal Purakh"...one can change his mind/spirit while he lives, but NEVER his lineage and parents...and i'm sure if you look hard enough in the Guru Granth Sahib, you may find plentiful quotes on "accepting the hukam".

Sikhism rejects ritualistic high/low, not paternal lineage.

"Your definition of qaum has divided the sikh panth."
can you state a specific period in time when this so called "panth" you refer too was ever united?

and besides, you are using the term "panth" wrongly, as I have explained in my earlier post. Stop interchanging "quom" with "panth"...Sikhism is a panth (a spiritual path), you CANNOT "unite" a spiritual path...

"If you don't follow Sikh faith, u r free to say whatever u want to. Don't call urself Sikh if u can't follow it."
And what gives you the authority to say that sarbjit? who are you or anyone else to tell me what I should follow and not follow? your statement itself is a practical example of what is wrong with your "interchangable quom/panth definition".

this statement clearly reflects your extremist/fanatic belief system, which is infact, the most common cause of conflict in todays world! unfortunately, this fanatic sikh belief system is becoming so prevalent (especially amongst vulnerable easily brainwashed youth) it almost makes me wonder whether sikhism extremism will become the next international threat, like the 'taliban' today.

and FYI: I'd rather be proud of my paternal lineage, race and ethnicity and hence be a man of honour and self respect than to follow an extremist and fanatic belief system which only makes its followers "bastards" (what else do you call someone without a father or paternal lineage? bastard is the only word that comes to my head).

"Don't call urself Sikh if u can't follow it."
I never do use the word "Sikh" as an identity badge anyway,...why would I want to use a spiritual/religious badge alone? its usually "Jat Sardar", or "Jat Sikh", or "Sikh Jat", but more often just "Punjabi Jatt" :D

*--------------------------->>
Turley Waalaa Chaudhary

TurleWaalaChaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/24/2011 - 10:35
Points: 4

and sarbjit, you still have my questions to answer from my earlier post.

*--------------------------->>
Turley Waalaa Chaudhary

Sarabjit Singh
Sarabjit Singh Ahluwalia's picture

1. 'The word Bhapa is used in derogatory sense to refer to khatris. '
"not really, it is what khatri's refer to themselves"
I don't think khatris use it. Its mostly used by almost everybody except khatris and that too in derogatory sense.

2. "If you follow Sikh panth then paternal lineage is a rejected idea in Sikh faith. "
I have countless quotes to prove you wrong. Sikhism in no way, shape or form (unless fanatically interpreted by brainwashed extremists) rejects paternal lineage. And besides, why would Guru Gobind Singh write about the origin of bedi's and sodhi's in Bachhitr Natak, Dasam Granth if he was to reject paternal lineage. It is only ritualistic high/low-ness of the brahmin panth which was rejected by the guru's, not tribal and paternal lineage. Infact throughout gurbani, bhagats are referred to by their caste i.e. "Dhana Jaat", "Ravidaas Chamaara" etc...

Looking at your posts, it appears you care less about religion and more about the qaum or your parental lineage. There is no problem with that. You shall not be arrogant. Arrogance stunts spiritual growth. To avoid arrogance, distinguish between pride ("I'm better than the other person") and pleasure ("I'm not better, just fortunate").

As far as caste system goes, India used to have 4 castes viz. Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaish and sudra. You shall search for yourself where did we belong to. Jatt, or Bhapa is not any caste in itself. Sikhism did free up the mankind from these social bindings and has guided many individuals to achieve salvation.

ਜਾਤਿ ਕਾ ਗਰਬੁ ਨ ਕਰਿ ਮੂਰਖ ਗਵਾਰਾ ॥ ਇਸੁ ਗਰਬ ਤੇ ਚਲਹਿ ਬਹੁਤੁ ਵਿਕਾਰਾ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਚਾਰੇ ਵਰਨ ਆਖੈ ਸਭੁ ਕੋਈ ॥ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਬਿੰਦ ਤੇ ਸਭ ਓਪਤਿ ਹੋਈ ॥੨॥ ਮਾਟੀ ਏਕ ਸਗਲ ਸੰਸਾਰਾ ॥ ਬਹੁ ਬਿਧਿ ਭਾਂਡੇ ਘੜੈ ਕੁਮ੍ਹ੍ਹਾਰਾ ॥੩॥ ਪੰਚ ਤਤੁ ਮਿਲਿ ਦੇਹੀ ਕਾ ਆਕਾਰਾ ॥ ਘਟਿ ਵਧਿ ਕੋ ਕਰੈ ਬੀਚਾਰਾ ॥੪॥
and remeber Guru Nanak Dev ji ne Vapar vi keeta te kheti vi keeti. Vapari nu ajkal Bhapa kahi jande ne te Kheti karan vale nu Jatt. Guru ji didn't care as these are means to live and both were equally acceptable to him.

3. "Your definition of qaum has divided the sikh panth."
can you state a specific period in time when this so called "panth" you refer too was ever united?

If it was not united in past, there is no reason to say that it won't be in future. Its your choice if you don't want to be part of it. Do u think you can unite as a qaum. Do u justify killing of thousands of innocent sikhs by Sajjan Kumar and party as he was a jaat? I believe you will. Similarly Muslims consider all Non-muslims as Kafirs. Can u unify with the group who consider you as a kafir.

4. "If you don't follow Sikh faith, u r free to say whatever u want to. Don't call urself Sikh if u can't follow it."
And what gives you the authority to say that sarbjit? who are you or anyone else to tell me what I should follow and not follow? your statement itself is a practical example of what is wrong with your "interchangable quom/panth definition".

I just don't care if you are not a sikh. You follow whatever you like. Waheguru mehr kare.

5. this statement clearly reflects your extremist/fanatic belief system, which is infact, the most common cause of conflict in todays world! unfortunately, this fanatic sikh belief system is becoming so prevalent (especially amongst vulnerable easily brainwashed youth) it almost makes me wonder whether sikhism extremism will become the next international threat, like the 'taliban' today.

Sikhism is not extremism. Sikhism is tolerance. Sikhism is all about being humble and not arrogant. Sikhism is not about division. Its about acceptance and unification. Sikhism is not about material gains but about salvation.
The uniqueness of Sikhism is upheld without any derogatory attitude towards others, or belittling of others.
I don't think sikhism in any way extremist. But sikhs have been pushed hard by the extremist attitude of others since its birth. Your fears are unfounded. Sikhism will keep finding its way irrespective of your prejudice.

6. and FYI: I'd rather be proud of my paternal lineage, race and ethnicity and hence be a man of honour and self respect than to follow an extremist and fanatic belief system which only makes its followers "bastards" (what else do you call someone without a father or paternal lineage? bastard is the only word that comes to my head).

- I said earlier please find difference between arrogance and pleasure. I don't agree your analogy to call followers of a faith or belief system as bastards. You can keep searching lineage and that will end with some monkey (We all evolved from Monkeys). You shall decide if you want to run back in past or you want to live in future. Wahegure Bhali kare.

7. "Don't call urself Sikh if u can't follow it."
I never do use the word "Sikh" as an identity badge anyway,...why would I want to use a spiritual/religious badge alone? its usually "Jat Sardar", or "Jat Sikh", or "Sikh Jat", but more often just "Punjabi Jatt" :D

Be happy with whatever tagg you want. I don't care. But i never saw anyone using muslim jatt or hindu jatt or christian jatt. Be thankful to sikhi.

BainsJat's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/03/2011 - 09:25
Points: 1

O pra sarabjit singh, so r u trying to imply that religious people are not arrogant and only if some body is a Jat, he is arrogant by association?

What is wrong with if we "keep searching lineage and that will end with some monkey (We all evolved from Monkeys)"? I find this very attempt of yours (to try to promote a dislike for mankind's link with Monkeys) not only against Science (Anti-Evolution) but it's also full of Arrogance (that humans should not be linked to monkeys).

This is the attitude that Christian fundamentalists (creationists) have towards theory of evolution and you, pra are simply displaying an attitude that sikh fundamentalists are no different to these creationists when it comes to arrogance.

To your question that you ask

"You shall decide if you want to run back in past or you want to live in future."

i will answer it thus as follows -

If future is full of Taleban type of religious fanatics and fundamentalists, i'd prefer to stick in the past with a monkey. At least that sounds more humble and not to mention - scientific.

Sarabjit Singh
Sarabjit Singh Ahluwalia's picture

Dear pra bainsjatt,

Thanks for ur opinion. I believe, my assertions are misunderstood. I don't say that don't search ur lineage. We shall not be arrogant as it will hamper a person/group's development. The arrogance may be based on religion or caste/group. If you follow Sikh religion, then being humble is an essential part of sikh's personality. To give you an example, I was in southern India and met a Sikh personality who was not holding good view of punjab Sikhs. The person had undergone the suffering of 1984 and thought of settling in Punjab after 84. He got his children admitted to a school in tarn taran. On return from school, his children asked if they are jat or bhapa as their classmates did ask this question. The man complained that they were treated worse than lowest caste in the village. Being self respecting, he left the village and settled in south India. I didn't have any explanation for so deep rooted caste bias in Punjab.
As far as ur assertion of Taliban type fanatism, I do agree that no civil society shall allow it. Fanatism can be religion or any other group based. What do u call the suffering of above man. Is it not fanatism based on caste?

Nirmol Rattan Singh
Sarabjit Singh Ahluwalia's picture

I think effort shold be on uniting Sikh rather than dividing sikhs....

Just wanted to say our gurus spend thier entire lives in spreading message of peace and humanity they were against any religion divide and undoubtdly caste divide.
I only request all to be a true sikh be true to waheguru Ji from heart and work hard.

You will achieve all success and all respect doesnt matter at all because modified version of both version from both communities whether you are pendu Jatt or refugee Bhapa) have spread the name of sikhism and punjabis in world.

.

TurleWaalaChaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/24/2011 - 10:35
Points: 4

note: Readers, sarabjit singh, I think you may need to grab yourself a cuppa' tea (or any drink of preference) and relax before you start reading, as this debate is getting rather lengthy.

1.
"I don't think khatris use it. Its mostly used by almost everybody except khatris and that too in derogatory sense."
I disagree. When they say "Bhapa ji" to each other, they are calling each other "Bhape" all the time, when its anyone else apart from "bhapa" then they find it offensive (though they only show offense taken on youtube videos, never during a face-to-face convo).

2.
"Looking at your posts, it appears you care less about religion and more about the qaum or your parental lineage. There is no problem with that. You shall not be arrogant. Arrogance stunts spiritual growth. To avoid arrogance, distinguish between pride ("I'm better than the other person") and pleasure ("I'm not better, just fortunate")."
Atleast you finally agree there is nothing wrong with accepting and taking pride in ones paternal lineage.

3.
"As far as caste system goes, India used to have 4 castes viz. Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaish and sudra. You shall search for yourself where did we belong to. Jatt, or Bhapa is not any caste in itself. "
Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaish and Shudra is the original caste system of the aryan indus valley civilization before the scythians and huns established themselves in North West India. Since then there have been Jats, Gujars, Ahirs, Kabohs, Rajputs, Chamaar, Lohar, Tarkhan etc... where the cultural "family" brahmin whom lived in a village which a zamindaar had established would instruct the zamindaar about his "dharma" duties, which where basically just to opress the castes with a lower social status most of the times (i.e. chamaars), in my village the lineage of the Sardars/Chaudhary of the village (my father and grandfather) did not comply in keeping chamaars from using the same water supply etc. as the brahmins family... hence in that generation the cultural link between jats and brahmins had been broken...in older generations (i.e. of my great grandfathers generation, and even my maternal grandmothers generation) lower castes would be kept at bay in terms of physical contact, and because Jats inforced these laws in villages, they where titled "kshatriya" by the brahmins, and taught the "kshatriya dharma"...this was common in most villages (regardless of wether the Sardar/Chaudhary of the village was a Hindu, Sikh or even Muslim) but obviously times have moved on since then, and most brahmins like to take that "kshatriya" status back lol.

4.
"Sikhism did free up the mankind from these social bindings and has guided many individuals to achieve salvation.
ਜਾਤਿ ਕਾ ਗਰਬੁ ਨ ਕਰਿ ਮੂਰਖ ਗਵਾਰਾ ॥ ਇਸੁ ਗਰਬ ਤੇ ਚਲਹਿ ਬਹੁਤੁ ਵਿਕਾਰਾ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਚਾਰੇ ਵਰਨ ਆਖੈ ਸਭੁ ਕੋਈ ॥ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਬਿੰਦ ਤੇ ਸਭ ਓਪਤਿ ਹੋਈ ॥੨॥ ਮਾਟੀ ਏਕ ਸਗਲ ਸੰਸਾਰਾ ॥ ਬਹੁ ਬਿਧਿ ਭਾਂਡੇ ਘੜੈ ਕੁਮ੍ਹ੍ਹਾਰਾ ॥੩॥ ਪੰਚ ਤਤੁ ਮਿਲਿ ਦੇਹੀ ਕਾ ਆਕਾਰਾ ॥ ਘਟਿ ਵਧਿ ਕੋ ਕਰੈ ਬੀਚਾਰਾ ॥੪॥"
That quote is essentially interprated as "Do not take pride excessively on your caste, as there is alot of the negativity associated with it [indicating inter-caste violence, excessive arrogance, laziness etc..]. Everything originates from the "brahm bind", i.e. the single point origin of all existence., and due to this the entire humanity(sansaar) has one [spiritual] race [I must add, this includes animals and plants too, as all originates from the 'brahm bindhu' according to the Sanatan philosophy. We share the same SPIRITUAL caste, but NOT physical caste] The pot-maker(indicating brahm) creates various forms (bahu bidh). brahm combines the five elements to create a physical form (dhehi). Who is to decide which is high or which is low."
Again this is from a spiritual perspective, as my translation has shown. Else, you can read Bachitar Natak, Chaubees Avtaar, and other Sakhi's (martial stories) in Dasam Granth (the "temporal"/"martial" granth) and all of them (even if you exclude the ones in charitropakhiyaan) mention caste of warriors on both sides in one way or another.

"and remeber Guru Nanak Dev ji ne Vapar vi keeta te kheti vi keeti. Vapari nu ajkal Bhapa kahi jande ne te Kheti karan vale nu Jatt. Guru ji didn't care as these are means to live and both were equally acceptable to him."
The word zaat/caste in Punjab is not used in the sense that it is by Brahmins who follow vedic hinduism, it is used as a term for ethnicity/tribe/inter-marrying clans. It was a term which has been adopted from sanskrit/hindi, but is used in a different context.
With the brahmins of vedic hinduism, it is used alongside varna to describe a hereditary occupation etc...some punjabi's today, especially (and probably excusively) urban punjabi's, also use it in that fasion.

5.
"If it was not united in past, there is no reason to say that it won't be in future. Its your choice if you don't want to be part of it. Do u think you can unite as a qaum."
Jats dont need to unite as a quom, the fact that they used the word 'Jat' to refer to their ethnicity/quom/zaat already denotes that they are already united under their paternal lineage and ancestors.
If by "quom" you mean "panth", then no, I don't see how anyone can unite under a spiritual banner/belief, especially at the cost of shunning their ancestors, that is a down right "baghairat" (unhonourable, un-respectful, even sinful?) thing to do...especially as each and every ones spiritual beliefs are supposed to be different (and personal), wasn't that Guru Nanaks main purpose? to tell people that religious/ritualistic elites such as brahmins and kaazi's should not brainwash people to bring people into their own "religious fold", well there is a new elite now called "giyani's" who seem to be doing the exact same thing!

"Do u justify killing of thousands of innocent sikhs by Sajjan Kumar and party as he was a jaat? I believe you will. Similarly Muslims consider all Non-muslims as Kafirs. Can u unify with the group who consider you as a kafir."
lol, again your stereotypical and extremist views combined with narrow-mindedness is not allowing you to read and understand what I said.
I said, for the billionth time, that the difference between 'quom'/'zaat' and 'panth' is:
One does not choose to be a part of a 'quom'/'zaat', it is a paternal lineage, a tribe, a clan. It is something one is born into and cannot change, and therefore shouldn't hide. Thus pride should be taken it, and identity should be associated with that alone (along with place of residence). If one does not have a paternal lineage he is termed a "bastard", likewise the same if one purposefully shuns/hides/attempts-to-change his paternal lineage. There is no point in trying to hide this behind a "religious veil" i.e. "sheikh" or "singh" (without writing gotra afterwards), or worse, "khalsa".
A 'panth' is simply a spiritual path which one chooses in his own life. No one is ever "born" to a religion/spiritual path, it is simply something he can choose to accept or ignore. I.e. at one time alot of the population of Punjab could be termed "sufi" or "sikh", or both at the same time, simply because of the overlap in beliefs and worshipping traditions. I think this quote can says alot on my point:
‘For years past the question, “Are the Sikhs Hindus?”, has been raised from time to time, and discussed in public prints not without acrimony. By a certain “advanced” [Tat Khalsa] party the question has been answered emphatically in the negative: but the old Sikhs, including some of the ruling Sikh chiefs, have expressed the opposite view: and the conflict of opinions has been productive of what might almost be regarded as a schism in the sect. Of course the question is primarily one for the Sikhs themselves and not for outsiders: though the Indian Government with a view to creating a valuable recruiting ground for its army, has through its military officers and otherwise done what was possible to foster the growth of Sikhism as a distinct cult. The idea underlying this policy is apparently that Sikhism, divorced from ordinary Hinduism and stimulated by its own martial traditions and its militant creed, would provide a special, distinct and numerous class of professional fighting men available for the Indian army. That this State encouragement, or stimulation, has not been without results, would appear from the increase in the number of Sikhs as recorded in the last census returns.’
‘Cults, Customs and Superstitions of India’, John Campbell Oman, 1908
The thing is, the Jatts would now like to see themselves seperate from the integration of all Jatts of Punjab being seen as the headmen of the Sikh panth, a mentality introduced during the British Raj because their martial and political attributes/qualities where what made Sikhism unique (hence they where preceived to be "distinct" from Hindu's and Muslims, though they weren't as they was overlap in belief throughout Punjab)...it was this mentality that some Jatts seemed to have identified themselves strongly as Sikhs, but now want to be distinct.

In terms of Sajjan Kumar, any man who massacres innocent people is wrong, but I cannot change the fact that he is a Jaat. All Jats take their ethnicity and paternal lineage with pride, and to be honest, if Sajjan Kumar is one of them, doesn't really bother me. You are forgetting that the "great hero of the modern-day mainstream-Sikh faith" Jarnail Singh Bhindrawala, is also a Jat. And what about the thousands of Kharkhu's (whom hid their caste under the veil of extremist Sikhism) who murdered and robbed innocent people in the name of religion? they are still running around competing for votes in british gudwara's (thanks to Britain's political assylum laws).

7.
"Sikhism is not extremism. Sikhism is tolerance. Sikhism is all about being humble and not arrogant. Sikhism is not about division. Its about acceptance and unification. Sikhism is not about material gains but about salvation.
The uniqueness of Sikhism is upheld without any derogatory attitude towards others, or belittling of others.
I don't think sikhism in any way extremist. But sikhs have been pushed hard by the extremist attitude of others since its birth. Your fears are unfounded. Sikhism will keep finding its way irrespective of your prejudice."
Ofcourse there are exteremest interprations of Sikhism, if you search "Sikh" on youtube there would be plentiful video's of a baba/giyani is a bana/chola preaching that the sikh religion is supperior to the rest...what could be more extremist than that? even nirmale sants who are supposed to be "peaciful" and "open" regard their meditation techniques supperior to those of other religions!
and also, have you seen the sikh channels which seem to be cropping up these days? they seem to be brainwashing sikhs to shun their paternal identity/lineage in favour of a "Sikh quom", not "panth" but "quom"...how on earth did "Sikhs" become a "quom"? they all seem to pushing parents of young kids (and even young children themselves) to grow their kesh and become a "son of the Guru"...This is absolutely crazy, a young child being brainwashed to disregard his kabila/paternal lineage for a baba/giyani on tv....any Sardar/Chaudhary of the british era, misl period and beyond would've spat on such a giyani.

8.
and FYI: I'd rather be proud of my paternal lineage, race and ethnicity and hence be a man of honour and self respect than to follow an extremist and fanatic belief system which only makes its followers "bastards" (what else do you call someone without a father or paternal lineage? bastard is the only word that comes to my head).
"I said earlier please find difference between arrogance and pleasure. I don't agree your analogy to call followers of a faith or belief system as bastards. You can keep searching lineage and that will end with some monkey (We all evolved from Monkeys). You shall decide if you want to run back in past or you want to live in future. Wahegure Bhali kare."
If you are familiar with anything to do with the science of Evolution, you would know that humans do not descend directly from monkeys, but from a common ancestor, hence why humans today have evolved distinctly to monkeys. Many giyanis/babe who preach in gurdwaras today are not yet acquainted/familiar with this theory yet either.

9.
"Be happy with whatever tagg you want. I don't care. But i never saw anyone using muslim jatt or hindu jatt or christian jatt. Be thankful to sikhi."
Just google Muslim Jat, Hindu Jat, Christian Jat...pretty much all Jats take pride in their ancestry. The religious prefix is just used to denote a religious tradition which runs in their family, from which they base their family rituals etc. You just don't hear things like "Khatri muslim" often because they hide under the religious title of "Sheikh" etc.
Would you believe me if I said that the reason I can have such an open-minded debate with you about this topic, is partially inspired by what I have learnt from Sikhi (teachings of Satguru Nanak-Guru Gobind Singh Patshah). What you have just read was me being thankful to Sikhi (no sarcasm intended).

*--------------------------->>
Turley Waalaa Chaudhary

Sukha
Sarabjit Singh Ahluwalia's picture

This split among Sikhs into different castes will not take us any where. We have to be proud of the fact that we got the best Farmers in the world, we have the best businessmen in our ranks.Now we have a Prime minister added to the list. We have Bindra the olympic champion and also Governor of South Carolina among our ranks.We have Maharaja Ranjit Singh ably supported by General Hari Singh Nalwa.We have the best regiment, Sikh regiment in the army. We are the richest people and we love daru. All of us love daru for sure.We are very proud people. Proud of our ancestry, proud of our religion. We have the tradtion of making the maximum number of sacrifices. We are brave and at the same time we can be humble(once in a while). That is the way we are. We have Harbhjan Singh and we have Sidhu Jatt from Patiala. We love Patiala Peg.We have made 6th river of Daru in Punjab. We have Baba Nanak who will get us through our ordeals. We continue to dispise each other. That is the way we are. We do not act nice. Gal mariye muh te. We eat Maki di roti Saron da saag with daru in plenty.We chad turla, we sit on manjha and feel like a King all the time. People think we are doing nasha. But we do some bhakti too. Overall, we are not so perfect. But we are proud the way we are.We do act nice because we can be some what mean. Now we are learning to be proud of others who have been making contributions. We know united we will be unbeatable but we love to maintain our own individuality and that is the way we are. We are not so perfect but still very proud.God bless our enemies.

TurleWaalaChaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/24/2011 - 10:35
Points: 4

Sukha...you seem to be confused..."turla" is a Jat tradition, drinking is a Jat tradition, (never seen any other bania/bhapa/etc... drink as much as Jats), Jatt Sikhs where the forefounders of the Sikh Regiment but the due credit is being taken away (infact if you look at any Captains i.e. Barstaws or Falcons, accounts of recruitment, they are specifically aimed at recruit "Jatt Sikhs of descent background/lineage"...Jatt is a race, not a "occupation", and we should be proud of it, not "shun" it...

*--------------------------->>
Turley Waalaa Chaudhary

Sukha
Sarabjit Singh Ahluwalia's picture

Totally agree with you brother.Jatts forms the majority of sikh religion, sikh regiment, and they are the most brave people.We should be proud of our traditions including turla. Jatt ne chadiya turla, hath which daang, kihrha maai da laal aake kheh jaawe. I wish our people to shun one thing and that is alcoholism. It is an important Jatt tradition. If there are 2 people one with alcoholism and other without it, we know who will succeed in this cut throat competitive world. Baaki Jatt and completely sufi is hard to imagine.

TurleWaalaChaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/24/2011 - 10:35
Points: 4

true, though "alcohol" does have its place (even within Sikhism, atleast the martial/Jat aspect anyway)...however "alcoholism", or over-reliance on alcohol doesn't.

I guess I can see where it comes from though, all martial races (i.e. highlanders, irish etc...) have a traditional of alcoholism, probably because it was the only thing an old veteran who had killed men in the most horrific of ways, and lived seeing such deaths, could rely on...

*--------------------------->>
Turley Waalaa Chaudhary

TurleWaalaChaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/24/2011 - 10:35
Points: 4

and what kinda celebration actually occurs without alcohol...none!

ek peg/glassy tha kato kat lagni chahi di

*--------------------------->>
Turley Waalaa Chaudhary

To Jatt Sikhs
Sarabjit Singh Ahluwalia's picture

Most Jatts have cut their hair. Most Bhapas-Khatris-Rajputs whatever you want to call them to please yourself, keep their hair.

Who is a Sikh?

The majority Jatts who cut their hair are basically hindus now or the non-Jatt Sikhs that keep their hair.

Scenario:
A class filled with 2 punjabi students in UK and rest white. From the 2 punjabi students, one is a Bhapa(who keeps his hair), other a Jatt(obviously cut hair roda). Professor is teaching about sikhism. She asks who is a sikh. Both punjabi students raise their hand. But the professor says to the Jatt Student, you don't keep the sikh identity and the other punjabi student does. Can you please explain who is the real sikh.

Jatts please explain.

iamsingh
Sarabjit Singh Ahluwalia's picture

turle wala jatt is a caste obssesd.i suggest him to make bhagat dhanna his guru like some chamar made bhagat ravidas there guru and leave sikhi which is good for him.

aman
Sarabjit Singh Ahluwalia's picture

this is a side topic but maharaja ranjit singh was actually a member of the Sansi clan which is separate from the Sahsi matt clan. Sansis are NOT hats and actually stem from a clan of hereditary thieves and robbers.. interesting note however

TurleWaalaChaudhry's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/24/2011 - 10:35
Points: 4

"Most Jatts have cut their hair. Most Bhapas-Khatris-Rajputs whatever you want to call them to please yourself, keep their hair.
Who is a Sikh?
The majority Jatts who cut their hair are basically hindus now or the non-Jatt Sikhs that keep their hair.
Scenario:
A class filled with 2 punjabi students in UK and rest white. From the 2 punjabi students, one is a Bhapa(who keeps his hair), other a Jatt(obviously cut hair roda). Professor is teaching about sikhism. She asks who is a sikh. Both punjabi students raise their hand. But the professor says to the Jatt Student, you don't keep the sikh identity and the other punjabi student does. Can you please explain who is the real sikh.
Jatts please explain."

....YOUR ANSWER: If you think all Sikhs need to keep their hair to believe the the bani of the Gurus, then you are a sick fanatic with no knowledge of how religions and cultures evolve. Many historians would agree that keeping hair was in general a custom of Sardars (i.e. Gujars, Jats, Rajputs, and Ahirs), as their profession with militarial, and keeping hair (esp. beard and moustache) was a sign of rouge masculinity. If Bhape want to keep their hair (so they can claim that they are the "Sardars" which gave their life in military persuits, which a majority didn't btw), and Jats in general have become "modernised" or more integrated in the western culture due to their fore-fathers leaving Punjab, then fair enough.

Amrit was to be taken by those who wanted to become the "Khalsa", i.e. individuals who left their home and property solely for military free-booting and loot. Read Rattan Singh Bhangu's account of how Sardari worked, not all Sardars where amrit-shekeyo Khalse (infact, a very few), most where Chaudhary and Zamindars...lol what bunch of people revolted against the Mughals outside of Punjab? and the answer is...THE SAME BUNCH OF PEOPLE, namely Gujars Jats Ahirs and Rajputs (though many Rajput kigdoms did side with Mughals on plentiful occasions, but thats beyond the point here).

Alot of Sikhs, even in Guru Nanaks era, had cut hair. I will present you with quotes if you really want them.

"turle wala jatt is a caste obssesd.i suggest him to make bhagat dhanna his guru like some chamar made bhagat ravidas there guru and leave sikhi which is good for him."

Isn't it funny how you "caste-less" people are annoyed, by the pride of my ethnicity and my conservatism towards it. I didn't say Guru Gobind Singh wasn't my Guru...I said that Sikhism is totally distorted by people like you who think "ethnic identity" is wrong, because your spine-less ritualistic beliefs and interpretations of religion rids you of your sanity.

"this is a side topic but maharaja ranjit singh was actually a member of the Sansi clan which is separate from the Sahsi matt clan. Sansis are NOT hats and actually stem from a clan of hereditary thieves and robbers.. interesting note however"

Many historians claim he was a Jat. Sadhanwalia Sardars where all "Sansi" Jat, infact according to Professor B. S. Dhillon (1994). History and study of the Jats, you will still find Sansi Jatts in the Gujranwala district of Pakistan. In terms of thieving and robbing, that was the common past-time of many smaller Zamindars, abit like the highlanders of Scotland. Infact, Babbars memoirs often mention being "plundered" by Jats on his way back to Afghanistan via Gujranwala. INFACT even the indirect (and one of the closest living) descendant of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, Sardar Sahib Preminder Singh Sandhawalia published his family tree and mentions his ancestory specifically as Jat. He is the author of Noblemen and Kinsmen History of a Sikh Family, along with a few other publications.

If fanatic Sikh authors want to brainwash public into believing something else, then you know, there isn't much that rational people can do to stop them.

*--------------------------->>
Turley Waalaa Chaudhary

Pages

Extensive Jatt Clans List and Details

A comprehensive list of all Jatt Clans (got) that make part of the Jatt Brotherhood. Originally compiled by HA Rose and now maintained and extended by The JattWorld Community Online.

Latest from the forum

Chaudhry added a latest post to Tatla Thathla clan
Filed under: Jatt Clan History
Read more ...

Chaudhry added a latest post to Pl Listen & comment
Filed under: FreeTalk
Read more ...

TurleWaalaChaudhry added a latest post to The Best Tribe
Filed under: FreeTalk
Read more ...

Latest blog activity

Punia Jatts (by punia_harjeet)
Latest comment by: khan punia

jatt list ! (by jatt di pasand)
Latest comment by: jasbir

seerha (by seerha2)
Latest comment by: Shira ziddi jat

About Jatt Cast (by Dilraj Jatt)
Latest comment by: zaadi

Make a choice

What's the cause of all Human divisions, hatred, conflicts and wars?