![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In recent days, there have been similar, unsourced additions from 219.91.185.159, 203.187.210.90, 123.201.45.65, 219.91.185.119 etc. (I guess this is result of something like a forum discussion). The edits are aimed at proving that Sikh Jatts are similar to Muslims Jatts, because they're of a "purer Scything origin", as compared to the inferior Hindu Jatts.
Unless somebody provides a reliable sources for this claim (a reliable source, not some Khalistani or Pakistani ethnoreligious supremacist propaganda site), such edits will be reverted.
Note should be taken of the fact that the great caste of Khatri (the merchants) have nothing to do with the Kshatriya (warrior and kings). A jat-Sikh (kshatriya) has no link to Khatri-Sikh (merchant). Tarsem Singh Toor
Here are some quotes from
reliable sources such as published books:
Rosen, Stephen Peter (1996). Societies and Military Power: India and Its Armies. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. p. 46. ISBN 978-0801432101. OCLC 34357943.:
“ | Striking social similarities among Hindu, Muslim, and Sikh Jats have been observed. | ” |
Upadhyay, H. C. (1991). Modernization and Rural Development. New Delhi: Anmol Publications. p. 236. OCLC 25732189.:
“ | There is great unity in the behaviour pattern of a Punjabi Sikh "jatt", a Haryana or UP Hindu "jar" and Punjabi Pakistani Muslim "jatt". | ” |
Munshi, K. M. (2007) [1942]. Akhand Hindustan. Read Books. p. 54. ISBN 1406750670. OCLC 6078616.:
“ | The Jat Hindu, the Jat Sikh, and the Jat Muslim in the Punjab were more allied to one another than the Jat Hindu of the Punjab and the Tamil Hindu of Madras. | ” |
In fact, many books state exactly opposite of what the IPs are adding: Hindu and Sikh Jatt societies are somewhat more similar, compared to the Muslim ones. For example:
Levinson, David (1996). Encyclopedia of World Cultures. Boston, Massachusetts: G.K. Hall & Co. p. 112. ISBN 0816118086. OCLC 22492614.:
“ | While among Muslim Jat the practice of exchange marriage takes place at various levels of lineage organization, among Hindu and Sikh Jat no such exchange... | ” |
utcursch | talk 15:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
The above e.g just states one diference between Jatt Sikh & Jatt Muslims and that is bcoz of different religion that they follow not bcoz of Punjabi Jatt culture.... What about the common clan names, culture, language that Punajbi Jatts(Sikhs & Muslims) share.... Jatts & Jaats can never be the same...they are totaly different in all the ways....below are few difference between Punjabi Jatt & Jaats of Haryana, UP & Rajasthan
Jatts are from Punjab & Jaats from Haryana, UP, Rajasthan Jatt Mother Tongue is Punjabi & Jaats Mother Tongue is Haryanvi and Hindi. Jatt Cuisine is Punjabi Khana & Jaats cusine is ...(i have no idea on this) Jatt is Bhangra lover & Jaats is Dham lover. Jatt traditional costumes and outfts are totally different from Jaats. Jatt is Whiskey lover & Jaat is Hookah lover Jatts have diff clan names from Jaats. Jatts are mostly meat eaters & Jaats are mostly vegetarians the list is endless....what do you have to say on above points 219.91.185.85 ( talk) 10:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
That was just an example on the general habbits and difference between jatts and jaat...jatts (being sikhs) do noy smoke hookah which is a tradition in jaat panchayats and elders...any ways you wont understand this 123.201.45.81 ( talk) 14:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
No its not claim of being a superior race that anyway is decided by history....but so clear distinctions as Language, culture, costumes...this thing go back thousands of years (even if you leave religion out of it)how can one ignore that....that is food for thought....isn't it utcursh..binda 219.91.185.34 ( talk) 15:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Jatt sikh is a shudra according to kaka kalekar 1952 act . In sikhism all sikhs are kshtriye but they donot allowed to use jat , khatri like identities if they use this identites then they are using hindu varna system and according to that jat sikh is shudra Harman0123 ( talk) 05:31, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Who is a sikh? Sikh is not a jat, khatri , rajput , ramgarhiya . Sikh is a relegion and everyone who become sikh have to leave thete caste like jat , khatri , rajput , ramgarhiya if they donot leave that caste , race , ethinitcy then they have consider according to varna system . According to varna system jatt sikh is a shudra class according to kaka kalekar 1952 act jat sikh is shudra and jat sikh is the ilgetitmate son of Rajput male and jat women . There are many types of jatt sikh like darbari jatt , shahjahani jatts of raja sansi , akbar jatts mihir mitha dhaliwal jatt gaves 150 families jatt women to akbar to get the free land from akbat . Those jatts are known as akbari jatts . These petition is valid under 1936 punjab hoshiarpur high court Harman0123 ( talk) 05:36, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
and what vandalism are you talking about.....is showing truth vandalism....and here iam writing about my people..this is what iam ... 123.201.45.110 ( talk) 15:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
For me, Misterconginialtastical hit the nail on the head regarding the Sudra reference (even though I myself reinstated it previously when it was removed as an "unrelaiable" source): this article is about Jatt Sikh, therefore by definition it is not about those Jats who are of, or originate from, a Hindu caste system. The reference to Sudra is valid for a wider survey of Jat people, but not for this article. -- Timberframe ( talk) 22:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree regarding Rajput. The "History" section is a mess, it has grown ad hoc and lacks a clear objective. Stepping back further, I'm not sure what the article as a whole is trying to say: we already have an article on Jat people in general, so I'd expect this article to expand on various aspects of the Sikh Jat community which characterise it or differentiate it from the general Jat population, now and in the past: faith (obviously), social traditions, occupations, historical origins. It doesn't seem to do this at all. -- Timberframe ( talk) 08:48, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Sikh-history the caste system im sorry to say isnt in sikhism but hinduism so they can not be termed as anything ,Jats are a ethnic group in the punjab region,these are the ones who converted to sikhism and forgot any caste creed or colour,but there influence in the sikh community is big as they do make up the majority of sikhs thats why there is a Jatt-sikh article i really think you(Sikh-history) are stepping over the mark this time.Pleas see Sense Regards Information-Line ( talk) 10:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Jatt sikhs beleive in caste system if they call themselev jat then it means they beleive in hindu caste system . Jat is not ethnitcity . In indian government caste list jat and jatt sikh is a caste who comes under obc in central government list . Sikhs donot have caste but jatt sikh have caste . Jatt sikh comes under shudra varna because they are the descand of the hindu jats . If they remove there identity of jat and become sikh then they are varna less . But they beleive in caste and call themselev jatt sikh accoriding to punjab high court 1936 jat and jat sikh come under shudra varna . Kaka kalekar 1952 act also describe jat and jatt sikh under shudra varna Harman0123 ( talk) 05:45, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
I have added information that is important for the article but it may need a little cleaning up as for the references link to the Sikhiwiki a Sikh encyclopedia,and i hope that you can use this information in the article during your major revamp of the article as it shows why jatt sikhs were renouned.Regards Information-Line ( talk) 11:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
On page 155
As has already been explained the virtues of the Jats are identical with those of the Sikhs, but the latter posses in a higher degree the ardent military spirit which had its origin in the warlike precepts of Govind Singh.
I think rather than quotes, what we do is make a statement eg Jatt Sikhs according to Barstow were very good soldiers, and due to the influence of Sikhism possesed more of a martial quality than their other non-Sikh Jat brethern or something like that.
Barstow also talks about Khatris, Mazbhis, Tarkhans etc etc being very good soldiers in the same manner, so we need a summary of what he is saying.
What do you think? Thanks -- Sikh-history ( talk) 16:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I think this section is key and will the article and also show why their need s to be a separate article for Jatt Sikhs rather than just Jatts. We need to find more sources and more headings. I will have a look. Thanks -- Sikh-history ( talk) 20:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I will give 3 days to find sources that concur that there were Buddist and Pagan Jatts in Panjab in the 17th and 18th Century. If none are presented, I will kill these two points. Thanks -- Sikh-history ( talk) 06:21, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry but Buddhism was in the punjab at the time and still is although it may be a minority,you may kill the pagan part i just thought if anybody had seen it they may want to give references ,but i am still working on a reference for Buddhist jatts so please do not remove it and still ,and also how can you prove muslim jatts became sikhs if you do not find any sources i will also kill that point within 3 days :) Information-Line ( talk) 15:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC) L
On over zealous tagging of personalities. Whoops-- Sikh-History 18:08, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
There must have been an influence of Jatts or Jat culture on Sikhism not only just religion on Jatts ?
Jatts are innate fighters, to suggest that Bhappe are a martial bunch too is laughable and its putting down Jats en masse Analtap ( talk) 21:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Of course there are bhappe who like to see themselves as jats and even call themselves jats, its quite obvious after a while who they are ! Analtap ( talk) 21:20, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVt8eSD7FEk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Analtap ( talk • contribs) 21:22, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Why do the Bhappe have anything to do with the Jat-Sikh article :S , most khatris i meet never say they are Jatt ,Khatris are the Kshatriya varna of Hinduism but i would have to agree that they werent renound warriors ,but Sikhisms influence of a martial type came from the opression it suffered by the Mughals and had to take up arms eventually not because Jatts wanted to make an army ,you have to remember by insulting the Sikh Bhappe it is just like insulting our Guru's ,please refrain from the obsession with Khatris.
They have also spread the word of Sikhism quite far they make up the Majority of sikhs in Afghanistan ,Kabul .
ਖ਼ਾਲਿਸਤਾਨ Information-Line talk 21:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
You are joking, right ? Analtap ( talk) 02:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Info-line, most of the sikhs in Kabul are refugees from 1947, but now most have fled the wrath of the Taliban in recent years despite NATO occupation and most have moved back to India, my point is that many bhappe (not a racist term) do actually pretend to be jatt or many internet sites if you get my drift Analtap ( talk) 02:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Most Sikhs and Hindus converted to Islam during the defeat of all the Gurus, and again in Partition there was a huge conversion in the middle part of the last century...I will find sources to find them too —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.59.171 ( talk) 16:44, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
How is Sikhs being brave in general a contradiction? Please STOP this POV NOW. The page is about Jat SIKHS (emphasis SIKH). What is it that makes a Jatt Sikh different from a Jat. Otherwise there is no need to have this page, as many editors have been trying to delete it. The same applies to Rajput Sikhs, Julaha Sikh (Ramdasia), Mazbhi Sikh (Chamar/Churah Sikh), Ramgarhia (Tarkhan) etc etc. The list goes on. The only reason to create these pages is to highlight what makes the Sikh element make these people different. Major Barstow goes into this in some detail (as do other books). I suggest you read them. Thanks -- Sikh-History 21:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I think we should have a realistic look at the historical relationship between jatt and bhappeya?
Bhappe traits and thier obsession with paise
Any contributions based on actual observations would be greatly appreciated ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heliosphere ( talk • contribs) 20:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Of Course not. But for some reason or other everyone seems to be dying to be included in Jatt category. All the Sikhs are not jatts, look at Sodhi stub and check it's editors' unwarranted yet relentless attempts to included in jatt class Jon Ascton (talk)
Sorry Singhboi, you refuse to reply to my warnings and tehrefore I have no option but to ask for your block. I suspect you are also the Vandal IP which has been blocked. Thanks -- Sikh-History 17:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
According to both references,
(1-The transformation of Sikh society - Page 92 by Ethne K. Marenco - The gazetteer also describes the relation of the Jat Sikhs to the Jat Hindus ...to 2019 in 1911 is attributed to the conversion of Jat Hindus to Sikhism. ...,)
(2->Social philosophy and social transformation of Sikhs by R. N. Singh (Ph. D.) Page 130 - The decrease of Jat Hindus from 16843 in 1881 to 2019 in 1911 is attributed to the conversion of Jat Hindus to Sikhism. ...)
Jat-sikhs converted from Jat-Hindus and no ref. of conversion from Jat-muslims to Jat-sikhs,,and moreover mostly Jat-sikhs were in east punjab and were hindu converts,,and Jat-sikhs of west-punjab were muslim converts...moreover Jat-muslims were also converted from Jat-hindus..
anyway...with due respect,if anyone find anything wrong in my minor edit,,please explain and then make your correction..
Thanks !
-- Last Emperor ( talk) 08:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
References require correct ISBN numbers as well as page numbers. Thanks-- Sikh-History 19:18, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
There really is nothing to discuss. All information is solidly cited and SikhHistory wants it gone for ego reasons, as he has stated unequivocally. He wants to maintain an atmosphere of shoddiness to the information by putting "citation needed" tags to statements already solidly backed up by reliable academic sources (peer-reviewed journals, about as academic as you can get).
He would much prefer sources in book format, which anyone, even non-experts can write (as opposed to PRJs, which only experts in the field can write and are peer-reviewed by experts, hence "peer-reviewed journal"), and which are published with presses with ISBNs and all (which he demands continuously, then considers it a personal attack when I inform him repeatedly that online PRJs don't have ISBNs, and say that he seems unfamiliar with them.) I added the Bhachu book source so that he would simply get off my back, though now he's saying he can't find the info, in large print as it is. 3swordz ( talk) 09:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I reverted the previous edit without realizing that there was an edit war in progress. Apologies. But it does seem unnecessary to say that the Jat Muslims were descendants of Jat Hindus. That is both fairly obvious as well as stated in the linked article. Finally, the clarification is added in a para that seems to summarize a single source and we would need to verify that the source actually presents the information in the same way and in the same context before inclusion. -- rgpk ( comment) 16:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
The section was categorically talking about the lineage of Jat Sikhs, I have elaborated that and find no reason for removing it unless one has an agenda to push here. Winston786 ( talk) 09:37, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
User:Sikh-history made an unsourced addition in the lineage section here and reveretd my sourced edit here, only to push his POV. Winston786 ( talk) 09:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
I have added the FACT tag. Winston786 ( talk) 11:26, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Exactly element of WP:GAME is going on here on your part, you seem to have an anti-Hindu mindset and are hence reverting the factual editions. Winston786 ( talk) 12:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
I have an objection with several opinions being expressed within the article, of poor (or absolutely non) citation. The Jatt Sikh article is regarding an ethno-religious group i.e. an ethnicity which is traditionally Sikh due to their ancestory. Therefore there should be no room for quoting from sectarian orthodox "Sikh" sources, which are bound to have religious bias (mainly due to the reason that orthodox sikh ideology does not support the preservation of ethnic or tribal identity, which is often mistaken by such orthodox sikhs as participating in the practice of "the caste system". I have already sent SH a message regarding this on his talk page.
It is for the same reason, a very bad idea to associate this with "WikiProject Sikhism". Please keep this article non-sectarian, before it is polluted with politically and religiously motivated bias.
For example:
"(something encouraged and taught by Guru Angad[21][22] to the Sikh people)" is uneccessary, because
pehlwani was a well recognised rural hobby in the Mughal era, which i'd presume many rural would practice regardless of religion or ethnicity (providing they had the dietary wealth).
"Dr. Irfan Habib, Professor Emeritus, Aligarh Muslim University, argues that Sikhism did a lot to uplift[11] the status of Jatts in general."
I think 'Sikhism' in this quote should be renamed to the 'Khalsa movement' or uprising. Sikhism alone is just a set of religious teachings (and like all other teachings, does no economic or social good to anybody), it was the militarized Sikh/Khalsa movement which allowed Sikh Sardars to establish themselves. (More on this from a book called "Chiefs and Families of Note in the Punjab" by Lepel Henry Griffin, which talks about the rise of the Misls specifically).
I have made several modifications to the article providing original quality sources (unlike the poor quality quotes from professors making opinions in a sectarian sikh website without citing any sources). Hope you like the edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.132.217 ( talk) 06:33, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
I did not use a single warning template on your talk page. FYI, that long explanation about the lack of validity for your sources was my own. And besides, most sources are not from historians but quotes from the work of recruiters of the "Sikh Regiment" themselves, i.e. Col. Falcon, which you do not seem to like, possibly because of your sectarian views, which should not be imposed on the "Jat Sikh" article, as most "Jats" are not Orthodox Sikhs like yourself, but still refer to themselves at Jat Sikhs. I believe Wikipedia should re-access your role in acting as an Admin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.132.217 ( talk) 18:10, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
http://worldsikhnews.com/13%20August%202008/The%20Malaise%20of%20Jat%20Consciousness.htm The website is clearly related to a fanatic sikh ideology, as is obvious with the overwhelming bias in the articles, especially against the BJP party, and articles in favour for the internationally banned terrorist organisation group "BKI" (or babbar khalsa international). The article itself does not contain a single citation, and for all we can see, the quote which he uses (and you site in this article) of Prof. K Singh could be made up, as there is no citation or explanation of the source of it from the article. Overall, I do not have any objection to Sikh related sources, its just when all these articles from 'fanatic' or extremist sikh organisations and publishers come in which is worrying and thus I use the term "polluting".
And in terms off Captain Falcons work, you haven't provided any specific quotations, hence why I added them (and you later deleted them). My original final edit is available here: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Jatt_Sikh&diff=467895790&oldid=467716532, on the left hand side, before Sikh-history removed them. As you can see, almost everything has been quoted.
And besides the point of me actually specifically quoting Captain Falcon was not for his historical interpretation, but to show how Jat Sikhs of a particular background where actually favoured in recruitment within the Sikh-regiment, hence why I included it as a blockquote: "still the Jat must ever be the main source for recruits, as he far and away outnumbers the other people, and possesses as a class qualities which no other people can claim. If, too, a Sikh belonging to a good Sikh tehsil (sub-district), does not give the name of a well known Jat Sikh tribe (clan) as his, he is pretty sure not to be a Jat…" R. W. Falcon, Handbook on Sikhs for Regimental Officers (Allahabad: Pioneer Press, 1896)
[1].
I also felt the need to mention the cultural and traditional titles exclusive to Jatt Sikhs in East Punjab, as this is still very evidently a part of today's Punjabi culture, and this too Sikh-history deleted, the title Sardar has been used by Jat land-owners in Punjab ever since the misl period:-
"Jatt Sikhs are referred to as Zamindars in Punjab, often titled Sardar. [2]
I would like to ask Sikh-history what objection he has for the above mentioned citations which he deleted?
86.17.132.217 ( talk) 06:21, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
References
Who become a sikh is no longer have their different identity . According to sikh every sikh have same same identity which is khalsa . They join sikh ethnicity so there is no thing like jatt sikh . If they beleive in jatt caste then they are not true sikhs Harman0123 ( talk) 05:13, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Why is Bhagat Singh's name mentioned here, when he is generally known to be an atheist and he even self-identified as one, authoring an essay Why i am an atheist? before his death? The fellow who claims otherwise is a right-wing Sikh named Trilochan Singh who is obviously not a reliable source on this matter, and even supposing he was, cannot override Bhagat Singh's self-identification. Jatt Sikh is not a separate ethnicity, but a Sikh sub-group. While his name can be mentioned in the Jatt article, it shouldn't be mentioned here. As such, i propose that his name be removed from this article. Joyson Prabhu Holla at me! 10:51, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Why is this article entitled "Jatt Sikh" rather than "Jat Sikh". Unless there is something I am missing, the latter is correct as WP:COMMONNAME applies. The same goes for the spelling through the article, which in any event is inconsistent. - Sitush ( talk) 18:49, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
What is the logical connection between jat and jatt?
Please do not quote bs nijjar ! Logicpl ( talk) 10:36, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 ( talk) 16:20, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Jatt Sikh →
Jat Sikh – Move as per
WP:COMMONNAME. For the same reason,
Jatt people was moved to
Jat people. Most modern and British era sources use the term "Jat Sikh" instead of "Jatt Sikh". --Relisted.
Armbrust
The Homunculus 13:08, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Yoonadue (
talk)
13:26, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Jat Sikh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:20, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Recently a para has been added by Hind ji here supported by this source. Since, the source talks about "Jat" but not this specific ethno-religious sub-group, I believe this content is better suited in the Jat people article. Suggestions @ Sitush, Мастер Шторм, and Heba Aisha:. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 10:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
According to sikhism all the sikh have ancestory is khalsa . Every sikh have identity of khalsa . All sikhs have same identity . Sikhs donot have varities in them . Those who differntiate in sikhism are not true sikhs. Its against sikhism delete this page . Sikhism reject the different identity of people according to sikhism all the sikhs have same identity of khalsa who donot beleive in khalsa is not a sikh. Harman0123 ( talk) 05:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
In sikhism amritdhari sikh donot have any caste , race , ethnicity . There only identity is sikh , khalsa is their caste , race , ethinicity. Jatt sikh claim them to raise their social status . He was a jatt but when he become a amritdhari sikh all the identity ethnicity was change to sikh and they becoma khalsa sikh Harman0123 ( talk) 05:17, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is the page of jatt sikh why are you adding the information muslim jat and hindu jat. Jat sikh only contribute in sikh regiment . Hindu jat contribute in many regiment . But why are you mentioning the information of hindu jat in sikh jats . Remove the information there is no source which prove jat sikh contribute in rajputana rifles. Jat contribute in rajputana rifles but not jat sikh. First undertsand both are same but by relegion they both are different . 2402:3A80:1FD4:F946:CAB2:E826:154C:68F3 ( talk) 03:25, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
You are adding the information that ancient sources prive jat is kshtriya . Their is no authentic souces which prove jat as kshtriya . Kaka kalekar act 1952 and punjab lahore highcourt 1936 proves after the proper study that jat and jatt sikh is comes under shudra varna . Jat sikh are under obc in central list of government pls remove that jat is kshtriya . One side you are mentioning sikhs donot beleive in caste another side you are mentioning jat sikh according to hindu varna what is this? If you are mentioning jat as kshtriya according to hindu varna system then add 1936 punjab lahore high court prove jat and jatt sikh as shudra and kaka kalekar act 1952 prove all jat as shudra. Sources - 1936 lahore high court 551 which proves jat and jatt sikh shudra Second source kaka kalekar act 1952 2402:3A80:1FD4:F946:CAB2:E826:154C:68F3 ( talk) 03:51, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
DB-g7
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Rajputt Singh ( talk) 19:11, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the List of Clans to include the clan 'Sahota'
'Sahota' is also a Jat Sikh clan, please see the below wikipedia links which cross reference the sources:
Thank you. 80.7.52.111 ( talk) 16:34, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
@ Sitush: Is the 'Jat Sikh' an ethno-religioous group similar to the Jewish people for example? Used in the lede sentence, we need this to be widely sourced. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 11:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In recent days, there have been similar, unsourced additions from 219.91.185.159, 203.187.210.90, 123.201.45.65, 219.91.185.119 etc. (I guess this is result of something like a forum discussion). The edits are aimed at proving that Sikh Jatts are similar to Muslims Jatts, because they're of a "purer Scything origin", as compared to the inferior Hindu Jatts.
Unless somebody provides a reliable sources for this claim (a reliable source, not some Khalistani or Pakistani ethnoreligious supremacist propaganda site), such edits will be reverted.
Note should be taken of the fact that the great caste of Khatri (the merchants) have nothing to do with the Kshatriya (warrior and kings). A jat-Sikh (kshatriya) has no link to Khatri-Sikh (merchant). Tarsem Singh Toor
Here are some quotes from
reliable sources such as published books:
Rosen, Stephen Peter (1996). Societies and Military Power: India and Its Armies. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. p. 46. ISBN 978-0801432101. OCLC 34357943.:
“ | Striking social similarities among Hindu, Muslim, and Sikh Jats have been observed. | ” |
Upadhyay, H. C. (1991). Modernization and Rural Development. New Delhi: Anmol Publications. p. 236. OCLC 25732189.:
“ | There is great unity in the behaviour pattern of a Punjabi Sikh "jatt", a Haryana or UP Hindu "jar" and Punjabi Pakistani Muslim "jatt". | ” |
Munshi, K. M. (2007) [1942]. Akhand Hindustan. Read Books. p. 54. ISBN 1406750670. OCLC 6078616.:
“ | The Jat Hindu, the Jat Sikh, and the Jat Muslim in the Punjab were more allied to one another than the Jat Hindu of the Punjab and the Tamil Hindu of Madras. | ” |
In fact, many books state exactly opposite of what the IPs are adding: Hindu and Sikh Jatt societies are somewhat more similar, compared to the Muslim ones. For example:
Levinson, David (1996). Encyclopedia of World Cultures. Boston, Massachusetts: G.K. Hall & Co. p. 112. ISBN 0816118086. OCLC 22492614.:
“ | While among Muslim Jat the practice of exchange marriage takes place at various levels of lineage organization, among Hindu and Sikh Jat no such exchange... | ” |
utcursch | talk 15:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
The above e.g just states one diference between Jatt Sikh & Jatt Muslims and that is bcoz of different religion that they follow not bcoz of Punjabi Jatt culture.... What about the common clan names, culture, language that Punajbi Jatts(Sikhs & Muslims) share.... Jatts & Jaats can never be the same...they are totaly different in all the ways....below are few difference between Punjabi Jatt & Jaats of Haryana, UP & Rajasthan
Jatts are from Punjab & Jaats from Haryana, UP, Rajasthan Jatt Mother Tongue is Punjabi & Jaats Mother Tongue is Haryanvi and Hindi. Jatt Cuisine is Punjabi Khana & Jaats cusine is ...(i have no idea on this) Jatt is Bhangra lover & Jaats is Dham lover. Jatt traditional costumes and outfts are totally different from Jaats. Jatt is Whiskey lover & Jaat is Hookah lover Jatts have diff clan names from Jaats. Jatts are mostly meat eaters & Jaats are mostly vegetarians the list is endless....what do you have to say on above points 219.91.185.85 ( talk) 10:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
That was just an example on the general habbits and difference between jatts and jaat...jatts (being sikhs) do noy smoke hookah which is a tradition in jaat panchayats and elders...any ways you wont understand this 123.201.45.81 ( talk) 14:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
No its not claim of being a superior race that anyway is decided by history....but so clear distinctions as Language, culture, costumes...this thing go back thousands of years (even if you leave religion out of it)how can one ignore that....that is food for thought....isn't it utcursh..binda 219.91.185.34 ( talk) 15:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Jatt sikh is a shudra according to kaka kalekar 1952 act . In sikhism all sikhs are kshtriye but they donot allowed to use jat , khatri like identities if they use this identites then they are using hindu varna system and according to that jat sikh is shudra Harman0123 ( talk) 05:31, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Who is a sikh? Sikh is not a jat, khatri , rajput , ramgarhiya . Sikh is a relegion and everyone who become sikh have to leave thete caste like jat , khatri , rajput , ramgarhiya if they donot leave that caste , race , ethinitcy then they have consider according to varna system . According to varna system jatt sikh is a shudra class according to kaka kalekar 1952 act jat sikh is shudra and jat sikh is the ilgetitmate son of Rajput male and jat women . There are many types of jatt sikh like darbari jatt , shahjahani jatts of raja sansi , akbar jatts mihir mitha dhaliwal jatt gaves 150 families jatt women to akbar to get the free land from akbat . Those jatts are known as akbari jatts . These petition is valid under 1936 punjab hoshiarpur high court Harman0123 ( talk) 05:36, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
and what vandalism are you talking about.....is showing truth vandalism....and here iam writing about my people..this is what iam ... 123.201.45.110 ( talk) 15:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
For me, Misterconginialtastical hit the nail on the head regarding the Sudra reference (even though I myself reinstated it previously when it was removed as an "unrelaiable" source): this article is about Jatt Sikh, therefore by definition it is not about those Jats who are of, or originate from, a Hindu caste system. The reference to Sudra is valid for a wider survey of Jat people, but not for this article. -- Timberframe ( talk) 22:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree regarding Rajput. The "History" section is a mess, it has grown ad hoc and lacks a clear objective. Stepping back further, I'm not sure what the article as a whole is trying to say: we already have an article on Jat people in general, so I'd expect this article to expand on various aspects of the Sikh Jat community which characterise it or differentiate it from the general Jat population, now and in the past: faith (obviously), social traditions, occupations, historical origins. It doesn't seem to do this at all. -- Timberframe ( talk) 08:48, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Sikh-history the caste system im sorry to say isnt in sikhism but hinduism so they can not be termed as anything ,Jats are a ethnic group in the punjab region,these are the ones who converted to sikhism and forgot any caste creed or colour,but there influence in the sikh community is big as they do make up the majority of sikhs thats why there is a Jatt-sikh article i really think you(Sikh-history) are stepping over the mark this time.Pleas see Sense Regards Information-Line ( talk) 10:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Jatt sikhs beleive in caste system if they call themselev jat then it means they beleive in hindu caste system . Jat is not ethnitcity . In indian government caste list jat and jatt sikh is a caste who comes under obc in central government list . Sikhs donot have caste but jatt sikh have caste . Jatt sikh comes under shudra varna because they are the descand of the hindu jats . If they remove there identity of jat and become sikh then they are varna less . But they beleive in caste and call themselev jatt sikh accoriding to punjab high court 1936 jat and jat sikh come under shudra varna . Kaka kalekar 1952 act also describe jat and jatt sikh under shudra varna Harman0123 ( talk) 05:45, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
I have added information that is important for the article but it may need a little cleaning up as for the references link to the Sikhiwiki a Sikh encyclopedia,and i hope that you can use this information in the article during your major revamp of the article as it shows why jatt sikhs were renouned.Regards Information-Line ( talk) 11:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
On page 155
As has already been explained the virtues of the Jats are identical with those of the Sikhs, but the latter posses in a higher degree the ardent military spirit which had its origin in the warlike precepts of Govind Singh.
I think rather than quotes, what we do is make a statement eg Jatt Sikhs according to Barstow were very good soldiers, and due to the influence of Sikhism possesed more of a martial quality than their other non-Sikh Jat brethern or something like that.
Barstow also talks about Khatris, Mazbhis, Tarkhans etc etc being very good soldiers in the same manner, so we need a summary of what he is saying.
What do you think? Thanks -- Sikh-history ( talk) 16:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I think this section is key and will the article and also show why their need s to be a separate article for Jatt Sikhs rather than just Jatts. We need to find more sources and more headings. I will have a look. Thanks -- Sikh-history ( talk) 20:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I will give 3 days to find sources that concur that there were Buddist and Pagan Jatts in Panjab in the 17th and 18th Century. If none are presented, I will kill these two points. Thanks -- Sikh-history ( talk) 06:21, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry but Buddhism was in the punjab at the time and still is although it may be a minority,you may kill the pagan part i just thought if anybody had seen it they may want to give references ,but i am still working on a reference for Buddhist jatts so please do not remove it and still ,and also how can you prove muslim jatts became sikhs if you do not find any sources i will also kill that point within 3 days :) Information-Line ( talk) 15:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC) L
On over zealous tagging of personalities. Whoops-- Sikh-History 18:08, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
There must have been an influence of Jatts or Jat culture on Sikhism not only just religion on Jatts ?
Jatts are innate fighters, to suggest that Bhappe are a martial bunch too is laughable and its putting down Jats en masse Analtap ( talk) 21:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Of course there are bhappe who like to see themselves as jats and even call themselves jats, its quite obvious after a while who they are ! Analtap ( talk) 21:20, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVt8eSD7FEk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Analtap ( talk • contribs) 21:22, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Why do the Bhappe have anything to do with the Jat-Sikh article :S , most khatris i meet never say they are Jatt ,Khatris are the Kshatriya varna of Hinduism but i would have to agree that they werent renound warriors ,but Sikhisms influence of a martial type came from the opression it suffered by the Mughals and had to take up arms eventually not because Jatts wanted to make an army ,you have to remember by insulting the Sikh Bhappe it is just like insulting our Guru's ,please refrain from the obsession with Khatris.
They have also spread the word of Sikhism quite far they make up the Majority of sikhs in Afghanistan ,Kabul .
ਖ਼ਾਲਿਸਤਾਨ Information-Line talk 21:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
You are joking, right ? Analtap ( talk) 02:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Info-line, most of the sikhs in Kabul are refugees from 1947, but now most have fled the wrath of the Taliban in recent years despite NATO occupation and most have moved back to India, my point is that many bhappe (not a racist term) do actually pretend to be jatt or many internet sites if you get my drift Analtap ( talk) 02:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Most Sikhs and Hindus converted to Islam during the defeat of all the Gurus, and again in Partition there was a huge conversion in the middle part of the last century...I will find sources to find them too —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.59.171 ( talk) 16:44, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
How is Sikhs being brave in general a contradiction? Please STOP this POV NOW. The page is about Jat SIKHS (emphasis SIKH). What is it that makes a Jatt Sikh different from a Jat. Otherwise there is no need to have this page, as many editors have been trying to delete it. The same applies to Rajput Sikhs, Julaha Sikh (Ramdasia), Mazbhi Sikh (Chamar/Churah Sikh), Ramgarhia (Tarkhan) etc etc. The list goes on. The only reason to create these pages is to highlight what makes the Sikh element make these people different. Major Barstow goes into this in some detail (as do other books). I suggest you read them. Thanks -- Sikh-History 21:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I think we should have a realistic look at the historical relationship between jatt and bhappeya?
Bhappe traits and thier obsession with paise
Any contributions based on actual observations would be greatly appreciated ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heliosphere ( talk • contribs) 20:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Of Course not. But for some reason or other everyone seems to be dying to be included in Jatt category. All the Sikhs are not jatts, look at Sodhi stub and check it's editors' unwarranted yet relentless attempts to included in jatt class Jon Ascton (talk)
Sorry Singhboi, you refuse to reply to my warnings and tehrefore I have no option but to ask for your block. I suspect you are also the Vandal IP which has been blocked. Thanks -- Sikh-History 17:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
According to both references,
(1-The transformation of Sikh society - Page 92 by Ethne K. Marenco - The gazetteer also describes the relation of the Jat Sikhs to the Jat Hindus ...to 2019 in 1911 is attributed to the conversion of Jat Hindus to Sikhism. ...,)
(2->Social philosophy and social transformation of Sikhs by R. N. Singh (Ph. D.) Page 130 - The decrease of Jat Hindus from 16843 in 1881 to 2019 in 1911 is attributed to the conversion of Jat Hindus to Sikhism. ...)
Jat-sikhs converted from Jat-Hindus and no ref. of conversion from Jat-muslims to Jat-sikhs,,and moreover mostly Jat-sikhs were in east punjab and were hindu converts,,and Jat-sikhs of west-punjab were muslim converts...moreover Jat-muslims were also converted from Jat-hindus..
anyway...with due respect,if anyone find anything wrong in my minor edit,,please explain and then make your correction..
Thanks !
-- Last Emperor ( talk) 08:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
References require correct ISBN numbers as well as page numbers. Thanks-- Sikh-History 19:18, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
There really is nothing to discuss. All information is solidly cited and SikhHistory wants it gone for ego reasons, as he has stated unequivocally. He wants to maintain an atmosphere of shoddiness to the information by putting "citation needed" tags to statements already solidly backed up by reliable academic sources (peer-reviewed journals, about as academic as you can get).
He would much prefer sources in book format, which anyone, even non-experts can write (as opposed to PRJs, which only experts in the field can write and are peer-reviewed by experts, hence "peer-reviewed journal"), and which are published with presses with ISBNs and all (which he demands continuously, then considers it a personal attack when I inform him repeatedly that online PRJs don't have ISBNs, and say that he seems unfamiliar with them.) I added the Bhachu book source so that he would simply get off my back, though now he's saying he can't find the info, in large print as it is. 3swordz ( talk) 09:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I reverted the previous edit without realizing that there was an edit war in progress. Apologies. But it does seem unnecessary to say that the Jat Muslims were descendants of Jat Hindus. That is both fairly obvious as well as stated in the linked article. Finally, the clarification is added in a para that seems to summarize a single source and we would need to verify that the source actually presents the information in the same way and in the same context before inclusion. -- rgpk ( comment) 16:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
The section was categorically talking about the lineage of Jat Sikhs, I have elaborated that and find no reason for removing it unless one has an agenda to push here. Winston786 ( talk) 09:37, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
User:Sikh-history made an unsourced addition in the lineage section here and reveretd my sourced edit here, only to push his POV. Winston786 ( talk) 09:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
I have added the FACT tag. Winston786 ( talk) 11:26, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Exactly element of WP:GAME is going on here on your part, you seem to have an anti-Hindu mindset and are hence reverting the factual editions. Winston786 ( talk) 12:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
I have an objection with several opinions being expressed within the article, of poor (or absolutely non) citation. The Jatt Sikh article is regarding an ethno-religious group i.e. an ethnicity which is traditionally Sikh due to their ancestory. Therefore there should be no room for quoting from sectarian orthodox "Sikh" sources, which are bound to have religious bias (mainly due to the reason that orthodox sikh ideology does not support the preservation of ethnic or tribal identity, which is often mistaken by such orthodox sikhs as participating in the practice of "the caste system". I have already sent SH a message regarding this on his talk page.
It is for the same reason, a very bad idea to associate this with "WikiProject Sikhism". Please keep this article non-sectarian, before it is polluted with politically and religiously motivated bias.
For example:
"(something encouraged and taught by Guru Angad[21][22] to the Sikh people)" is uneccessary, because
pehlwani was a well recognised rural hobby in the Mughal era, which i'd presume many rural would practice regardless of religion or ethnicity (providing they had the dietary wealth).
"Dr. Irfan Habib, Professor Emeritus, Aligarh Muslim University, argues that Sikhism did a lot to uplift[11] the status of Jatts in general."
I think 'Sikhism' in this quote should be renamed to the 'Khalsa movement' or uprising. Sikhism alone is just a set of religious teachings (and like all other teachings, does no economic or social good to anybody), it was the militarized Sikh/Khalsa movement which allowed Sikh Sardars to establish themselves. (More on this from a book called "Chiefs and Families of Note in the Punjab" by Lepel Henry Griffin, which talks about the rise of the Misls specifically).
I have made several modifications to the article providing original quality sources (unlike the poor quality quotes from professors making opinions in a sectarian sikh website without citing any sources). Hope you like the edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.132.217 ( talk) 06:33, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
I did not use a single warning template on your talk page. FYI, that long explanation about the lack of validity for your sources was my own. And besides, most sources are not from historians but quotes from the work of recruiters of the "Sikh Regiment" themselves, i.e. Col. Falcon, which you do not seem to like, possibly because of your sectarian views, which should not be imposed on the "Jat Sikh" article, as most "Jats" are not Orthodox Sikhs like yourself, but still refer to themselves at Jat Sikhs. I believe Wikipedia should re-access your role in acting as an Admin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.132.217 ( talk) 18:10, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
http://worldsikhnews.com/13%20August%202008/The%20Malaise%20of%20Jat%20Consciousness.htm The website is clearly related to a fanatic sikh ideology, as is obvious with the overwhelming bias in the articles, especially against the BJP party, and articles in favour for the internationally banned terrorist organisation group "BKI" (or babbar khalsa international). The article itself does not contain a single citation, and for all we can see, the quote which he uses (and you site in this article) of Prof. K Singh could be made up, as there is no citation or explanation of the source of it from the article. Overall, I do not have any objection to Sikh related sources, its just when all these articles from 'fanatic' or extremist sikh organisations and publishers come in which is worrying and thus I use the term "polluting".
And in terms off Captain Falcons work, you haven't provided any specific quotations, hence why I added them (and you later deleted them). My original final edit is available here: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Jatt_Sikh&diff=467895790&oldid=467716532, on the left hand side, before Sikh-history removed them. As you can see, almost everything has been quoted.
And besides the point of me actually specifically quoting Captain Falcon was not for his historical interpretation, but to show how Jat Sikhs of a particular background where actually favoured in recruitment within the Sikh-regiment, hence why I included it as a blockquote: "still the Jat must ever be the main source for recruits, as he far and away outnumbers the other people, and possesses as a class qualities which no other people can claim. If, too, a Sikh belonging to a good Sikh tehsil (sub-district), does not give the name of a well known Jat Sikh tribe (clan) as his, he is pretty sure not to be a Jat…" R. W. Falcon, Handbook on Sikhs for Regimental Officers (Allahabad: Pioneer Press, 1896)
[1].
I also felt the need to mention the cultural and traditional titles exclusive to Jatt Sikhs in East Punjab, as this is still very evidently a part of today's Punjabi culture, and this too Sikh-history deleted, the title Sardar has been used by Jat land-owners in Punjab ever since the misl period:-
"Jatt Sikhs are referred to as Zamindars in Punjab, often titled Sardar. [2]
I would like to ask Sikh-history what objection he has for the above mentioned citations which he deleted?
86.17.132.217 ( talk) 06:21, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
References
Who become a sikh is no longer have their different identity . According to sikh every sikh have same same identity which is khalsa . They join sikh ethnicity so there is no thing like jatt sikh . If they beleive in jatt caste then they are not true sikhs Harman0123 ( talk) 05:13, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Why is Bhagat Singh's name mentioned here, when he is generally known to be an atheist and he even self-identified as one, authoring an essay Why i am an atheist? before his death? The fellow who claims otherwise is a right-wing Sikh named Trilochan Singh who is obviously not a reliable source on this matter, and even supposing he was, cannot override Bhagat Singh's self-identification. Jatt Sikh is not a separate ethnicity, but a Sikh sub-group. While his name can be mentioned in the Jatt article, it shouldn't be mentioned here. As such, i propose that his name be removed from this article. Joyson Prabhu Holla at me! 10:51, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Why is this article entitled "Jatt Sikh" rather than "Jat Sikh". Unless there is something I am missing, the latter is correct as WP:COMMONNAME applies. The same goes for the spelling through the article, which in any event is inconsistent. - Sitush ( talk) 18:49, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
What is the logical connection between jat and jatt?
Please do not quote bs nijjar ! Logicpl ( talk) 10:36, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 ( talk) 16:20, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Jatt Sikh →
Jat Sikh – Move as per
WP:COMMONNAME. For the same reason,
Jatt people was moved to
Jat people. Most modern and British era sources use the term "Jat Sikh" instead of "Jatt Sikh". --Relisted.
Armbrust
The Homunculus 13:08, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Yoonadue (
talk)
13:26, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Jat Sikh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:20, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Recently a para has been added by Hind ji here supported by this source. Since, the source talks about "Jat" but not this specific ethno-religious sub-group, I believe this content is better suited in the Jat people article. Suggestions @ Sitush, Мастер Шторм, and Heba Aisha:. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 10:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
According to sikhism all the sikh have ancestory is khalsa . Every sikh have identity of khalsa . All sikhs have same identity . Sikhs donot have varities in them . Those who differntiate in sikhism are not true sikhs. Its against sikhism delete this page . Sikhism reject the different identity of people according to sikhism all the sikhs have same identity of khalsa who donot beleive in khalsa is not a sikh. Harman0123 ( talk) 05:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
In sikhism amritdhari sikh donot have any caste , race , ethnicity . There only identity is sikh , khalsa is their caste , race , ethinicity. Jatt sikh claim them to raise their social status . He was a jatt but when he become a amritdhari sikh all the identity ethnicity was change to sikh and they becoma khalsa sikh Harman0123 ( talk) 05:17, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is the page of jatt sikh why are you adding the information muslim jat and hindu jat. Jat sikh only contribute in sikh regiment . Hindu jat contribute in many regiment . But why are you mentioning the information of hindu jat in sikh jats . Remove the information there is no source which prove jat sikh contribute in rajputana rifles. Jat contribute in rajputana rifles but not jat sikh. First undertsand both are same but by relegion they both are different . 2402:3A80:1FD4:F946:CAB2:E826:154C:68F3 ( talk) 03:25, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
You are adding the information that ancient sources prive jat is kshtriya . Their is no authentic souces which prove jat as kshtriya . Kaka kalekar act 1952 and punjab lahore highcourt 1936 proves after the proper study that jat and jatt sikh is comes under shudra varna . Jat sikh are under obc in central list of government pls remove that jat is kshtriya . One side you are mentioning sikhs donot beleive in caste another side you are mentioning jat sikh according to hindu varna what is this? If you are mentioning jat as kshtriya according to hindu varna system then add 1936 punjab lahore high court prove jat and jatt sikh as shudra and kaka kalekar act 1952 prove all jat as shudra. Sources - 1936 lahore high court 551 which proves jat and jatt sikh shudra Second source kaka kalekar act 1952 2402:3A80:1FD4:F946:CAB2:E826:154C:68F3 ( talk) 03:51, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
DB-g7
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Rajputt Singh ( talk) 19:11, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the List of Clans to include the clan 'Sahota'
'Sahota' is also a Jat Sikh clan, please see the below wikipedia links which cross reference the sources:
Thank you. 80.7.52.111 ( talk) 16:34, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
@ Sitush: Is the 'Jat Sikh' an ethno-religioous group similar to the Jewish people for example? Used in the lede sentence, we need this to be widely sourced. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 11:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)