Gadari Movement Was A Sikh Movement

[Jonny101]

The whole Maratha - Sikh comparison is pointless I agree, It appears to have started because the Punjabi Hindus wanted to downplay the role of the Sikhs in destroying the Mughal rules in Punjab. Even now Sher does not tire of propagating lies that the Marathas 'saved' the Sikhs of Punjab.

The Marathas were a minor interlude in the Mughal-Afghan-Sikh struggle for Punjab.

Abdali invaded a number of times after Panipat.

What people like Sher conveniently ignore is that the Maratha "invasion" of Punjab was not a one party event. They were invited and facilitated by the Mughals. Adina Beg paid them 1 lakh rupees per day's march and 50,000 for halting. Further more when they did arrive It was the combined effort of Mughals(under Adina Beg), Sikhs, Marathas. It was this tripartite alliance that drove out the Afghans. When this was achieved, the Mughals and Marathas sidelined the Sikhs.

The Marathas left Punjab with an army to be used as a reserve force to help the Mughals in administering Punjab. Further more, Adina Beg had again begun to persecute the Sikhs with the silent approval of the Marathas, the Sikhs realized at that point even though the Marathas are a Hindu power, but they are just as imperialistic as the Mughals or the Afghans. Where ever they went they did not even spare the non Muslims and looted the Muslim and non-Muslims alike. That is why when the Afghans under Abdali arrived they completely destroyed the Maratha power in North India. Due to their conduct all over India, the Marathas alienated the Sikhs, Jats and Rajputs of Rajputana.

And it's completely ridiculous to compare the Sikhs and Marathas. Marathas were a numerous community and the majority in Maharasthra. So numerous were they that they overwhelmed the Mughals. They could match the huge Mughal armies with the same amount of men on the field. Their state base was not a multi religious land where as Punjab was. Sikhs had to compete with everyone even with in Punjab to finally come out on top.

What the Sikhs achieved given what little they had, no other community in the world can even compare. It is almost like Kashmiri Pandits beating the Muslims and ruling Kashmir or Zoroastians beating Muslims and ruling over Muslim majority Iran or Copts beating Muslims and ruling over Egypt. Except that this never happened for these minorities. Sikhs are the only persecuted minority which beat the hostile Muslim majority and ruled over them and add to that Sikhs had the resurgent Afghans under an able leader like Abdali to deal with. Until the 1947 forced migration of the Sikhs, our people never even formed a majority in any district of Punjab.

Edited March 10, 2014 by Jonny101

[Jonny101]

Sher as usual you are over exaggerating the Maratha episode which is nothing but a foot note in the history of Punjab. And how did they "liberate" punjab from Mughal tyranny? They came to Punjab as a party to an tripartite alliance which consisted of Mughals, Marathas and Sikhs. It was the combined effort of all three that drove out the Afghans from Punjab. But once the Afghans were driven out, the Mughals and Marathas sidelined the Sikhs.

So thanks to the Marathas, now the situation was that Punjab again fell under Islamic Mughal rule. And the first thing the Mughals under Adina Beg did was the persecute the Sikhs. For this task, he gathered chiefs from all over Punjab, the Janjuas, Gakhars, Ghebas from Pothohar, the Pathans settled in Punjab, Randhawa Jats in central Punjab, Hindu Paharias from the hills of Punjab. All these Hindu and Muslims chiefs of Punjab made a combined effort with the Mughals in carrying out a new wave of genocide of the Sikhs. So severe was this new genocide that the Sikhs all over Punjab retreated into the thick jungles of Majha. The Mughals then hired 4000 Tarkhans to cut up the forests.

This was one of the worst episodes of Sikh history all thanks in part to the Marathas who helped the Mughals regain the lost province of Punjab from the Afghans and instead of doing the right thing and befriending the Sikhs by giving Punjab to them. For the first time since the horrible days of Zakharia Khan, Sikhs were again prevented from entering Darbar Sahib. So now Sikhs again had to start from scratch and work their way up to liberate Punjab. Even historian HariRam Gupta notes this was a HUGE mistake made by the Marathas because of which the Sikhs did not help them in the 3rd battle of Panipat. And also this was one of the reasons why the Sikhs opposed the 1857 'rebellion' by the sepoys, Rohillas, Marathas to revive the Mughal empire in India. Our people already saw what a mistake it was to help the Marathas and Mughals the first time and did not want to repeat that in 1761 and 1857

Edited March 11, 2014 by Jonny101

[tonyhp32]

Maratha this, Maratha that. Give it a rest, Sher, those South Indian Madrasis were a footnote in the history of Punjab. Trying to attribute the fall of the Mughal empire to the Marathas is like attributing the end of the Roman Empire on Atilla the Hun. The Mughal Empire was challenged on all sides. The groundwork for the end of Mughal rule in Punjab was done by Banda Singh Bahadur. His half decade war decimated the Mughal system of revenue collection, disposed of the large Jagirdars in Malwa and gave the land to the tillers. His revolt did far more lasting damage to the Mughal rule in Punjab than any other revolt did in other areas to the Mughal rule in those areas be it the Jats or Satnamis etc.

The invasion of Nadir Shah also contributed to the demise of the Mughal Empire. The Marathas came, left their representative Adina Beg in charge and then were decimated a few years later at Panipat that they did not come to Punjab proper again. They made do with minor incursion to try and retrieve the Mughal revenue from the Malwa and Northern Haryana area.

The last Maratha to come to Punjab was Holkar who was seeking help from the Sikhs and Afghans against the British.

[das]

Do the debaters know that history in this world is most prone to distortion?? Just for an example to bring the fact that it is possible: http://www.nhsf.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=345:how-british-distorted-indian-history&catid=239:misconceptions&Itemid=233

Here I'm NOT favoring or opposing any author/writer; I'm just bringing the fact that history is prone to distortion because authors/writers may have prejudice. The best authentic source of history lies within us as we were the history. In other words, the REAL history could only be known by either diving deep into our Soul OR from the talks of TRUE Saints (from any religion) who are aware of the facts of past/present/future.

Now regarding the Sikh and Hindu role in start and end of Mughal kingdom.

• The start as well as the end of Mughal kingdom was determined by the Guru's word (here please do NOT label Him as Sikh Guru only as HE come in Kalyug for the betterment of everyone.
• It was Guru Nanak Dev Ji who reminded Babur of his brutality on the people and then Babur asked for what he should do. Guru Ji then blessed him with information on how he should rule. He was told that he will have kingdom till he rule within God's Law.
• The raj of Mughal was brought to an end by the forces chosen by God (be it Sikhs or any other tribe/religion) because the later Mughals kings again started using brutality.

Always remember that the 2 parties in the war always think that God is on their side. It's all the play of God.

Instead of mentioning all the mughal kings during the 10 Guru's time and their respective association with mughals, I would refer everyone to the following articles:

http://www.info-sikh.com/G-EmpPage1.html
http://www.info-sikh.com/G-EmpPage2.html
http://www.info-sikh.com/G-EmpPage3.html

Edited March 12, 2014 by das

[OnPathToSikhi]

Das Ji, Very well put comments. "..history could only be known by either diving deep into our Soul OR from the talks of TRUE Saints (from any religion).." So true. Especially Sikh history cannot be put in the right context without having some spiritual insight.

[amar_jkp]

This my reply to Hindu fanatic who questioned the Sikh shaheed of Jallianwala Bagh and called it a shameful chapter of Sikh History .

In fact its other way around - Which regiment was involved in Jallianwala massacre :

The Jallianwalla Bagh during 1919, months after the massacre.
"The Martyrs' Well" at Jallianwala Bagh.
Cartoon in Punch 14 July 1920, on the occasion of Montagu labelling as "frightful" General Dyer for his role in the Amritsar massacreAn hour after the meeting began as scheduled at 4:30 pm, Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer marched a group of sixty-five Gurkha and twenty-five Baluchi soldiers into the Bagh, fifty of whom were armed with rifles. Dyer had also brought two armoured cars armed with machine guns, however the vehicles were stationed outside the main gate as they were unable to enter the Bagh through the narrow entrance.

Which community dominate Gurkha Regiment ? We all knew dont we .

Who killed General Dyer - Udham Singh and we Sikhs are proud of him

How many sikhs killed :

According to Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya, who personally collected information with a view to raising the issue in the Central Legislative Council, over 1,000 were killed. The total crowd was estimated at between 15,000 and 20,000, Sikhs comprising a large proportion of them. -

Edited March 15, 2014 by amar_jkp

[amar_jkp]

The Sikhs formed the All India Sikh League as a representative body of the Panth for political action. The League held its first session in December 1919 at Amritsar simultaneously with the Congress annual convention. The honouring of Brigadier-General Dyer by the priests of Sri Darbar Sahib, Amritsar, led to the intensification of the demand for reforming management of Sikh shrines already being voiced by societies such as the Khalsa Diwan Majha and Central Majha Khalsa Diwan. This resulted in the launching of what came to be known as the Gurdwara Reform movement, 1920-25. Some Sikh servicemen, resenting the policy of non-violence adopted by the leaders of the Akali movement, resigned from the army and constituted thc nucleus of an anti-British terrorist group known as Babar Akalis.

[chatanga1]

Das, i understand where you are coming from and also admit that SOMETIMES i do get carried away. Being a history student, i get really pissed with the hyperbolic claims made by the likes of Amar (not only khalistani make such bombastic claims). In my op, there is need to start a thread on each and every claim Amar has made, lets analyse those in a detailed manner. If given the correct facts (as used by the known historians not 'quacks' like 'Dr' Udhoke) and am not claiming that i am always correct. I would be more than willing to admit that i am wrong.

Come off it! you have had answers to all of your facts, yet vomit the same questions.

Once again, Punjabi Hindu is responsible if the Sikh looks like as having played the junior role in bringing down the Mughals. Once again, Sher is propagating lies if he tries to counter the hyperbolic claims. when will such supremacists would focus on the facts cited from well-known history books.

The Marathas were a minor interlude in the Mughal-Afghan-Sikh struggle for Punjab.

Marathas may have played limited DIRECT role in Punjab but they were the primary reason Mughals were defeated. I would repeat one more time, Aurangzeb shifted his base to Deccan and fought 27 years' war against the Marathas. compare this to the fact that no Mughal emperor ever fought against any Sikh force himself. Aurangzeb's obsession to subdue the Marathas emptied the coffers and led to demoralisation in the Mughal ranks.

The fact that Marathas at one stage controlled territory from the tip of the Indian Peninsula to Peshawar inc Punjab is well-recorded. even Mughals paid protection money to Marathas in mid 18th century. why they did not threw out Mughals completely would always remain a hotly debated question.

Please note I am not even mentioning the Rajput and Jat rebellions which Mughals had to face during the 50-year reign of Aurangzeb. You can imagine youself, how Mughal administration in Punjab would have fared with the emperor busy mounting campaigns thousands of KMs away deep South.

i understand the Sikh bigots' disdain for the Marathas for one reason - Brahmin leadership. we know very well that over 200 years of Maratha domination of the Indian subcontinent was made possible by the military and political leadership provided by the Brahmin peshwas. Sikh fanatics cannot digest the idea that dhoti-wearing bahmans registered such spectacular triumphs as forcing the mighty mughals on their knees and conquering Punjab and afghan areas in 1758.

The mere thought that a bahman could do (conquer whole Punjab) what a Sikh could never, turns their supremacist agenda right on its head.

I have been reading about the Marathas "conquest" of Panjab, in "sicques, tigers and thieves". The writer has written that in 1755 Adina Beg had brokered an alliance between himself, the Sikhs and the Mahrattas to fight Abdali. On page 104, it says that the Marathas were angry at the Sikhs plunder of Sirhind, and planned to attack them, whereupon Adina Beg told the Sikhs. The Sikhs seeing the marhatta army was more powerful, retreated to the lower mountains, leaving the Marathas to establish garrisons at Lahore, Multan etc (ie important panjab cities).

In 1758, Abdali again invaded Panjab, and I quote, "as soon as it was known that the Durrani had crossed the Attock, the Marhatta garrisons in Lahore and Multan fled without waiting for his approach."

This above account has been written in 1783, by James Browne.

So, sher is right in that the Marhattas were at one time, rulers of panjab, while the Sikhs saw them as superior to their own forces, but we can also say that they bolted, even thought Abdali was hundreds of miles away. We can safely say, that they must have been a stronger army than the Sikhs (although not necessarily better), as their manpower was much more than the Sikh.

What we can also deduce is, like the Sikhs there were times, when they could not stand up to Abdalis army. They certainly didnt take Panjab by sword and blood, it was a part power-vacuum, and part military strategy by the Sikhs, that actually led the marathas to take over Panjab. We can say the same for the Marathas strategy, in that they legged it even though Abdali hadn't even entered Panjab, they must have felt that they could not engage his army head-on.

[amar_jkp]

We all knew true characters of Marathas still Hindu fanatic wants to say they were great how many proof we have given still these Hindu Rashtravadis will not accept it . Lying is they best at .

[aksantali]

the hindu fanatic lost this debate really badly like usual

[chatanga1]

You are partially correct in saying that Marathas were angry about Sikhs plunder of Sirhind and also that Sikhs fled instead of confronting Marathas in the battlefield in their own backyard (!). Your comment is also an honest admission of Sikhs resorting to plunder in their own home. You are contradicting yourself when on one hand you talk about the alliance and on the other you mention that sikhs fled to Shivalik Hills as "maratha army was more powerful".

However you are completely wronf when you try to imply as if Marathas captured Punjab and the Afghan areas without battling afghan and other Muslim forces. The campaign which ended with the Marathas flying the kesri flag at Attock in May 1758, started at least one year before as they captured Delhi and made Mughal emperor their protectee (august 1757). They captured Lahore on 20 April 1758.

I totally agree, they must have fled in the face of much stronger army of Abdali. Not long after 1759 invasion of Abdali, Marathas took on Afghans in the Third battle of Panipat and were defeated. It would be dishonest if someone tries to deny the historical facts. marathas conquest of Punjab and Afghan areas in 1758 is a historical fact. It's well-acknowledged fatc that the maratha empire in 1758 spread from the tip of the Indian peninsula to Afghanistan border. maratha triumphs and defeats are historical facts and the same about khalsas. While marathas fled in the fact of Abdali invasion in 1759,so did the Sikhs. Not only 1759, Sikhs failed to engage Abdali in one single battle. they fled everytime Abdali invaded and at no stage controlled whole of Punjab forget a Maratha like empire spread over few centuries. There is absolutely no comparison. ....

"They bolted..." yes they did but Sikhs bolted before them deserting their homes.

There were times... MAKE THAT EVERYTIME, Sikhs never faced Abdali in a battle.

Marathas battle of Peshawar and Attock are well-recorded facts.

As i wrote before, you do not expect the garrisoned contingents to take on

RE: the Sikhs retreating from the Marhattas at Sirhind, the Sikhs saw the Marhatta army, and made a tactical decision to retreat. They were face to face with the Marhattas, and saw that the Marhatta army was more powerful, so made a tactical decision to withdraw. Abdali hadn't even entered Panjab, yet the Marhattas flag (which you claim was hoisted at Attock, after a battle) came down with the wind. Following this the Marhattas fled Panjab without even seeing the whites of the eyes of Abdali's men. A retreat is not the same as "fleeing".

What resources, men, weapons had Abdali come with? The Marhattas certainly didnt know. They just got scared and left. They could have asked the Sikhs for help? If im correct Adina Beg had died at this time, but the Sikhs-Marhattas had combined to fight Abdali before, they could do so again. But the fact is that the Marhattas were running so fast, their feet were kicking their OWN ass!

You are right, there is no comparison between the Sikhs and Marhattas.

As i wrote before, you do not expect the garrisoned contingents to take on much larger army. tactical retreats are a part of the warfare to avoid total rout.

Ok, I accept your point, but what about a nominal gesture, to show the Afghans that the Marhattas were not fleeing out of fear, but a tactical response?

The Sikh example was Baba Gurbaksh Singh, who as part of a 30 strong Sikh army, died defending Darbar Sahib against Abdali.

See how he has gone down in history, while no-one even remembers the Marhattas stepping foot in Panjab, (at least not with a sword in their hands!).

[OnPathToSikhi]

The Marathas were no better than Mughals. Each fighting a religious jihad.

Edited March 17, 2014 by OnPathToSikhi

[OnPathToSikhi]

"... Udham SIngh did not kill Gen Dyer, he died of natural causes ..."

Please specify which "Dyer" are you referring to?

[dalsingh101]

Michael O'Dwyer (who Udham Singh killed) was like General Dyer's boss. He supported Dyer's actions....or something like that?

[OnPathToSikhi]

If you are commenting as if you have the compete knowledge about the historical events, you should know whom Udham Singh killed. pathetic.

I understand the true essence of Sikh history very well. I don't need to carry a history book "under my arm" all the time. That is for insecure "history crooks" like you.

Edited March 18, 2014 by OnPathToSikhi

[OnPathToSikhi]

@ True essence of Sikh history.

You are not only ignorant but also arrogant. If i make such stupid factual mistake, i would apologise. And you call yourself a "sikh"?

Correct.

[chatanga1]

You have mentioned yourself that Gen Dyer was honoured at Harmandir sahib.

You love this don't you? The way you repeat this like it had the support of the whole Sikh nation. But try to hide the evil of your panjabi hindu brothers in helping the central asian invaders against your own co-religionists and brothers. Dyer being honoured spelt the end of the corruption of the management committee for the remainder of the Raaj, but your brothers in faith, dishonoured and caused the deaths of millions and millions of your co-religionists.

Yet you point the finger at others. Yet, you point the finger at others.

I am stating the truth which Sikh bigots cannot digest so I become a "Hindu fanatic". wow! great logic.

funny that when we tell you a few truths, we are khalibans. even greater logic.

Once again, totally biased response. you are not interested in making a neutral analysis, just want to show Sikh supremacy, chivalry even while they are fleeing while refusing to acknowledge one of the greatest achievements of Marathas (hoisting kesri flag at Attock after seven centuries or so) and that too 1000s of kms away from their capital Pune.

Baba Gurbakhsh Singh...get over such taksali kisse kahanian. Marathas campaign is recorded in every history book while BGS is just in Taksali and Sikh-Mahan-quom-aa kisse kahanian series. By ignoring Marathas campaign, sikh historians are exposing their intellectual bankruptcy. shameful.

I gave you a neutral analysis, you chose to ignore it. I was not trying to show any Sikh supremacy either, but making a very valid point that the Marhatta "conquest" of Panjab, was not the same way that you and your "hindu fanatic" friends portray it.

The fact is that the Marhatta "conquest" of Panjab, was of absolutely no consequence in the scheme of things, great or small, concerning Panjabi history. The fact that you and you hindu fanatic friends try and force the re-writing of panjabi history to accomodate your agenda, shows your intellectual shallowness. Disgusting!

[amar_jkp]

I am stating the truth which Sikh bigots cannot digest so I become a "Hindu fanatic". wow! great logic.

Marathas were looters rapists and thats what they did in bengal and north India.

[amar_jkp]

Learn to face the truth.

You have mentioned yourself that Gen Dyer was honoured at Harmandir sahib.

Udham SIngh did not kill Gen Dyer, he died of natural causes. whole nation is proud of Udham singh who died for the freedom of mother India and not for those who honoured Gen Dyer for massacring hundreds of Indians.

As far as Gurkha regiment is concerned, only recently it has been revealed that Sikh soldiers loyal to the foreign master executed around 300 indian revolutionaries (or mutineers as Brits called them) in just one incident at Ajnala (Amritsar district) in 1857 and buried them in a dry well. 500 of the revolutionaries belonging to one unit were killed all together. So?

What an answer sooooooooooo . And what all Hindu soldiers who were serving in killing so called 1857 revolutionaries ?

[OnPathToSikhi]

Sikhs looted and ...their fellow Punjabis

You are a lunatic. Your misery knows no bounds.

[aksantali]

you can just feel the hatred for sikhi this fanatic has in his posts....

[Amarjeet Singh_1737]

You are a lunatic. Your misery knows no bounds.

If I had a degree in counselling I would prescribe suicide as the cure.

[OnPathToSikhi]

balle! intolerant fanatics violating every norm of civilised conversation just because they cannot gulp down some well-known historical facts. while i have no hesitation in admitting marathas (or any other Hindu force) may have gone overboard and indulged in acts which would not be approved by Vienna Convention, fanatics start jumping up and down if they feel one word has been written against their holier than holy cow Khalsa soldier (1699-2014).

now this extremely bigoted nut is suggesting suicide to me. Hmm I am pretty sure his fellow maniacs would like me to end my life too.

what happened to the dialogue option where the other person is asked for facts, evidence if you disagree with his/her assertion?

sad, very sad.

Your definition of "civilized" is applicable to you and your "Hindu" folks. Your hate for Sikhs knows no bounds. You ARE a miserable soul, proved beyond doubt by you. You come to this forum saying you are a Nanakpanthi and then find every excuse to make anti-Sikh statements and go overboard .... I am just marveled at the decency of the moderators to even allow you to post without any objections.

[chatanga1]

You love this don't you? The way you repeat this like it had the support of the whole Sikh nation"

I am told harmandar sahib/Akal Takht is supreme in Sikhi. Their Hukamnams, their every act is considered as having sanction of the "whole Sikh nation". The Highest Sikh body did this (what i see as) unpardonable act.

Sher, Aroor Singh was neither a jathedar or Sri Akal Takht Sahib, neither was he a leader of any sort, and nor was any hukumnama issued. He gave a siropa, which every Gurdwara Manager throughout the world can do.

Its a little like that Chandok guy giving your brother Tytlar a siropa at Delhi Gurdwara, isn't it?.

Aroor Singh was the Manager of Sri Darbar Sahib, ie he oversaw the daily program ran smoothly. He can not in any way be misconstrued as speaking for the Panth, unless you are deliberately looking for drama. Are you?

"..absolutely no consequences" to whom?

what can i say my friend...you are stooping too low

absolutely no consequence for the Sikhs or the Panjabis. Absolutely none at all.

And you Sir, have your head in the clouds.

. what i said about sikh forces plundering fellow punjabis (along wwith Marathas),

Adina Beg brokered an agreement between the Sikhs and Marathas, whereby the 3 forces would unite to fight Abdali's army in Sirhind. The Sikhs agreed on promise of the Afghans' heavy guns in case of victory. This was agreed to by the Marathas and Adina Beg. However after the battle, after Abdali's forces had been beaten, the Sikhs stepped forward to claim the heavy guns, but the Marhattas reneged on their agreement and wanted to take the guns. Adina Beg, informed the Sikhs that the Marhattas had gone back on their word, and wanted to attack the Sikhs. The Sikhs forces then took the heavy guns and retreated towards the lower himalayan hills.

This episode was what James Browne was refering to, when he wrote about the plunder of Sirhind.

No doubt at other times, Sikhs did commit plunder in Panjab, but it could hardly have been of the local population, whom they were protecting via the rakhi system. Whatever plunder took place was against the afghans/moghals/govt in Panjab.

Now when you talk about armies plundering the local populace in Panjab, you think of the Moghals and Afghans and such, but we must also take into account how the army of Holkar plundered Panjab on his withdrawal from there in 1806.

Meanwhile, please read Rajmohan Gandhi's book about Punjab Ausrangzeb toBritish

I have the book, please tell me which page(s) you are refering to, as it is a little down my reading list.

[chatanga1]

As i wrote before, you do not expect the garrisoned contingents to take on much larger army.

See, even this in itself is a joke. The Marathas plant their flag at Attock, after the Afghans retreat, and leave garrisons at the cities, and claim they added Panjab to their empire. Yet Abdali's not even ankle-deep in the Attock, and these brave conquerors of Panjab, turn and run.

What kind of a takeover was this? Why not send Marhatta reinforcements to Panjab to fight Abdali? That would prevent him from linking up to his delhi and balochi partners. We can only see piss-poor planning from the Marhattas, nothing else, in Panjab. Outside of Panjab, i couldn't give a shit, what they achieved.