Jatt-Sikh wars

[JungChamkaur]

Sikhs today are a joke as a community due to the fact that people like amardeep can't even read history properly. Hence you see the whole kom at the feet of various nations.

[JungChamkaur]

Sikhs can't read or understand history hence they are extremely pathetic at politics. Numbers don't lie, Sikhs history can't even amount to rathore history... Don't even bother trying to compare yourselves to other tribes and  rajputs as a whole. Perhaps the rajputs at chamkaur and raikot and himachal and bangla sahib should have let the gurus get murdered by the mughals.... 

[dalsingh101]

One I met 

Thanks bro for the info. Do they describe the same battles or different ones?

Bhul chuk maaf

Different ones. That Wendel guy obviously hated Singhs going by his writing. 

[dalsingh101]

Important point to make:

What we learn from Bhangu is that prior to Singh Sabha (who I believe learnt to lie from the British when it came to history), native Sikh historiography as represented by Panth Prakash was infinitely more honest and open about the past. 

I prefer the original warts and all style of original Sikh historiography over the white-washed, propaganda style learnt from white-man. 

[amardeep]

Yes you are right Jungchamkaur. There was never any incidences of Rajput rane etc enrolled into Mughal and Muslim armies in order to subjugate other Indians under the banner of mughal raj.... You are right indeed.

[amardeep]

Important point to make:

What we learn from Bhangu is that prior to Singh Sabha (who I believe learnt to lie from the British when it came to history), native Sikh historiography as represented by Panth Prakash was infinitely more honest and open about the past. 

I prefer the original warts and all style of original Sikh historiography over the white-washed, propaganda style learnt from white-man. 

Indeed. And the early scholars also appear to have been critical about the writings they had in their hand - Kavi Santokh Singh for instances has a short discussion on the credibility of the Bhai Bala Janamsakhi since he believes it is not to be trusted 100% .. .Western academics always assume they were the first one to be critical on Sikh writings. Rattan Singh Bhangu also likewise says some sakhis were made by SIkhs with good intentions but they are not historically correct etc...

 

In a discussion on apocryphal writings attributed to Guru Gobind Singh, Giani Gian Singh (though from Singh Sabha era ) writes that the elders of his community state they were written by the Guru, but he does'nt know himself whether this is true or not..

Edited October 10, 2015 by amardeep

[paapiman]

Perhaps the rajputs at chamkaur and raikot and himachal and bangla sahib should have let the gurus get murdered by the mughals.... 

Satguru jee is the incarnation of God. Do you think anyone can murder God? If any Rajputs did seva of Satguru jee, they in turn received blessings for it. Do you think, a race can protect God? Please stop making offensive statements. 

Additionally, Khalsa forces (majority so-called Shudars) also defeated the Rajputs many times in battles.

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited October 10, 2015 by paapiman

[paapiman]

One I met 

Different ones. That Wendel guy obviously hated Singhs going by his writing. 

Does he say that Jatts beat the Singhs in wars?

Bhul chuk maaf

[JungChamkaur]

a handful of rajput kingdoms fought the sikhs, the only proper cases you can cite are attacks at anandpur... most of the other battles that took place between sikhs and rajputs consisted of sikhs vastly outnumbering the rajput tribes they were at war with. the only times rajputs outnumbered sikhs was at anandpur attack. all battles after that were just pathetic and typical sheep vs lion or slaves vs master fights. look at other cases where sikhs fought against jaipur... or maybe look at the fact that many rajputs actually became sikh themselves. regardless of that, ghorewaha rajputs have defeated sikh rajputs in doaba. there are other instances i have mentioned in this forum already like when ramgarhias ran away from a single rajput. and even guru gobind singh says that hari singh (i think) yelled kaal kaal everywhere he went and killed many brave warriors. regardless, the truth is that patiala and other satluj states have crushed the lahore darbar. 

new sikhs are not representative of pre-singh sabha era. post-singh sabha era sikhi is dominated by low caste jatts who have turned sikhi into their personal jagir and can never ever amount to anything ever again since they are not even honest about their own heritage, religion and history. 

the fact that jatts were defeated by "sikhs" is interesting and very odd at the same time but I guess it makes sense because most sikhs were mostly khatri brahmin and rajput rather than low caste scum like yourselves. so it makes sense why jatts had to get slapped up in bhangus story and in 1984. 1984 was mostly a jatt sikh vs indian state ordeal rather than a sikh vs indian conflict. pseudo sikh needs a state like pakistan so it can elevate its false history and lies to a state level like pakistan and forget about its own heritage.  now the same khatris and brahmins and rajputs that formed sikhi are the ones slapping the new owners of sikhi but i guess this doesnt apply to rajputs because sikh rajputs are mehton anyways and their inbred halfbreeds who dont even get recognized as full rajputs by real hindu rajputs. 

[Crystal]

Stupid peasants

 

Crystal

[paapiman]

regardless of that, ghorewaha rajputs have defeated sikh rajputs in doaba.

 

there are other instances i have mentioned in this forum already like when ramgarhias ran away from a single rajput.

 

 the truth is that patiala and other satluj states have crushed the lahore darbar. 

Can you provide evidence for the above three statements? For the last one, are you referring to the Anglo-Sikh wars?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[Koi]

JungChamkaur, you stupid inbred little twat,  if you have such a massive problem with Sikhs (and it's clear that you do), leave this forum, but DON'T YOU DARE INSULT OUR GURUS!

Honestly, I don't know of any Sikhs who can be bothered to join a Hindu or Muslim forum with the sole intention of spreading hate.

You've been countered time and time again, and every time you comment, you spew your tyrannical twisted hate. 

This is Sikhawareness. You don't like it, then bugger off , bloody Internet warrior!

[dalsingh101]

I know man. 

 

It's embarrassing to to even imagine any apany going on Hindu or Muslim forums and doing the same (not that there wouldn't be a fudhoo or two who wouldn't do that).

 

That all being said, I think it is high time to stop 'bukra bullaing' Hindus, it just brings the trolls out and then we have a slagging match like above.

 

And apnay bigging themselves up over our ancestor's achievements and constantly throwing facts around to try and smote down the other side is pretty pathetic too. 

 

We need to get out of this whole cycle. 

[tonyhp32]

 

new sikhs are not representative of pre-singh sabha era. post-singh sabha era sikhi is dominated by low caste jatts who have turned sikhi into their personal jagir and can never ever amount to anything ever again since they are not even honest about their own heritage, religion and history. 

the fact that jatts were defeated by "sikhs" is interesting and very odd at the same time but I guess it makes sense because most sikhs were mostly khatri brahmin and rajput rather than low caste scum like yourselves. so it makes sense why jatts had to get slapped up in bhangus story and in 1984. 1984 was mostly a jatt sikh vs indian state ordeal rather than a sikh vs indian conflict. pseudo sikh needs a state like pakistan so it can elevate its false history and lies to a state level like pakistan and forget about its own heritage.  now the same khatris and brahmins and rajputs that formed sikhi are the ones slapping the new owners of sikhi but i guess this doesnt apply to rajputs because sikh rajputs are mehton anyways and their inbred halfbreeds who dont even get recognized as full rajputs by real hindu rajputs. 

For someone who complains about Sikhs not knowing their history, you have a very low grasp of Sikh history yourself. The Jats didn't dominate Sikhi just after the Singh Sabha, they had become a majority in Sikhism by the time of Guru Hargobind. A majority of the Misl leaders were Jats, the ones in Sialkot and Gujranwala fought and beat both the Muslim Jats and Rajput to take over these areas. The ones in Doaba beat Muslim Rajputs and Afghans to control Doaba and the ones in Malwa beat Muslim Rajputs in Sirsa-Hissar area. The Hindu Rajput of Doaba was sitting on his backside changing one master for another. 

As for the battles between the Brars and Sikhs, the Sikhs would have been for the most part Jats from Majha. 

[paapiman]

The Jats didn't dominate Sikhi just after the Singh Sabha, they had become a majority in Sikhism by the time of Guru Hargobind. 

As for the battles between the Brars and Sikhs, the Sikhs would have been for the most part Jats from Majha. 

Bro, can you please provide evidence for the above statements?

Thanks

Bhul chuk maaf

[dalsingh101]

What's interesting about Bhangu's account is that it could well be describing the actions of the same Brar families that Guru Gobind Singh ji mentions in Zafar Namah. We know Guru ji wrote (at least some of) this whilst lodging in Brar territory. This suggests that those Brars already had a belligerent stance towards Moghuls, as they were accommodating what were essentially rebels to the Moghul government.

If this hypothesis is correct, Bhangu could be describing the actions of the descendants of those Brars mentioned in Zafar Namah. If Bhangu is correct it appears as if (at least some of) those original  Brars took Amrit, and the ones he is talking about may be literally the grandchildren of those mentioned in ZN. Hence his use of the term dhadhay?

The descendants appear to have a very haughty attitude towards Singhs (probably because they saw them as in need of shelter in their territory), and obnoxious behaviour like being insulting, stealing and trying to molest Sikh women and notice the implied sense of privilege/entitlement because their forefathers took Pahul. 

Edited October 13, 2015 by dalsingh101

[paapiman]

 

What is ਅੰਦ੍ਰਾਹੁਲ???

Bro, please have a look below. 

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[dalsingh101]

Still don't know ਮਟਿਆਂਡੀ is?

 

What is ਸੂੰਦਾ - sleep?

[chatanga1]

Dally matiandi are testicles, and shoonda is having a wee.

 

[chatanga1]

 

 

Here's the original text:

 

What is ਅੰਦ੍ਰਾਹੁਲ???

I had read this as:

Chaupai: Ths Singhs then gave the advice for their well-being| But this was met with ridicule

 

Singhs said "Partake of the Pahul" | Then Brars responeded we have internally

 

they said our ancestors took pahul |  Has it come out of us and gone somewhere?

 

Basically the Brars said that they had amrit in their genes or dna etc because their ancestors had taken it, and hence they were born with it already in their bodies, so there was no need for them to take amrit.

[IJJSingh]

Still don't know ਮਟਿਆਂਡੀ is?

 

What is ਸੂੰਦਾ - sleep?

ਪਸ਼ੂ = Farm animal.  A cow or a buffalo

ਸੂੰਦਾ = Is giving birth

ਮਟਿਆਂਡੀ =  Is the fluid filled sack which surrounds the calf emerging from the womb.

Unborn calf in the womb is surrounded by a sack made of translucent skin.  Placenta is part to this sack.  The sack is filled with fluid.  When an animal is about to give birth, the first thing which emerges out of the womb is six to twelve inches of this sack.  Which appears almost like a baloon (ਮਟਿਆਂਡੀ in Punjabi means a small balloon or bubble).  This hanging sack soon bursts due to the pressure and weight of the fluid and soon after, front hooves and the head of the calf emerges.

 

In the above text, Brars are taunting the Sikhs and are telling them to drink the slightly off-clear fluid which gushes from the birth-sack.

 

Sorry for the graphic detail.

 

Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh

 

[dalsingh101]

Dally matiandi are testicles, and shoonda is having a wee.

 

Ha ha ha ha!!!!

 

Had me rolling around man! lol

[dalsingh101]

ਪਸ਼ੂ = Farm animal.  A cow or a buffalo

ਸੂੰਦਾ = Is giving birth

ਮਟਿਆਂਡੀ =  Is the fluid filled sack which surrounds the calf emerging from the womb.

Unborn calf in the womb is surrounded by a sack made of translucent skin.  Placenta is part to this sack.  The sack is filled with fluid.  When an animal is about to give birth, the first thing which emerges out of the womb is six to twelve inches of this sack.  Which appears almost like a baloon (ਮਟਿਆਂਡੀ in Punjabi means a small balloon or bubble).  This hanging sack soon bursts due to the pressure and weight of the fluid and soon after, front hooves and the head of the calf emerges.

 

In the above text, Brars are taunting the Sikhs and are telling them to drink the slightly off-clear fluid which gushes from the birth-sack.

 

Sorry for the graphic detail.

 

Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh

 

Thanks for this. Can I ask, the source of your information? I'm not being rude or doubting it, just would like to know how you know this?

[chatanga1]

Ha ha ha ha!!!!

 

Had me rolling around man! lol

I was serious. I can see the connection now, between "sac", I had thought this was testicles (nut-sac) but as the knowledgeable brother has informed us,it actually refers to the amniotic sac. But i did mistake Soonda for doing a wee. D'oh.

In the above text, Brars are taunting the Sikhs and are telling them to drink the slightly off-clear fluid which gushes from the birth-sack.

Seems quite a long-winded sentence to essentially tell someone "bugger off and leave us alone!" Unless the Brars were going for the vomit-inducing factor.

[dalsingh101]

 

Seems quite a long-winded sentence to essentially tell someone "bugger off and leave us alone!" Unless the Brars were going for the vomit-inducing factor.

Nah, it's the subtle implication. What they actually thought of Amrit is made clear by their comparing it to this disgusting fluid. They are basically saying we don't think much of your Amrit ceremony/community.