Definition of being JAT

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

suniljakhar

New member
When somebody says that he/she is proud to be a JAT or he/she is a JAT, what makes one to claim that one is JAT? I am not looking for the origin of JAT community but in current scenario when world has become a global village and people are looking beyond caste and creed, what makes us to say that one is a JAT.

With no offenses meant, I am sharing certain points which I thought could help in a healthy discussion or initiate it further. I presume JAT as a caste and then moving forward.
1) One who is born in a JAT family (All generation purely JAT without any other caste involved) is JAT indeed
2) One who is born in a family (JAT Father or grandfather has married in other caste) and he/she carries father’s ‘gautra’ is a JAT
3) One who is born in a family (JAT mother or grandmother has married in other caste) and he/she carries mother’s ‘gautra’, can the child claim JAT status?
4) One who is born in a family (JAT mother or grandfather has married in other caste) and he/she carries non JAT father’s ‘gautra’ which is not known to be a JAT gautra.
5) Or is it the virtues of JAT like sacrifice, valour, courageous, fair, honest, daunting…list goes on, that makes one indeed a JAT. If it is - then other castes have also shown the same virtues as well.
6) Or simply in India like we get our nationality as Hindu/Muslim/Christian by birth, on same pattern (or some Indian law involved – not sure) any one born to their JAT father will be a JAT.

Now a days JAT boys/gals are accepting matches of other caste (it’s a very personal matter and I am not discussing it here though my subject of discussion is related to it, but we have many a threads running on this topic), let’s say a JAT boy marries a gal from non JAT caste (it may be love marriage or arranged marriage) and both gets agreed that their children will have their mother’s ‘gautra’, can their children claim JAT status? Or in this case on what basis a child can be termed as JAT or non JAT (if at all this nomenclature is required).

Now contra of this scenario, JAT gal marries a non JAT boy and their child carries their father’s surname, will that child be a non - JAT?

Actually, I am not after ‘gautra’ as well, thing is now a days in one family you have one child married in non-JAT family and one in JAT family, both parents as may or may not be of JAT caste; In such a heterogeneous family how can one claim that they are JATs?

Being a JAT and marrying into non-JAT family is not a crime but then in coming generation, it will be a mix of breeds. So if we accepting this then -
1) Why this so much fuss over inter caste marriages/ inter religion marriages then?
2) Why then anybody so much fanatic about any caste be it JAT or non JAT?

And if it really matters, then how can one say that he/she is a JAT or proud to be JAT?

Or is it just like our name that we are differentiating ourselves at initial level to make things easy. Like at lower level, its name, then your village/city name, then your district or state name or country name and so on……likewise within society to make things orderly and managed, we have divided ourselves into JATs and other non JAT castes. So, be it same caste marriage or intercaste marriage and as a result be it hetrogeneous family or non hetrogeneous family, its upto individuals to decide themselves as whatever they want to be or called to be?
 
Last edited:
jat is not a breed. its a samaj (community) meaning a group of people with a common culture, language, and thinking (vichaar).

breed sab insaanon ki ek hai..dont confuse community with breed or nasal.
so if a jat and non jat marries, then the child will b a jat if he has the nature of jat. otherwise not. aur gotra hamesha pita ka chalta hai.
 
Last edited:
Thnx for clarification, 'Breed' se mera abhipraye 'hybrid family i.e mix of JAT and non JAT castes' se he.

Also, I would like to correct myself, I presumed that JAT is a caste, that is very limited meaning that I have derived out of JAT, with further study I have come to know that its not just a caste, its RACE, an Ethnic group of people. I am still studying and will share my inputs in later threads.

"its a samaj (community) meaning a group of people with a common culture, language, and thinking (vichaar)." ...es hisab se to pura North India hi JAT ho gya, as far as I know we have more or less the same common culture, language. And thinking I am not sure because it can be different, agar thinking se aapka matlab "Aachar vayahvar" se he to shayad ye b apna common sa hi he.

And with your inputs starting "if a jat and non jat marries, then the child will b a jat if he has the nature of jat"...so in this way -
1) A JAT male marries a non JAT female, then Child = JAT
2) A JAT female marries a non JAT male, then Child = JAT..

Quite interesting :confused::rolleyes:

And "if he has the nature of jat...", can you please share some more as what is the nature of JAT?

Next line "aur gotra hamesha pita ka chalta hai.", is it a Thumb Rule :confused:

We have some 'vicharsheel' female members over here at JL, seek their participation as well.
 
Last edited:
All human beings are the same as blood flowing through their veins is same and i find absolutely no comparisons in that sense of things.What Jats or any other group we see today(attitude wise) is byproduct of long circumstantial evolution based on the role they played in various circumstances and how powerful or weak they could subsequently emerge and were acknowledged that way by the society at large from time to time.50-100 years back Jats used to be considered as Marshal Kaum because of their ability to fight the enemy physically which some other groups in society feared and dreaded.But look at today's circumstances....bahujan samaaj is political marshal and a south indian more accurate soldier/policeman.So it is a matter of time and circumstances.


No harm jat girls/boys marrying inter cast as how long can we remain aloof from the rest of the society....In fact Ch Charan Singh broke this barrier long back.Jats have to learn lots of skill to come to main stream of the society.Lets be good human being first...rest will be good automatically.
 
जाट शब्द का निर्माण संस्कृत के 'ज्ञात' शब्द से हुआ है. अथवा यों कहिये की यह 'ज्ञात' शब्द का अपभ्रंश है. लगभग 1450 वर्ष ईशा पूर्व में अथवा महाभारत काल में भारत में अराजकता का व्यापक प्रभाव था. यह चर्म सीमा को लाँघ चुका था. उत्तरी भारत में साम्राज्यवादी शासकों ने प्रजा को असह्य विपदा में डाल रखा था. इस स्थिति को देखकर कृष्ण ने अग्रज बलराम की सहायता से कंस को समाप्त कर उग्रसेन को मथुरा का शासक नियुक्त किया. कृष्ण ने साम्राज्यवादी शासकों से संघर्ष करने हेतु एक संघ का निर्माण किया. उस समय यादवों के अनेक कुल थे किंतु सर्व प्रथम उन्होंने अन्धक और वृष्नी कुलों का ही संघ बनाया. संघ के सदस्य आपस में सम्बन्धी होते थे इसी कारण उस संघ का नाम 'ज्ञाति-संघ' रखा गया.

ठाकुर देशराज लिखते हैं कि महाभारत युद्ध के पश्चात् राजनैतिक संघर्ष हुआ जिसके कारण पांडवों को हस्तिनापुर तथा यादवों को द्वारिका छोड़ना पड़ा. ये लोग भारत से बाहर इरान, अफगानिस्तान, अरब, औतुर्किस्तान देशों में फ़ैल गए. चंद्रवंशी क्षत्रिय जो यादव नाम से अधिक प्रसिद्द थे वे इरान से लेकर सिंध, पंजाब, सौराष्ट्र, मध्य भारत और राजस्थान में फ़ैल गए. पूर्व-उत्तर में ये लोग कश्मीर, नेपाल, बिहार तक फैले. यही नहीं मंगोल देश में भी जा पहुंचे. कहा जाता है कि पांडव साइबेरिया में पहुंचे और वहां वज्रपुर आबाद किया. यूनान वाले हरक्यूलीज की संतान मानते हैं और इस भांति अपने को कृष्ण तथा बलदेव की संतान बताते हैं. चीन-वाशी भी अपने को भारतीय आर्यों की संतान मानते हैं. इससे आर्यों को महाभारत के बाद विदेशों में जाना अवश्य पाया जाता है. ये वही लोग थे जो पीछे से शक, पल्लव्ह, कुषाण, यूची, हूण, गूजर आदि नामों से भारत में आते समय पुकारे जाते हैं.

यह 'ज्ञाति-संघ' व्यक्ति प्रधान नहीं था. इसमें शामिल होते ही किसी राजकुल का पूर्व नाम आदि सब समाप्त हो जाते थे. वह केवल ज्ञाति के नाम से ही जाना जाता था. प्राचीन ग्रंथो के अध्ययन से यह बात साफ हो जाती है की परिस्थिति और भाषा के बदलते रूप के कारण 'ज्ञात' शब्द ने 'जाट' शब्द का रूप धारण कर लिया. महाभारत काल में शिक्षित लोगों की भाषा संस्कृत थी. इसी में साहित्य सर्जन होता था. कुछ समय पश्चात जब संस्कृत का स्थान प्राकृत भाषा ने ग्रहण कर लिया तब भाषा भेद के कारण 'ज्ञात' शब्द का उच्चारण 'जाट' हो गया. आज से दो हजार वर्ष पूर्व की प्राकृत भाषा की पुस्तकों में संस्कृत 'ज्ञ' का स्थान 'ज' एवं 'त' का स्थान 'ट' हुआ मिलता है. इसकी पुष्टि व्याकरण के पंडित बेचारदास जी ने भी की है. उन्होंने कई प्राचीन प्राकृत भाषा के व्यकरणों के आधार पर नविन प्राकृत व्याकरण बनाया है जिसमे नियम लिखा है कि संस्कृत 'ज्ञ' का 'ज' प्राकृत में विकल्प से हो जाता है और इसी भांति 'त' के स्थान पर 'ट' हो जाता है. इसके इस तथ्य कि पुष्टि सम्राट अशोक के शिला लेखों से भी होती है जो उन्होंने २६४-२२७ ईशा पूर्व में धर्मव्लियों के स्तंभों पर खुदवाई थी. उसमें भी कृत के सतह पर कट और मृत के स्थान पर मत हुआ मिलाता है. अतः उपरोक्त प्रमाणों के आधार पर सिद्ध होता है कि 'जाट' शब्द संस्कृत के 'ज्ञात' शब्द का ही रूपांतर है.अतः जैसे ज्ञात शब्द संघ का बोध करता है उसी प्रकार जाट शब्द भी संघ का वाचक है.

इसी आधार पर पाणिनि ने अष्टाध्यायी व्याकरण में 'जट' धातु का प्रयोग कर 'जट झट संघाते' सूत्र बना दिया. इससे इस बात की पुष्टि होती है कि जाट शब्द का निर्माण ईशा पूर्व आठवीं शदी में हो चुका था.

जाट संघ से अन्य संगठनों की उत्पति

जाट संघ में भारत वर्ष के अधिकाधिक क्षत्रिय शामिल हो गए थे. जाट का अर्थ भी यही है कि जिस जाति में बहुत सी ताकतें एकजाई हों यानि शामिल हों, एक चित हों, ऐसे ही समूह को जाट कहते हैं. जाट संघ के पश्चात् अन्य अलग-अलग संगठन बने. जैसे अहीर, गूजर, मराठा तथा राजपूत. ये सभी इसी प्रकार के संघ थे जैसा जाट संघ था. राजपूत जाति का संगठन बौद्ध धर्म के प्रभाव को कम करने के लिए ही पौराणिक ब्राहमणों ने तैयार किया था. बौद्धधर्म से पहले राजपूत नामका कोई वर्ग या समाज न था.
 
Burdak Ji....thanks for putting this piece of information here in detail. I wanted to know it for so long:)
lrburdak said:
जाट शब्द का निर्माण संस्कृत के 'ज्ञात' शब्द से हुआ है. अथवा यों कहिये की यह 'ज्ञात' शब्द का अपभ्रंश है. लगभग 1450 वर्ष ईशा पूर्व में अथवा महाभारत काल में भारत में अराजकता का व्यापक प्रभाव था. यह चर्म सीमा को लाँघ चुका था.
Click to expand...
 
Thank you Dev ji, Laxman ji and Sunita ji for your time and inputs about origin of JAT word.

However my question is again left unanswered.

To be very specific let me again ask, what can be the status of a child born in a hybrid family (mix of JAT and non JAT castes).

I digged into JL Wiki pedia itself and got some interesting stuff - it goes like this..

"Definition of Jat Status in Jat Tribal Blood Law

The status of being a Jat is defined by the Jat blood (DNA) of the Father and mother of the offspring (Children). The Scythians warriors that invaded the Punjab region and India in general were men (males). Each one of them took native women as wives. The children produced from that joining were the first Jats. The Status of being a Jat in Jat Tribal Blood Law is decided by the father's Jat blood (the DNA Y chromosome of the father being from Central Asia). If a Jat Man marries a Jat Woman in Jat Tribal Blood Law the children from that marriage are given Full Jat status (100% Jat) by Jat Tribal Blood Laws. If a Jat Man marries a Non-Jat Woman in Jat Tribal Blood Law the children from that marriage are given Half Jat status (50% Jat) by Jat Tribal Blood Laws. If a Jat Woman marries a Non-Jat Man in Jat Tribal Blood Law the children from that marriage are given No Jat status (0% Jat) by Jat Tribal Blood Laws.

Father Mother Child Status (%)

Jatt Jatt Full Jatt (100 %)
Jatt Non-Jatt Half Jatt (50 %)
Non-Jatt Jatt Non-Jatt (0 %)
Non-Jatt Non-Jatt Non-Jatt (0 %)

Note: Historically and currently, Pure Jats (Full Jats) are commanded by Jat Law to marry other Pure Jats (Full Jats) to prevent their future offspring (children) losing Full Jat Status and losing (DNA) blood membership of the Jat community. Once blood membership of the Jat community is lost by becoming Half Jat (50 % Jat) or Non-Jat (0 % Jat), it is impossible for future descendents (e.g. grandchildren or great grandchildren) to ever become Jat again (100 %). Historically, Half Jats (50 % Jat) have found it very difficult for themselves to be accepted for marriage by Jat families (100 % Jat families). A decision to marry outside of the Jat community is PERMANENT (DNA) blood wise and can NEVER be undone for any potential children of that individual. Therefore, marrying outside of one's Jat community is almost never done due to the seriousness of the outcome."

Your views please...
 
Last edited:
Hi Sunil

Question involves legal and Social aspects .

Point 3,4,5 can be simply omitted.

No doubt regarding point one.

Point 2 and Six are almost same and needs explanation.

Legally they will be considered Jats but Socially there may be problems.But if their future generation keep on marrying among Jats they will be treated as Jats .
 
lrburdak said:
आज से दो हजार वर्ष पूर्व की प्राकृत भाषा की पुस्तकों में संस्कृत 'ज्ञ' का स्थान 'ज' एवं 'त' का स्थान 'ट' हुआ मिलता है. इसकी पुष्टि व्याकरण के पंडित बेचारदास जी ने भी की है. उन्होंने कई प्राचीन प्राकृत भाषा के व्यकरणों के आधार पर नविन प्राकृत व्याकरण बनाया है जिसमे नियम लिखा है कि संस्कृत 'ज्ञ' का 'ज' प्राकृत में विकल्प से हो जाता है और इसी भांति 'त' के स्थान पर 'ट' हो जाता है. .
Click to expand...

Laxman ji .


Is there any two thousand year old Parakrit Book available that Pandit Bechardas quoted for this rule ?

Can you tell us the primary source ?

Please don't take secondary sources on their face value .
 
Last edited:
A dictionary of Urdu, classical Hindi, and English available at URL

http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/platts/

has entry for जाट. These are:


1. جاٿ जाट jāṭ : (page 370)

Math.) right-angled, rectangular, oblong;—s.m. A person of noble descent;—a rectangle:—jātyāyat, adj. & s.f. Rectangular, oblong;—a rectangle:—jātya-tribhuj, s.m. A right-angled triangle.

جاٿ जाट jāṭ

H جاٿ जाट jāṭ, s.m. Name of a tribe of Rājpūts (who are mostly cultivators); a member of the tribe.
جاٿ जाट jāṭ

H

2. جاٿ जाट jāṭ : (page 370)

person of noble descent;—a rectangle:—jātyāyat, adj. & s.f. Rectangular, oblong;—a rectangle:—jātya-tribhuj, s.m. A right-angled triangle.

جاٿ जाट jāṭ

H جاٿ जाट jāṭ, s.m. Name of a tribe of Rājpūts (who are mostly cultivators); a member of the tribe.
جاٿ जाट jāṭ

H جاٿ जाट jāṭ,

3. جاٿ जाट jāṭ : (page 370)

جاٿ जाट jāṭ

H جاٿ जाट jāṭ, s.m. Name of a tribe of Rājpūts (who are mostly cultivators); a member of the tribe.
جاٿ जाट jāṭ

H جاٿ जाट jāṭ, s.m.=jāṭh, q.v.
جاٿل जाटल jāṭal

H جاٿل जाटल jāṭal,

4. جاٿ जाट jāṭ : (page 370)

H جاٿ जाट jāṭ, s.m. Name of a tribe of Rājpūts (who are mostly cultivators); a member of the tribe.
جاٿ जाट jāṭ

H جاٿ जाट jāṭ, s.m.=jāṭh, q.v.
جاٿل जाटल jāṭal

H جاٿل जाटल jāṭal, = S جاٿلي
 
narenderkharb said:
Laxman ji .


Is there any two thousand year old Parakrit Book available that Pandit Bechardas quoted for this rule ? Can you tell us the primary source ?

Please don't take secondary sources on their face value .
Click to expand...

Narenderji,

Whatever source has been used is quoted. I think this site is not a primary research site. We are educating our people about thes matters concerned with Jats. We are discussing things. We have references in our Jat historian's books. Unless we bring them here and do not discuss how are we supposed to accept or reject. My request is that if some member has content other than given by me it can be put here and discussed. The concept of preeching others should be kept aside. We should work in form of जाट संघ or 'ज्ञाति-संघ'.

You can see this reference: प्राकृत व्याकरण द्वारा बेचारदास, पृ. 41

Regards,
 
Last edited:
ठाकुर देशराज जाट इतिहास के पृष्ठ १०७ पर लिखते हैं कि ज्ञात का उच्चारण हिन्दी और संस्कृत में जात होता है. फ़िर जिस समय में ज्ञात से जात या जाट आम बोल-चाल में प्रयोग होने लगा, उस समय उत्तर भारत की भाषा संस्कृत मिश्रित पिसाची (प्राकृत) थी. इसलिए यह कोई असंभव बात नहीं कि तत्कालीन बोल-चाल के अनुसार ज्ञात अथवा जात से जट व जाट हो गया. संस्कृत का भक्त प्राकृत में भट्ट है जो हिन्दी में भाट सिन्धी में भट कहलाता है.

इसी आधार पर पाणिनि ने अष्टाध्यायी व्याकरण में 'जट' धातु का प्रयोग कर 'जट झट संघाते' सूत्र बना दिया. इससे इस बात की पुष्टि होती है कि जाट शब्द का निर्माण ईशा पूर्व आठवीं शदी में हो चुका था.
 
महाभारत के शान्ति पर्व पुस्तक 12 अध्याय 82 में

महाभारत के शान्ति पर्व पुस्तक 12 अध्याय 82 में ज्ञाति-संघ

महाभारत के शान्ति पर्व पुस्तक 12 अध्याय 82 में यदु वंश के दो कुलों अन्धक और वृष्णियों ने एक राजनैतिक संघ बनाया था. उस संघ में दो राजनैतिक दल थे जिनमें एक तरफ़ श्रीकृष्ण तथा दूसरी तरफ़ उग्रसेन थे. उनकी सभा में खूब वाद विवाद हुआ करते थे. इन्ही कठिनाइयों का वर्णन श्रीकृष्ण ने नारद से किया और नारद ने सलाह दी कि जैसे भी बने संघ को नष्ट न होने दें संघ संचालन के लिए जिन गुणों की आवश्यकता होती है वे भी नारद ने कृष्ण को बताये.

स ते सौहृथम आस्दाय किं चिथ वक्ष्यामि नारथ
कृत्स्नां च बुथ्धिं संप्रेक्ष्य संपृच्छे तरिथिवं गम ।। 4 ।।

अर्थात - हे नारद तुम में मैं वह सच्ची मित्रता पाता हूँ जिस पर मैं निर्भर रह सकता हूँ, इसलिए मैं तुम्हें कुछ बातें कहना चाहता हूँ. हे सुप्रसन्न ! तुम्हारी बुद्धि बहुत प्रबल है, इसलिए तुम्हें एक बात पूछना चाहता हूँ. ।। 4 ।।

थास्यम ऐश्वर्यवाथेन ज्ञातीनां वै करॊम्य अहम
अर्धभॊक्तास्मि भॊगानां वाग थुर उक्तानि च कषमे ।। 5 ।।

अर्थात - यद्यपि लोग उसे ऐश्वर्य या प्रभुत्व कहते हैं तथापि मैं जो कुछ करता हूँ वह वास्तव में अपनी जाति के लोगों का दासत्व है. यद्यपि मैं अच्छे वैभव या शासनाधिकार का भोग करता हूँ तथापि मुझे उनके कठोर वचन ही सहने पड़ते हैं. ।। 5 ।।

सॊ ऽहं कितव मातेव थवयॊर अपि महामुने
एकस्य जयम आशंसे थवितीयस्यापराजयम ।। 11 ।।

ममैवं कलिश्यमानस्य नारथॊभयतः सथा
वक्तुम अर्हसि यच छरेयॊ ज्ञातीनाम आत्मनस तदा ।। 12 ।।

अर्थात - हे महामुने ! इन दोनों (अन्धक और वृष्णि ) के बीच में मैं उन दो जुवारिओं की माता की भांति रहता हूँ जो आपस में एक दूसरे के साथ जुआ खेलते हैं और वह माता न तो इस बात की आकांक्षा कर सकती है कि अमुक जीते और न इस बात कि कि अमुक हारे. अब हे नारद ! तुम मेरी अवस्था और साथ ही मेरे ज्ञातियों की अवस्था पर विचार करो और कृपा कर मुझे कोई ऐसा उपाय बताओ जो दोनों के लिए कल्याण कारक हो. मैं बहुत ही दुखी हो रहा हूँ. ।। 11-12 ।।

आपथॊ थविविधाः कृष्ण बाह्याश चाभ्यन्तराश च ह
पराथुर्भवन्ति वार्ष्णेय सवकृता यथि वान्यतः ।। 13 ।।

अर्थात - नारद ने कहा - हे कृष्ण प्रजातंत्र गणों में दो प्रकार की आपत्तियां हो सकती हैं. एक तो बाह्य या बाहरी और दूसरी आभ्यन्तर या भीतरी, अर्थात एक तो वे जिनका प्रादुर्भाव अपने अन्दर से होता है और दूसरी वे जिनका प्रादुर्भाव अन्य स्थान से होता है. ।। 13 ।।

कृतमूलम इथानीं तज ज्ञातशब्थं सहायवत
न शक्यं पुनर आथातुं वान्तम अन्नम इव तवया ।। 16 ।।

बभ्रूग्रसेनयॊ राज्यं नाप्तुं शक्यं कदं चन
ज्ञातिभेथ भयात कृष्ण तवया चापि विशेषतः ।। 17 ।।

अर्थात - जिस अधिकार ने जड़ पकड़ ली है और जो ज्ञाति शब्द की सहायता से और भी दृढ़ हो गया है, उसे लोग वमन किए हुए भोजन की भांति से वापस नहीं ले सकते. ज्ञात में मत-भेद या विरोध होने के भय से वभ्रू उग्रसेन राज्य या शासनाधिकार वापस नहीं ले सकते. हे कृष्ण ! विशेषतः तुम उनकी कुछ सहायता नहीं कर सकते. ।। 16-17 ।।

ज्ञातीनां वक्तुकामानां कटूनि च लघूनि च
गिरा तवं हृथयं वाचं शमयस्व मनांसि च ।। 22 ।।

अर्थात - ज्ञाति के लोग कटु और लघु बातें कहते हैं, उनकी बातों पर ध्यान मत दो और अपने उत्तर से उनका ह्रदय और मन शांत करो. ।। 22 ।।

नामहा पुरुषः कश चिन नानात्मा नासहाय वान
महतीं धुरम आथत्ते ताम उथ्यम्यॊरसा वह ।। 23 ।।

अर्थात - जो महापुरुष नहीं है, आत्म-बलवान नहीं है और जिसके अनुयायी नहीं हैं, वह उच्च राजनैतिक दायित्व का भार सफलता पूर्वक वहन नहीं कर सकता. ।। 23 ।।

सर्व एव गुरुं भारम अनड्वान वहते समे
थुर्गे परतीकः सुगवॊ भारं वहति थुर वहम ।। 24 ।।

अर्थात - समतल भूमि पर तो हर एक बैल भारी बोझ लाड कर चल सकता है पर कठिन बोझ लाड कर कठिन मार्ग पर चलना केवल बहुत बढ़िया और अनुभवी बैल का ही काम है. ।। 24 ।।

भेथाथ विनाशः संघानां संघमुख्यॊ ऽसि केशव
यदा तवां पराप्य नॊत्सीथेथ अयं संघस तदा कुरु ।। 25।।

नान्यत्र बुथ्धिक्षान्तिभ्यां नान्यत्रेन्थ्रिय निग्रहात
नान्यत्र धनसंत्यागाथ गणः पराज्ञे ऽवतिष्ठते ।। 26 ।।

अर्थात - केवल भेद निति के सहारे ज्ञातिसंघों का नाश हो सकता है. हे केसव तुम संघों के नेता हो या संघ ने तुम्हें इस समय प्रधान के रूप में प्राप्त किया है. अतः तुम ऐसा काम करो जिसमें यह संघ नष्ट न हो. बुद्धिमत्ता, सहनशीलता, इन्द्रिय-निग्रह और उदारता आदि ही वे गुण हैं जो किसी बुद्धिमान मनुष्य में किसी संघ का सफलता पूर्ण नेतृत्व ग्रहण करने के लिए आवश्यक होते हैं. ।। 25-26 ।।

धन्यं यशस्यम आयुष्यं सवपक्षॊथ्भावनं शुभम
ज्ञातीनाम अविनाशः सयाथ यदा कृष्ण तदा कुरु ।। 27।।

अर्थात - हे कृष्ण अपने पक्ष की उन्नति से सदा धन, वंश और आयु की वृद्धि होती है. तुम ऐसा काम करो जिससे तुम्हारे ज्ञ्यातियों का विनाश न हो. ।। 27।।
 
Last edited:
your frank opinions would surely help

JAT definition by Tribal Law (yester years' definition)

By the definition of Tribal law, I believe I have got the answers of this thread. But this very tribal law existed centuries of years back and probably started with the evolution of JAT race, and referring the JAT history it seems that JATs are the descendants of Indo-Aryans and Indo-Scythian tribes of the region, merging to form the JAT people.

So, a JAT is -

1) One who is born in a JAT family (All generation purely JAT without any other caste involved) meaning 100% JAT
2) One who is born in a family (JAT Father or grandfather has married in other caste) and child carries father’s ‘gautra’ is a JAT, meaning 50% JAT.
3) No other combination is a JAT indeed.

The 2nd point may also be considered as full JAT status since the very origin of JAT race started like this as mentioned in JAT history that JAT people were really migrants who settled in Sindh area and married local women. Thus (migrant descendants of Indo Aryans/Scythians + local women) = JAT people. This process might have been prevalent for over centuries and thus evolving JAT race.

Thus considering the above fact, even at present time if some JAT marries in non JAT caste, the child should be 100% JAT. (100% or 50%, may be debated)

JAT definition in current timings (present timings definition)

Thought do we really need the definition of being JAT in present timings?

1) If yes, by what standards do we define somebody being JAT or non JAT? Should we stick to the Tribal Law or does it need amendments?
2) If not, don’t you think we are unnecessarily carrying this false EGO of being JAT and fuss over so many other resultant issues like Inter caste marriages/Inter religion marriages?

Personally I have a major circle of JAT friends and many of them have married in non JAT castes. And like me, many of my other friends have willingly or unwillingly accepted these friends with their wives (non JAT caste), reason being these girls are really educated, understanding, socially aware, rational thinker, good natured and well behaved. What else do we need in them?

And likewise, here my intent is not to say that my other JAT friends who have got married in JAT families, their wives don’t have these exemplary characteristics as mentioned above for non JAT caste wives, in fact they are equally good and might be better as these have more or less the same culture and are better adjusted.

And some of these friends (talking about friends who have gone for inter caste marriages) have now children as well –

1) I am thinking as who are we indeed to label these newborn babies as JAT or non JAT?
2) Isn’t it enough that these babies are human beings and do we want these children as as good human beings or JAT(does not mean that JATs are not good human beings) ?

Does it really matter being JAT in this fast changing world today?

1) If yes, how would we like to preserve our culture and our race? Or is it like that we don’t know where actually we are heading towards and may get consequences after many years from now and it will be too late by then?
2) If not, NO further discussion.

As Dev Dahiya ji said, JAT race can NOT remain aloof in current timings. Like for Muslims as we usually make a statement that they need total introspection, don’t you think JAT people/Race also needs total introspection as our Tribal Law stands odd in present timings and needs amendment?

Personally, I want to come out of this dilemma and thought to share my views at JL. Since JL has most of the members in their youth, are well educated and have multicultural exposure, so who could be the best people to answer these questions. Perhaps I have targeted the right audiences and they could easily relate to this thought process dilemma as they will also have to face it sooner or later.

And I am sure; many other people might too have these questions in their mind to get them answered, so com-on share your opinions.
 
Last edited:
My humble request to Laxman ji as not to share stuff related to JAT word or race origin and if at all required, would appreciate if you could relate it in context with thread discussion.
 
Thanks sunilji,

The purpose of going into historical detail was to explain what Jat is. Jats have emerged not from a single epi-person but it is association or Union of Clans. We are not governed by sepate jat tribal marriage laws but by common Hindu Marriage laws. Traditionally we leave four clans while marrying boy and girl. Two clans of Boy's ancestry and two clans of Girl's ancestry. There are three possibilities:

Jat boy marries with Jat girl is Jat. This is Jat family and it carries the gotra of boy.

Jat boy marries with non-Jat girl is Jat. This families carries the gotra of boy. In patriarchal system girl's gotra is not accepted as family gotra. It is also confirmed by common tradition that 'Jat ke ghar aai jatni kahlai'.

Non-Jat boy marries with Jat girl: This family is not Jat family. The family carries the gotra of boy and over a period of time girl looses her identity as Jat. Traditionally this was discarded amongst Jats.

One more possibility is that a non Jat clan joining Jat Union. This was the prcess of assimilation in long past but not observed in present times. Why this was in past can be understood from a chapter in Mahabharata Book XII Chapter 108. Here it discusses as how a gana grows. Gana may be taken in the sense of a tribe or clan. You can see on JL Wiki at

http://www.jatland.com/home/Shanti_Parva_Mahabharata_Book_XII_Chapter_108
 
lrburdak said:
Thanks sunilji,

The purpose of going into historical detail was to explain what Jat is. Jats have emerged not from a single epi-person but it is association or Union of Clans. We are not governed by sepate jat tribal marriage laws but by common Hindu Marriage laws. Traditionally we leave four clans while marrying boy and girl. Two clans of Boy's ancestry and two clans of Girl's ancestry. There are three possibilities:

Jat boy marries with Jat girl is Jat. This is Jat family and it carries the gotra of boy.

Jat boy marries with non-Jat girl is Jat. This families carries the gotra of boy. In patriarchal system girl's gotra is not accepted as family gotra. It is also confirmed by common tradition that 'Jat ke ghar aai jatni kahlai'.

Non-Jat boy marries with Jat girl: This family is not Jat family. The family carries the gotra of boy and over a period of time girl looses her identity as Jat. Traditionally this was discarded amongst Jats.
Click to expand...

As explained well by Burdak ji, Mahabharat is the best source of information and reference so far as Jats are concerned. During that period, it was very common for kshatriyas to marry girls of foreign origin both for making bonds of friendships within kingdoms as well as refining the race. Arjuna also got married to an Iranian girl (named उलोपी). A 'non-Jat' girl could very well adapt to our system. A quotation may be noted:

परोक्ष प्रिया इव हि देवाः प्रत्यक्ष द्विषाः ।

Means - Marrying (प्रिया or wife) in remote regions (परोक्ष) brings more peace and happiness (देवाः) and marrying someone within one's neighbourhood (प्रत्यक्ष) only invites enmities and sufferings (द्विषाः) .

Hence, Jats adopted a system of leaving several clans (gotras) while deciding marriage bonds.

See the examples of Muslims who marry within their own family and clan - and the bad effects of their system which we all know.
.
 
Last edited:
निजी अनुभव से मेरा ऐसा मानना है , जाट समाज के प्रचलित और सर्वमान्य नियमो और प्रचलित परम्पराओं के हिसाब से किसी जाट परवार में आने व् जाने से किसी व्यक्ति विशेष की सामाजिक पहचान पर सीधा फर्क नही पड़ता पर उनकी होने वाली संतान पर पड़ता है !
जाट समाज पितृ प्रधान है ! यानिकी पिता परिवार का मुखिया नही अपितु संतान को उसकी पहचान भी देता है ! कुल की पहचान / गोत्र , संतान को पिता से ही मिलती है ! अतः नियम सपष्टहै :
जाट परवार से गैर जाट परिवार में ब्याही जाने वाली लड़की , जाट ही रहेगी पर उसकी संतान नही ! आम बोलचल की भाषा में भी सुनने को मिलेगा की फलां लड़के ने जाट लड़की से शादी की है ! पर उसकी संतान को कोई नही कहेगा की वो जाट है !
इसी तरह जाट परिवार में ब्याही जाने वाली गैर जाट लड़की ताउमर उसकी मूल जाती /समाज से ही जानी जायेगी ! निसंदेह , संतान जाट के रूप में ही जानी जायेगी !

खुश रहो !
 
dndeswal said:
As explained well by Burdak ji, Mahabharat is the best source of information and reference so far as Jats are concerned. During that period, it was very common for kshatriyas to marry girls of foreign origin both for making bonds of friendships within kingdoms as well as refining the race. Arjuna also got married to an Iranian girl (named उलोपी). A 'non-Jat' girl could very well adapt to our system. A quotation may be noted:

परोक्ष प्रिया इव हि देवाः प्रत्यक्ष द्विषाः ।

Means - Marrying (प्रिया or wife) in remote regions (परोक्ष) brings more peace and happiness (देवाः) and marrying someone within one's neighbourhood (प्रत्यक्ष) only invites enmities and sufferings (द्विषाः) .

Hence, Jats adopted a system of leaving several clans (gotras) while deciding marriage bonds.

See the examples of Muslims who marry within their own family and clan - and the bad effects of their system which we all know.
.
Click to expand...
ye sirf arya samaj (hindu) ko manne wale jato me hain. sikh , bishnoi, ya muslim jato me nahi hain. Sirsa side ke hindu jat apne gaam ki gaam me a byaah kar le s.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top