Jat- the term origins, history, etymology etc

[drssrana2003]

@ Ravi ji....... ....Let us not belittle the efforts of foreign authors under colonial tag .Do we find a tempering with the historical data in their efforts as many of these so called nationalist Indian Historians are doing these days.

@ Prashant ................Your model is largely agreeable however terms Scythian Aryan Sikh and Hindu are not properly applied and you have left at least two other major immigration waves but right now we can exclude them from our discussion.

@Ranbear.....Aryans were not Indians.................That's a fact.

@Dr SS Rana .....With all respect to your sincere efforts and a proper approach I can say you are widely off the mark in your quest for a True Jat History .I agree with you that exmples like Jat Jhat Sanghate have no relation with Jat identity and name similarity is not a solid proof unless substantiated by other proofs but your hypothesis regarding origin of Jat word because of a similar word in Arabic language is most untenable Hypothesis presented by any Scholar so far .

Dear Narendra,
I think, academic discussions are fruitful if we do engage and get engaged in arguments. Expressions like ‘untenable’ or ‘Jats were not Aryans’ smack of magisterial approach which could not lead to a productive debate. We all have our limitations of access to latest information on a given topic. I too have mine. And I am sure you could not have got the impression of my ploughing my lonely furrow in the matter of the ‘ late and Arab origins’ of the term ‘Jat’ had you had access to the very extensive researches conducted by the German Westphal couple and published in their two books which are listed on Jatland Wiki library. The bigger Volume in German language is as good as inaccessible to many of us. I also refer you to the statement in the ‘Majmaultwareekh’ ( I wish I could give the exact reference!) that ‘ the Arabs call the hinus ‘Jat’.
When a limited reference is made to the error of judgment in the writing of the western writers it should not be taken as a whole condemnation of their efforts. But if one makes a comprehensive study of the background of several commissioned authors in a strictly political context one can not fail to notice the motives which, in several cases, have not been found to be purely research for objective history. I would like to draw a line between well informed indigenous authors marshalling arguments on the basis of hitherto unexplored information or new facts on the one side, and on the other side the self appointed saviours of our ancient civilization, churning out a fanciful account of our past to receive standing ovation from the gullible ones among us. If you have not happened to go through Maculay’s writings and in this regard it may be helpful to appreciate the point made about colonial approach.And as I have pointed out earlier were not some of the distinguished British writers part of the 'Great Game' being played on Central Asia during the 18/19 th centurie?
At the same time I am deeply touched by the regard you have expressed towards me personally in your reponses.
Also I am flattered when I find you agreeing with me on my views regarding j’ata jhata anghate’ in the dhatupatha of Panini. But there many who do not agree. I respect their views also. However, I would like to continue to argue with them, with freh insights if possible. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
Thanks.
s.s.rana <o></o>

A people is known by the kind of history it writes, or forgets to write one/

 

[narenderkharb]

Dear Narendra,
I think, academic discussions are fruitful if we do engage and get engaged in arguments. Expressions like ‘untenable’ or ‘Jats were not Aryans’ smack of magisterial approach which could not lead to a productive debate. We all have our limitations of access to latest information on a given topic. I too have mine. And I am sure you could not have got the impression of my ploughing my lonely furrow in the matter of the ‘ late and Arab origins’ of the term ‘Jat’ had you had access to the very extensive researches conducted by the German Westphal couple and published in their two books which are listed on Jatland Wiki library. The bigger Volume in German language is as good as inaccessible to many of us. I also refer you to the statement in the ‘Majmaultwareekh’ ( I wish I could give the exact reference!) that ‘ the Arabs call the hinus ‘Jat’

Respected Sir ..

If you think Arabs called all Hindus as Jats than you are sadly mistaken .Arabs mention them as a section of Indian people in Sindh ,Belochistan ,Makran and Afghanistan province. They do mention about other communities like Meds and brahmans and even give seperate histories for them.

Further you have not gone through that refernce of Majmuul al Tawarikh ,Primary Refernce itself mention Jats along with other communities like Meds and Brahmans hence your hypothesis regarding all Hindus =Jats stands nullified here itself. Refernce further points out that Jats were not under the religion of Brahmans(Hinduism)


Let us first make ourself clear on our hypothesis .....and than we can go for refernces ...


If you propose a hypothesis that Jat term came in to existence because of Arabs for a similar derogatory word in Arabian language than it is flondered by very evidence that you gave in support of your hypothsis ........

Since author of Majmul -al- Tawarikh quoting even older Indian texts affirms the presence of Jats here along with Meds and Brahmans fighting with each other as seperate communities before any Arab ever visited this land.





.

When a limited reference is made to the error of judgment in the writing of the western writers it should not be taken as a whole condemnation of their efforts. But if one makes a comprehensive study of the background of several commissioned authors in a strictly political context one can not fail to notice the motives which, in several cases, have not been found to be purely research for objective history. I would like to draw a line between well informed indigenous authors marshalling arguments on the basis of hitherto unexplored information or new facts on the one side, and on the other side the self appointed saviours of our ancient civilization, churning out a fanciful account of our past to receive standing ovation from the gullible ones among us. If you have not happened to go through Maculay’s writings and in this regard it may be helpful to appreciate the point made about colonial approach.And as I have pointed out earlier were not some of the distinguished British writers part of the 'Great Game' being played on Central Asia during the 18/19 th centurie?

At the same time I am deeply touched by the regard you have expressed towards me personally in your reponses.

My intention here is that We should not fall prey to some Nationalist historians who just wants to further their own agenda under this segregation of our and their(Britishers) history .Let us deny any scholar on the basis of reasoning not on whether he was Colonial or Native Scholar.

Also I am flattered when I find you agreeing with me on my views regarding j’ata jhata anghate’ in the dhatupatha of Panini. But there many who do not agree. I respect their views also. However, I would like to continue to argue with them, with freh insights if possible. fficeffice" /><O></O>
Thanks.
s.s.rana <O></O>

A people is known by the kind of history it writes, or forgets to write one/

I have put my ideas clearly on this issue long ago.However Jaatya Aaatnaro may represent a Jat if we believe Prof Sukhi Chand Rawat a Sanskrit Scholar and a Jat Historian ,I have requested him to put his views here by joining this site

 

[ranbear]

@ Ravi ji....... ....Let us not belittle the efforts of foreign authors under colonial tag .Do we find a tempering with the historical data in their efforts as many of these so called nationalist Indian Historians are doing these days.

@ Prashant ................Your model is largely agreeable however terms Scythian Aryan Sikh and Hindu are not properly applied and you have left at least two other major immigration waves but right now we can exclude them from our discussion.

@Ranbear.....Aryans were not Indians.................That's a fact.

@Dr SS Rana .....With all respect to your sincere efforts and a proper approach I can say you are widely off the mark in your quest for a True Jat History .I agree with you that exmples like Jat Jhat Sanghate have no relation with Jat identity and name similarity is not a solid proof unless substantiated by other proofs but your hypothesis regarding origin of Jat word because of a similar word in Arabic language is most untenable Hypothesis presented by any Scholar so far .

I would like to hear what you have to say about the aryans as you have said that they were not indians and its a fact,please elaborate on it dear narender.

 

[drssrana2003]

Respected Sir ..

If you think Arabs called all Hindus as Jats than you are sadly mistaken .Arabs mention them as a section of Indian people in Sindh ,Belochistan ,Makran and Afghanistan province. They do mention about other communities like Meds and brahmans and even give seperate histories for them.

Further you have not gone through that refernce of Majmuul al Tawarikh ,Primary Refernce itself mention Jats along with other communities like Meds and Brahmans hence your hypothesis regarding all Hindus =Jats stands nullified here itself. Refernce further points out that Jats were not under the religion of Brahmans(Hinduism)


Let us first make ourself clear on our hypothesis .....and than we can go for refernces ...


If you propose a hypothesis that Jat term came in to existence because of Arabs for a similar derogatory word in Arabian language than it is flondered by very evidence that you gave in support of your hypothsis ........

Since author of Majmul -al- Tawarikh quoting even older Indian texts affirms the presence of Jats here along with Meds and Brahmans fighting with each other as seperate communities before any Arab ever visited this land.





.





My intention here is that We should not fall prey to some Nationalist historians who just wants to further their own agenda under this segregation of our and their(Britishers) history .Let us deny any scholar on the basis of reasoning not on whether he was Colonial or Native Scholar.









I have put my ideas clearly on this issue long ago.However Jaatya Aaatnaro may represent a Jat if we believe Prof Sukhi Chand Rawat a Sanskrit Scholar and a Jat Historian ,I have requested him to put his views here by joining this site

Dear Narendra,
I feel I am seen as one ncroaching upon a pre-wrtten script. I do realise that distant dialogues are rather an unmanagable thing. We can agree to disagree. Thanks.

s.s.rana
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A people is known by the kind of history it writrs, or forgets to write one.

 

[narenderkharb]

Dear Narendra,
I think, academic discussions are fruitful if we do engage and get engaged in arguments.

Sir , I was acting as per your suggestion and now you are just avoiding arguments over it..When you are proposing a theory you are bound to find people who will question the basics of it. If a theory can answer such critics than it is a worth it , otherwise we should just drop it and move on in our efforts to find a true past of our community.

I have also read a book by a German couple about Jats of Pakistan(As you mentioned in earlier post) which was given to me by another member of this site but I really found the book lacking in contents or evidences on such a crucial issue.May be you can put their version and evidences in support of your theory and we can critically analyse it .It is important to engage ourselves in arguments to find a real picture of our past

@RanBear ....we should discuss it under a proper thread .Make your points in three and four lines and we can discuss that point by point .

 

[lrburdak]

I have further digitized and Wikified one more chapter from Hukum Singh Panwar (Pauria) book The Jats:Their Origin, Antiquity and Migrations - Chapter X:The identification of the Jats

The link is - http://www.jatland.com/home/The_Jat...and_Migrations/The_identification_of_the_Jats

Members may go throuh it and comment. I quote two paras from it:

Another significant and interesting fact is that the Iranian terms (?) (jata and massa or Maha jata) as well as the Chinese Gut (الجات ?) literally convey the sense of the Paninian phrase jata jhata saghate (जट झट संघाते) from which the Indian scholars derive the name Jatt or Jat. All the three sources agree that the term Jat (जाट) means "to gather together", or "to unite" or "to confederate". The Indian writers think that there is no earlier provenance than Panini's Ashtadhyayi in which mention of Jata (जट) can be found.

It is said that there is no smoke without fire. Jata, as the name of a people, did exist in the period anterior to Panini, for Panini has acknowledged that all the roots, mentioned by him in the dhatupatha of his Ashtadhyayi, have come down from the earlier grammarians. His predecessor, Yaska, in his Nirukta describes many ambiguous terms like Jatya Atnaro (जाट्य आटनारो) , which undoubtedly means "in the Jata nomads" or "like the jata nomads." He apprises us further that such terms have descended from antiquity through Sakatayana. Evidently, this appellation must have been used by the grammarians and their scholiasts, prior to Panini, to denote the Saka nomads, whom we regard as the progenitors of the Jats, who used to wear locks and roam about in groups.

Note - Word in (?) has some arabi script. Members with knowledge of Arbi are requested to complete these.
Regards,

 

[ranbear]

Sir , I was acting as per your suggestion and now you are just avoiding arguments over it..When you are proposing a theory you are bound to find people who will question the basics of it. If a theory can answer such critics than it is a worth it , otherwise we should just drop it and move on in our efforts to find a true past of our community.



@RanBear ....we should discuss it under a proper thread .Make your points in three and four lines and we can discuss that point by point .

I think their is no need for a separate thread as this is topic intertwined with the topic already being discussed.
I wanted you to give the facts (Aryans were not Indians.................That's a fact) as stated by you ,i have already commented on this topic,i am waiting for your facts with eagerness so that i can comment on them and discuss your part .

 

[ravichaudhary]

I think their is no need for a separate thread as this is topic intertwined with the topic already being discussed.
I wanted you to give the facts (Aryans were not Indians.................That's a fact) as stated by you ,i have already commented on this topic,i am waiting for your facts with eagerness so that i can comment on them and discuss your part .

The is a separate thread for the Aryan question.

Please post your pro and against comments there.

Also please post the relevance to the Jat question there.

This thread is for the etymology question

Please cooperate.


Ravi Chaudhary

 

[drssrana2003]

Sir , I was acting as per your suggestion and now you are just avoiding arguments over it..When you are proposing a theory you are bound to find people who will question the basics of it. If a theory can answer such critics than it is a worth it , otherwise we should just drop it and move on in our efforts to find a true past of our community.

I have also read a book by a German couple about Jats of Pakistan(As you mentioned in earlier post) which was given to me by another member of this site but I really found the book lacking in contents or evidences on such a crucial issue.May be you can put their version and evidences in support of your theory and we can critically analyse it .It is important to engage ourselves in arguments to find a real picture of our past

@RanBear ....we should discuss it under a proper thread .Make your points in three and four lines and we can discuss that point by point .

Dear Narendra,
Yes, I do believe in engaging and get engaged through arguments. I am not avoiding arguments. I am only expressing my inadequacy in marshalling arguments (not value judgement about others' arguments) to counter respones in expresions like "you are sadly mitaken", "strong conviction that Jats were not Hindus" , "you are widely off the mark" and many other strongly worded value judgments on he opinions expressed by others. Every one is entitled to hold trong convictions, but we enter a forum with an open mind and patience. When such attitude is not available agreeing to disagree is the natural course. I wish you God speed in your enterprie.
Thanks.
s.s.rana
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A people is known by the kind of hitory it write, or forgets to write one.

 

[kapdal]

Dear Narendra,
Yes, I do believe in engaging and get engaged through arguments. I am not avoiding arguments. I am only expressing my inadequacy in marshalling arguments (not value judgement about others' arguments) to counter respones in expresions like "you are sadly mitaken", "strong conviction that Jats were not Hindus" , "you are widely off the mark" and many other strongly worded value judgments on he opinions expressed by others. Every one is entitled to hold trong convictions, but we enter a forum with an open mind and patience. When such attitude is not available agreeing to disagree is the natural course. I wish you God speed in your enterprie.
Thanks.
s.s.rana
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A people is known by the kind of hitory it write, or forgets to write one.

Ideally, conclusions and convictions follow a strong research. But with many people, a strong conviction comes first and then they actively hunt for evidence that "proves" it. I'd urge you to continue sharing your knowledge irrespective of such prejudiced viewpoints.

 

[lrburdak]

संसार में परमसत्य की खोज अभी तक नहीं हो पाई है. ऐसा ही जाट की उत्पत्ति के बारे में निष्कर्ष निकलता है. भारतीय समाज को समझाने, दशा और दिशा देने के लिए एक देव मान्य नहीं किया गया है. ब्रह्मा , विष्णु और शिव को बराबर माना गया है. इसलिए जाट की उत्पत्ति की परम खोज नहीं जो जाती तब तक हमारे प्रयास जरी रहने चाहिए. हमें सभी थ्योरियों को बराबर सम्मान देना चाहिए.

जत से जाट की उत्पत्ति प्रमाणित करने के लिए और जतन करने पड़ेंगे.

जट से जाट की उत्पत्ति भी उतनी ही जटिल है हमें और अनुशंधान करने पड़ेंगे.

संभवतः पाणिनि को यह आभाष रहा होगा इसलिए उसने जट झट संघाते कहा होगा. जाट को संघ के रूप में मजबूत करने की आवश्यकता है.

'ज्ञात' शब्द से जाट की उत्पत्ति भी अभी और खोज की मांग कराती है. ज्ञाति संघ को चलाना और बनाये रखना कितना कठिन था यह कृष्ण द्वारा युधिष्ठिर को महाभारत में उपदेश देकर समझाना पड़ा था.

 

[drssrana2003]

Jat - the rem origins, history, etymology etc.

संसार में परमसत्य की खोज अभी तक नहीं हो पाई है. ऐसा ही जाट की उत्पत्ति के बारे में निष्कर्ष निकलता है. भारतीय समाज को समझाने, दशा और दिशा देने के लिए एक देव मान्य नहीं किया गया है. ब्रह्मा , विष्णु और शिव को बराबर माना गया है. इसलिए जाट की उत्पत्ति की परम खोज नहीं जो जाती तब तक हमारे प्रयास जरी रहने चाहिए. हमें सभी थ्योरियों को बराबर सम्मान देना चाहिए.

जत से जाट की उत्पत्ति प्रमाणित करने के लिए और जतन करने पड़ेंगे.

जट से जाट की उत्पत्ति भी उतनी ही जटिल है हमें और अनुशंधान करने पड़ेंगे.

लक्ष्मण जी ,
आप ठीक कहते हैं . सत्य क्या है यह सिद्ध करने के लिए बहुत खोज की आवश्यकता है .आज 'जाट ' संज्ञा से जानी जाने वाली जाति की प्राचीनता के विषय मैं तो व्यापक तौर पर मान्यता दिखाई देती है. 'इस जाति के लोग भारतीय आर्य लोगों के वंशज हैं' यह मत भी आधुनिक विद्वानों में अधिक मान्य कहा जा सकता है . इस प्राचीनता और भारतीयता को सिद्ध करने का सर्वोत्तम सूत्र मुझे तो इस जाति की पहचान के वो बिन्दु अधिक उपयोगी और महत्वपूर्ण लगते हैं जिनको हम वैदिक काल के साहित्य से लेकर समग्र इतिहास काल के संस्कृत ग्रंथों में स्पष्ट रूप में उल्लिखित पाते हैं. और मेरे विचार से वे बिन्दु हैं इनके गोत्र एवं प्रवर नाम , इनके संघ नाम, तथा विवाह सम्बन्धी प्रथा एवं रीती रिवाज और साथ ही अन्य सामाजिक मान्यताएं . जाति के अर्थ में आज प्रयुक्त होने वाले 'जाट' शब्द को ध्रुव तारा मान कर चलने से सारा उत्तर छान कर भी यदि उत्तर संतोष - जनक नहीं मिलता तो अन्य दिशाओं में खोज करने में संकोच नहीं करना चाहिये . भाषा ध्वनियों का सार्थक मुच्चय है 'ट' से पहले आने वाली .'जा ' या 'ज' ध्वनियों से मेल खाते 'जटा' (बालों की ) अथवा 'जट'(बालों की ) शब्द हमें हठात आकर्षित तो करते हैं परन्तु अर्थ का अन्वय नहीं होता . पाणिनि और उनसे पूर्व एवं पश्चात समूचे संस्कृत एवं अन्य भारतीय भाषाओं के साहित्य में बालों के गुच्छे (संघात ) के अर्थ में ही इन दोनों ('जटा' और समास के उत्तर पद में 'जट' ,जैसे - 'दीर्घजट' ).पाणिनि ने इन्हीं प्रयोगों के सन्दर्भ में 'जट' धातु की व्यवस्था की है . ' संघात' शब्द भी इसी की पुष्टि करता है . पाणिनि को यहाँ 'संघ; अर्थ अभीष्ट होता तो वे उसी का प्रयोग करते . वे 'संघ ' शब्द का तकनीकी अर्थ जानते तो थे ही, साथ में अनेक संघों के नाम भी उन्हों ने दिए हैं . उन संघ नामों में कई ऐसे हैं जिनको बाद में 'जाट' नाम से पुकारे जाने इन jaवाले लोगों ने बनाया था . मुझे लगता है कि जाट जाति की प्राचीनता की खोज में जुटे अनेक जाट विद्वान कदाचित पाणिनि के 'जट झट संघाते ' धातुपाठ की सही व्याख्या करने में चूक कर गए लगते हैं .एक दूसरा .प्रश्न वर्ण एवं जाति व्यवस्था के परस्पर सम्बन्ध का है . यह भारतीय समाज शास्त्र का .एक जटिल प्रश्न है . अभी तो इतना ही कहना चाहूंगा कि - वर्ण एक समाज का परिकल्पित आदर्श रहा है और जाति एक जमीनी यथार्थ .एक में लोच है तो दूसरा सुनिर्धारित मनु ने अपनी स्मृति के १०वें अध्याय में जो वर्णसंकर के सिद्धांत से जो नई जाति के उदय की बात कही है वह जमीनी सत्य से मेल नहीं खाती .पी . वी . काणे जैसे धर्मशास्त्र के विद्वान एवं जी . एस . घुर्ये जैसे समाज शास्त्री ऐसा कह गए हैं .अधिकाँश जाति नामों का किसी न किसी व्यवसाय से सम्बन्ध जुड़ता है . 'जाट' जाति नाम पर यह बात घटित होती नहीं दिखती .इस की खोज करनी चाहिए .

s.s.rana
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A people is known by the kind of history it writes, or forgets to write one.