koi aser nahi h balhara bhai aur na kabhe tha;ha takar hoi hen aur uska jawab bhe karara mila h inhe.kia sharon ke kuch ander k baten hote h jaise Rewari ahiron ka ilaka mana jata h,par shahar m gujaron ke chalti h.rohtak shaher m bhe chordea badmashi dekha dete h.you are right they are untrustable.this is my personal experience that we can trust ahirs,gujjars but no thakar(80% of times).par asli chinta ka vishyea ye h k ab hum m khod hi joot baj rahe h;dosaron k kya kahe.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Jat unity-Are we really united ??
- Thread starter jksangwan
- Start date
Until someone gives it a written form, history is propagated in oral form only. So even the written form has it's roots in oral history. Factual writings and research based of the hard facts is rare and that's why history can be easily molded.Friend,
I congratulate you for giving an insight to the oral history based on gossips of Bhiwani District. Juxtaposition of facts and fiction from different periods of history have been mixed . Kindly read your post again and please amend it if you like to do so.
Regards
Coming to the topic, I have lived in the Bhiwani city since 90's and have seen, heard and experienced most of what Raka has narrated. I have personally nothing against Rajputs (in fact I have some Rajput friends) and I see the Jats and Rajputs fights as a fight between two marshal coms, just like fights between two lions in the same forest.
It is a fact that Rajputs had a upper hand till about 1994 - 97 when two major gangs emerged as other casts students merged with Jat students gang and had an underworld kind of fighting. Dharmvir and Sampurn were well known gang leaders whose leadership was later taken by Siwatch and Maan and Gabhu. Gabhu was the last one after the MDU incident. I remember one of their decisive fights at Ghanta Ghar roundabout around 1995-96.
Thakur were major land holders in Bhiwani city, in fact most of the land belonged to them. However, a huge part of the land got acquired by HUDA (at a very nominal rate, the land acquisition rules were heavily against the landholders that time) and rest huge part by colonizers. As a result, Rajputs got a huge lump-sum money; and that's when their degradation started. As they resorted to a lavish lifestyle, they spoiled most of the money in alcohol and prestige/ego spendings. Most of that money went to alcohol thekedars (Dharmvir, Sampurn and Gabhu had huge stakes in liquor shops) and rest to local Brahmins and Banyas. By 1996, most of that one time money got lost and with no other source of income (it was against Rajput's customs to work) they could no longer roar with empty stomachs. Meanwhile, Jats from nearby villages got settled in the city outskirts (out side of circular road) which strengthened their numbers.
Last edited:
Dr. saab, I want to contradict on your this post kindly tell us what is oral history and what is written history.History can't be 100% true,it is always mixed according to persons' perception and beliefs;I think raka have given very fair description of the things in the discussion.He is very good at describing facts.Also I know your intention as our senior member are good in this matter,and at of the day one's intentions should be good that's all matters than history and facts.I never make conclusions on the basis of facts given in history,as in Kings' time they have there kisdedars aur vo unhi k badai aur ganea gatea the.Friend,
I congratulate you for giving an insight to the oral history based on gossips of Bhiwani District. Juxtaposition of facts and fiction from different periods of history have been mixed . Kindly read your post again and please amend it if you like to do so.
Regards
My best wishes to all Jats and Regards(now see Dr saab I have taken something from your lines)
drrajpalsingh
New member
Dr. saab, I want to contradict on your this post kindly tell us what is oral history and what is written history.History can't be 100% true,it is always mixed according to persons' perception and beliefs;I think raka have given very fair description of the things in the discussion.He is very good at describing facts.Also I know your intention as our senior member are good in this matter,and at of the day one's intentions should be good that's all matters than history and facts.I never make conclusions on the basis of facts given in history,as in Kings' time they have there kisdedars aur vo unhi k badai aur ganea gatea the.
My best wishes to all Jats and Regards(now see Dr saab I have taken something from your lines)
Dear friend,
It is not History writing nor History to say that "it is always mixed according to persons' perception and beliefs
We are discussing the historical genesis of the rift between the two communities. The oral history provides us sources from the mouth of people around us whether they were present on the occurrence of the incident/event or they had heard about it from other persons.
But it is the duty of the historian to go to verify the stated evidence attested from the records available in the form of written documents whether they are police records, court records or records in any other form (as in the case of Sarva Khap panchayat records are found in the case of Sauram Khap Panchayat HQ), archaeological and archival repositories etc. and then analyse the collected information. If you are further interested in this task of writing on history and historical topics, do not take criticism at personal level but consider it as criticism of the topic under discussion.
The topic you have raised as what constitutes historical facts are, please read --What is History by EH Carr
You are a promising Jat with talent and zeal to learn so I tell you that I am not here to police or play moralizing role on the JatlLnders but am here as an ordinary Jat student of history. who wants the Jat boys and also girls to come up and join discussions on historical topics leaving aside their prejudices so that gaps in the Jat History could be abridged.
Regards
Last edited:
drrajpalsingh
New member
.......par asli chinta ka vishyea ye h k ab hum m khod hi joot baj rahe h;dosaron k kya kahe.
Friend,
Is it really so; or you consider difference of opinion equal to quarrel or fight.
Regards,
My Senior and respected Friend,
Friend,
Is it really so; or you consider difference of opinion equal to quarrel or fight.
Regards,
stimulation of mind is good,but stimulating it too much and that too in wrong direction is bad;kindly read my full post I am only referring to general condition through which our caste is going; everybody have his own view point and have full right to express it; I think in this way both sides gain some knowledge.
with great Regards
Dear friend,
It is not History writing nor History to say that "it is always mixed according to persons' perception and beliefs
We are discussing the historical genesis of the rift between the two communities. The oral history provides us sources from the mouth of people around us whether they were present on the occurrence of the incident/event or they had heard about it from other persons.
But it is the duty of the historian to go to verify the stated evidence attested from the records available in the form of written documents whether they are police records, court records or records in any other form (as in the case of Sarva Khap panchayat records are found in the case of Sauram Khap Panchayat HQ), archaeological and archival repositories etc. and then analyse the collected information. If you are further interested in this task of writing on history and historical topics, do not take criticism at personal level but consider it as criticism of the topic under discussion.
The topic you have raised as what constitutes historical facts are, please read --What is History by EH Carr
You are a promising Jat with talent and zeal to learn so I tell you that I am not here to police or play moralizing role on the JatlLnders but am here as an ordinary Jat student of history. who wants the Jat boys and also girls to come up and join discussions on historical topics leaving aside their prejudices so that gaps in the Jat History could be abridged.
Regards
Respected Dr.Saab,
Thanks for describing how history is written;but even after the methods you described,there are great chances for flaws to exist in so called history.We all know how police cases are filed in India and what happens in courts(for general public,where there's no intervention of media)-Like what happened to Manu Sharma-Jasica Lal case before the intervention of media.
Now with coming of Great RTI act things are very much different-it has made certain persons labelled as thiefs/thugs who otherwise would have called great and respected personalities in our coming history,isnt' it so ?
With Great Regards and best wishes.
drrajpalsingh
New member
Respected Dr.Saab,
Thanks for describing how history is written;but even after the methods you described,there are great chances for flaws to exist in so called history.
Dear Friend,
You have rightly picked up the essence of writing objective history by verifying every type of available information and then after comparison and analysis of the same one can arrive at certain convincing conclusions. Such conclusions can be revised if any new data comes to light in subsequent times. In the same way re-interpretation of the known facts and addition of newer facts continues to further enrich History. This is a very rigorous exercise and takes long time.
Otherwise, there would always be "great chances for flaws to exist in so called history."
Regards
What a sheer stupidity is this call on lack on unity? You people, yes all of you, don't get tired of finding faults with your own self.? Shame on you all. You are hypocrites of ultimate grade. At various fronts you shout from rooftops with squizzed anal muscles about bravery, attitude and fearlessness of your race but at the same moment you fear about lack of unity. Why this foolishness touches you every now and then?
Where did you see and hear a fearless and straightforward person looking for a group? Such a personna is always free. That can't be bounded. Unity often seen among weak thaty they are always united because they fear most of the time from various things. Strong men will never be united because they don't accept anybody's rule. A jat's character is as free as wind. This oozing level of self esteem came over in character because of the centuries of hard work in fields and being the sole provider of grain to everybody in society. Now you think from your own wits that how can such a character of jat would be looking for unity who has been so independent all through the ages. Think many times. Unity,moreover, scientifically and naturally occurs when there is a big threat, a threat for survival, a threat of extinction. When that threat is conquered people would lead normal life. In jat's intrinsic nature submission is the last resort unless there is another level of evolution. Unity is a myth, a fantasy and a pretty lie.
All Jats can do is stride towards cooperation for each other's growth only if it is suitable.
Further, if anyone of the hypocrite feel offended, I don't care.
Dear Brother Your Quote is very good if we are living in virtual world.
Answer me.
Why we were ruled by others since long?? Why we lost our all good trades and education system?? Nalanda and takshilla were very good universities in India but we lost. Mughals and Afgans always conquered us and won. Eventhough In Jungle also Lion is King and most powerful animal but 5-6 Junglee dog were capable enough to kill single lion. Their family also lives together for survival. Be united doesn't mean that we are not capable. You may found thousands of example "of very powerful person" in our commudity but we never ruled because of this thinking.We are social animal and we need to survive in society with long term vision.We need to understand and replication of our each action. Living in well and thinking that this well boundries are the longest boundries will not solve any purpose. We were land lord. We are capable enough of doing anything But always others ruled us.
In Rajathan JATS MLA's are maximum but CM of rajasthan is of other cast only.In Haryana every time Bhajan lal appointed CM by congress, Only this time huda become JAT CM by congress but his father was also very senior leader of Congress and never got chance to become CM.
Brother Individual man can win the race when fight is between one is one but right now we are in a country where every body wants to become more powerful and rich with others money and if you want to stop them, Only answer is to become United.
drrajpalsingh
New member
Dear Brother Your Quote is very good if we are living in virtual world.
Answer me.
Why we were ruled by others since long?? Why we lost our all good trades and education system?? Nalanda and takshilla were very good universities in India but we lost. Mughals and Afgans always conquered us and won. Eventhough In Jungle also Lion is King and most powerful animal but 5-6 Junglee dog were capable enough to kill single lion. Their family also lives together for survival. Be united doesn't mean that we are not capable. You may found thousands of example "of very powerful person" in our commudity but we never ruled because of this thinking.We are social animal and we need to survive in society with long term vision.We need to understand and replication of our each action. Living in well and thinking that this well boundries are the longest boundries will not solve any purpose. We were land lord. We are capable enough of doing anything But always others ruled us.
In Rajathan JATS MLA's are maximum but CM of rajasthan is of other cast only.In Haryana every time Bhajan lal appointed CM by congress, Only this time huda become JAT CM by congress but his father was also very senior leader of Congress and never got chance to become CM.
Brother Individual man can win the race when fight is between one is one but right now we are in a country where every body wants to become more powerful and rich with others money and if you want to stop them, Only answer is to become United.
Friend,
Kindly let us know the meaning of bold lines (by me) of your Post.
The huda stands for Haryana Urban Development Authority.
Shri Bhupinder Singh Hooda is not the first Jat C.M. of Haryana.
Ch. Bansi Lal, Ch. Devi Lal, Ch. Hukam Singh, Ch. Om Parkash Chautala (all these belonged to Jat Community) have already adorned this coveted Chair.
But this was not due to the fact that they were Jats but they deserved to occupy it on account of their multifaceted qualities of head and heart.
Mr. Paweria we are not here to put baseless things to be discussed. Please come out with solid points for discussion and enjoy the fruitful conclusions. Otherwise, we shall continue to beat about bush and keep on increasing the number of posts contributed against our respective names!
Nonetheless, I respect your zeal in posting your views so freely and frequently on so many non existent issues.
Friend,
Kindly let us know the meaning of bold lines (by me) of your Post.
The huda stands for Haryana Urban Development Authority.
Sir That HUDA was my spelling mistake
Shri Bhupinder Singh Hooda is not the first Jat C.M. of Haryana.
Ch. Bansi Lal, Ch. Devi Lal, Ch. Hukam Singh, Ch. Om Parkash Chautala (all these belonged to Jat Community) have already adorned this coveted Chair.
I know that bansi lal, Omprakash & devilal were CM of haryana but I specially wrote only "appointed CM by congress" specially Bhajan Lal always that time Bhupinder singh Father Was also senior leader in Congress, Banshi lal & devilal left congress because of this discrimination only.
But this was not due to the fact that they were Jats but they deserved to occupy it on account of their multifaceted qualities of head and heart.
Mr. Paweria we are not here to put baseless things to be discussed. Please come out with solid points for discussion and enjoy the fruitful conclusions. Otherwise, we shall continue to beat about bush and keep on increasing the number of posts contributed against our respective names!
Nonetheless, I respect your zeal in posting your views so freely and frequently on so many non existent issues.
You may found thousands of example "of very powerful person" in our commudity but we never ruled because of this thinking.
I want to convey that our cast maximum population is around delhi only but we never ruled delhi. Our forefather were very capable and powerful like Hari Singh Nalwa,Surajmal,Teja ji, than also we were ruled by others. In Eastern UP also Thakurs were ruling us. Thanks to Devilal ji for Haryana division otherwise we were under sikh if Punjab & Haryana was not divided. In Rajasthan also we were under Rajputs only. Right now also we are trying but unable to make CM from our commudity.
we are in a country where every body wants to become more powerful and rich with others money
By this I want to say that In our country current situation is like that Rulers and powerful man are working for their interest only and for single penny they are ready to harm & cheat others. They are so mean that they are ready to sale our country too. And at that time if we are not united we will not able to rule those corrupt people. Same type of incidents will hapen again like they did with Ramdev.
drrajpalsingh
New member
You may found thousands of example "of very powerful person" in our commudity but we never ruled because of this thinking.
I want to convey that our cast maximum population is around delhi only but we never ruled delhi. Our forefather were very capable and powerful like Hari Singh Nalwa,Surajmal,Teja ji, than also we were ruled by others. In Eastern UP also Thakurs were ruling us. Thanks to Devilal ji for Haryana division otherwise we were under sikh if Punjab & Haryana was not divided. In Rajasthan also we were under Rajputs only. Right now also we are trying but unable to make CM from our commudity.
we are in a country where every body wants to become more powerful and rich with others money
By this I want to say that In our country current situation is like that Rulers and powerful man are working for their interest only and for single penny they are ready to harm & cheat others. They are so mean that they are ready to sale our country too. And at that time if we are not united we will not able to rule those corrupt people. Same type of incidents will hapen again like they did with Ramdev.
Friend,
With due regards, I pity your knowledge of history. Kindly spare some time to study the History of India from the hoary past to modern times and then come prepared to discuss such important issues as you raise through your posts. It would be nice to go to JatLand. Com Wiki section first to know how many people belonging to the Jat Community (not our commudity as you spell it?) have ruled in the past.
Further, one must always remember that rulers whether they belong to one caste/religion or the other, belonged to all. Then as the time passed, their class identity separated them from the people on whom they ruled. And in due course of time they have/had nothing to do with their caste or clan forming common people.
Therefore, False pride of one's caste and hatredness for other caste men results in the spread of caste-ism which is a venom. Therefore, we must believe in caste identity but avoid spreading caste-ism i.e. hatred for other castes through such meaningful forums as the one we are using. Please mind it, if we indulge in such type of spreading of wrong notions and canards, we are not doing any service to our own community.Grow with the fast changing times and start enjoying unity of people in the service of mankind.
Thanks.
saurabhjaglan
New member
To Reunite something , someone must have that magnetic power to attract and then the ability to stick them together for long.
“if you are not the sun, the planets will not revolve around you"
First Develop Qualities to be a leader and then lead and then Reunite them.
And a True leader never talk about any Religion, caste or state..
“Upper Level” category of any cast always Exploits the "lowerone"and these upperlevel people mainly support their Close partners,not every1.
But A True leader always talks about a common man and help the needy.
“if you are not the sun, the planets will not revolve around you"
First Develop Qualities to be a leader and then lead and then Reunite them.
And a True leader never talk about any Religion, caste or state..
“Upper Level” category of any cast always Exploits the "lowerone"and these upperlevel people mainly support their Close partners,not every1.
But A True leader always talks about a common man and help the needy.
Friend,
With due regards, I pity your knowledge of history. Kindly spare some time to study the History of India from the hoary past to modern times and then come prepared to discuss such important issues as you raise through your posts. It would be nice to go to JatLand. Com Wiki section first to know how many people belonging to the Jat Community (not our commudity as you spell it?) have ruled in the past.
Further, one must always remember that rulers whether they belong to one caste/religion or the other, belonged to all. Then as the time passed, their class identity separated them from the people on whom they ruled. And in due course of time they have/had nothing to do with their caste or clan forming common people.
Therefore, False pride of one's caste and hatredness for other caste men results in the spread of caste-ism which is a venom. Therefore, we must believe in caste identity but avoid spreading caste-ism i.e. hatred for other castes through such meaningful forums as the one we are using. Please mind it, if we indulge in such type of spreading of wrong notions and canards, we are not doing any service to our own community.Grow with the fast changing times and start enjoying unity of people in the service of mankind.
Thanks.
Sir Thanks remark on my knowledge about history of JAT but from My point of views Big Rulers are Like Ashok,Akbar or eventhough Aurangjeb. Last Hindu King was Harsh vardhan and after him India was ruled by Mughals and Last Hindu/Sikh King was Ranjit Singh. I am only considering that type of King other wise at every 15 Km you will find some jamidar or kiladar in India but I am not considering them King of India, They are only pitdu of Delhi Kingdom.Plus if check with our any history book which are studied by each and every student of any class, you will not find any JAT name. During my all education I never found any write up about our cast dominant kings. In Jat land it is bought up by us only and becuase of this we are adding all small Riyasat like Kucheshar or Ballabgarh kingdom in that. Can you compare those with Riyasat with Delhi Kingdom.I found only Suraj mal who did remarkable job but unable to get Delhi Kingdom due to our divided nature.
Second point is that if you are considering my arguement related to caste-ism than their is no need of talking over this topic.Topic itself talk about that only.But it is true That we are divided by boundries,not Jat only but it is true for all resident of India. Eventhough we are divided upto family level.
It was need of topic because of this I wrote such facts. I am also against caste-ism But if it is required to save our existense, I would prefer it.
drrajpalsingh
New member
Manoj Bhai,
I am not under rating your scholarship. But from your posts it seems you have read social studies subject with a little component of history in it and then have formed your point of view on flimsy grounds; otherwise no student, who has studied history up to College level would dare to post:
"...... from My point of views Big Rulers are Like Ashok,Akbar or eventhough Aurangjeb. Last Hindu King was Harsh vardhan and after him India was ruled by Mughals and Last Hindu/Sikh King was Ranjit Singh...."
Friend kindly clarify to yourself by what yard stick you put Ashok, Akbar and Aurangzeb (not 'Aurangjeb!) in one category of great Kings of India.
How can you say that Last Hindu King was Harsh (who ruled from 606 A.D. to 647 A.D.) and after him India was ruled by Mughals (whose first ruler was Babur (1526 to 1530 A.D.)?
Was there total chaos and no kings worth their names for the next so many years. Even great Krishandevarai, the ruler of Vijaynagara Kingdom, was contemporary of Babur and then Shershah Suri does not require any introduction to be called one of the greatest kings of India.
The Last Hindu/Sikh ruler of Lahore Durbar Government was an infant Maharja Duleep Singh when the Sikh Kingdom was annexed in the British Empire in 1849 and Maharaja Ranjit Singh had passed away in 1839.
Friend, History is not such a frivolous subject that anybody comes and deducts his conclusions to satisfy his whims. It requires rigorous treatment.
Since you are not ready to indulge in serious discussion, I stop here and beg pardon for having hurt your 'ego'.
Regards
I am not under rating your scholarship. But from your posts it seems you have read social studies subject with a little component of history in it and then have formed your point of view on flimsy grounds; otherwise no student, who has studied history up to College level would dare to post:
"...... from My point of views Big Rulers are Like Ashok,Akbar or eventhough Aurangjeb. Last Hindu King was Harsh vardhan and after him India was ruled by Mughals and Last Hindu/Sikh King was Ranjit Singh...."
Friend kindly clarify to yourself by what yard stick you put Ashok, Akbar and Aurangzeb (not 'Aurangjeb!) in one category of great Kings of India.
How can you say that Last Hindu King was Harsh (who ruled from 606 A.D. to 647 A.D.) and after him India was ruled by Mughals (whose first ruler was Babur (1526 to 1530 A.D.)?
Was there total chaos and no kings worth their names for the next so many years. Even great Krishandevarai, the ruler of Vijaynagara Kingdom, was contemporary of Babur and then Shershah Suri does not require any introduction to be called one of the greatest kings of India.
The Last Hindu/Sikh ruler of Lahore Durbar Government was an infant Maharja Duleep Singh when the Sikh Kingdom was annexed in the British Empire in 1849 and Maharaja Ranjit Singh had passed away in 1839.
Friend, History is not such a frivolous subject that anybody comes and deducts his conclusions to satisfy his whims. It requires rigorous treatment.
Since you are not ready to indulge in serious discussion, I stop here and beg pardon for having hurt your 'ego'.
Regards
Last edited:
Manoj Bhai,
I am not under rating your scholarship. But from your posts it seems you have read social studies subject with a little component of history in it and then have formed your point of view on flimsy grounds; otherwise no student, who has studied history up to College level would dare to post:
"...... from My point of views Big Rulers are Like Ashok,Akbar or eventhough Aurangjeb. Last Hindu King was Harsh vardhan and after him India was ruled by Mughals and Last Hindu/Sikh King was Ranjit Singh...."
Friend kindly clarify to yourself by what yard stick you put Ashok, Akbar and Aurangzeb (not 'Aurangjeb!) in one category of great Kings of India.
How can you say that Last Hindu King was Harsh (who ruled from 606 A.D. to 647 A.D.) and after him India was ruled by Mughals (whose first ruler was Babur (1526 to 1530 A.D.)?
Was there total chaos and no kings worth their names for the next so many years. Even great Krishandevarai, the ruler of Vijaynagara Kingdom, was contemporary of Babur and then Shershah Suri does not require any introduction to be called one of the greatest kings of India.
The Last Hindu/Sikh ruler of Lahore Durbar Government was an infant Maharja Duleep Singh when the Sikh Kingdom was annexed in the British Empire in 1849 and Maharaja Ranjit Singh had passed away in 1839.
Friend, History is not such a frivolous subject that anybody comes and deducts his conclusions to satisfy his whims. It requires rigorous treatment.
Since you are not ready to indulge in serious discussion, I stop here and beg pardon for having hurt your 'ego'.
Regards
Dear Sir Soory if you think that I am taking it on my ego but I was only trying to explain related to thread and considering our cast kings in North India. Krishan dev rai was good king but after him that region was also rules by Mughals(Under Mughals I am considering all invaders whether khilji vansh or suri vansh or aebak vansh & etc). You have right to correct us with facts and figure like you are doing. But your explaination is diverting from this thread. I never told in my comments that India was not having good king. We had because of that only we were called Sone Ki Chidiya but when were discussing our cast unity I found those facts and shared with you and other.
Dullep Singh was also last king after Ranjit singh but from my point of view King who lost last battle and surrender and passed his whole life in London is not King than we would call them Ghulam and after that only India was under British Empire.
Our Discussion starts with Bhai Samarkadian comments and on his comment only I commented that if we are or were united we would not be in this position because maximum of our population is residing near to India Capital (Delhi or Agra) only and never gave a king like Ashoka to this country. we are very capable but never used this capacity for ourselves. I think somewhere we have problem of working with team or leading a team. May be due to our short temper nature or else.
Do not take it otherwise you have 100% right to guide us, please continue it will only improve ourselves.
Thanks & Regards
drrajpalsingh
New member
Friend,Dear Sir Soory if you think that I am taking it on my ego but I was only trying to explain related to thread and considering our cast kings in North India. Krishan dev rai was good king but after him that region was also rules by Mughals(Under Mughals I am considering all invaders whether khilji vansh or suri vansh or aebak vansh & etc). You have right to correct us with facts and figure like you are doing. But your explaination is diverting from this thread. I never told in my comments that India was not having good king. We had because of that only we were called Sone Ki Chidiya but when were discussing our cast unity I found those facts and shared with you and other.
Dullep Singh was also last king after Ranjit singh but from my point of view King who lost last battle and surrender and passed his whole life in London is not King than we would call them Ghulam and after that only India was under British Empire.
Our Discussion starts with Bhai Samarkadian comments and on his comment only I commented that if we are or were united we would not be in this position because maximum of our population is residing near to India Capital (Delhi or Agra) only and never gave a king like Ashoka to this country. we are very capable but never used this capacity for ourselves. I think somewhere we have problem of working with team or leading a team. May be due to our short temper nature or else.
Do not take it otherwise you have 100% right to guide us, please continue it will only improve ourselves.
Thanks & Regards
I am not taking it otherwise, rather I am taking it as it were. But think who is going to be benefited by my posts when in spite of repeated attempts to correct the wrong notions, you go on insisting that: "(Under Mughals I am considering all invaders whether khilji vansh or suri vansh or aebak vansh & etc)".
Nonetheless, I thank you for your contribution in proving Mr. Samar Kadianji right.
Though belated, I also accept that I was under delusion that we are willing to share views and learn from one another.
May God save us from understanding the history of India on the lines you suggest,
and pray that the Almighty bless you.
Adieu.
Friend,
I am not taking it otherwise, rather I am taking it as it were. But think who is going to be benefited by my posts when in spite of repeated attempts to correct the wrong notions, you go on insisting that: "(Under Mughals I am considering all invaders whether khilji vansh or suri vansh or aebak vansh & etc)".
Nonetheless, I thank you for your contribution in proving Mr. Samar Kadianji right.
Though belated, I also accept that I was under delusion that we are willing to share views and learn from one another.
May God save us from understanding the history of India on the lines you suggest,
and pray that the Almighty bless you.
Adieu.
Thank you very much Sir, We required same type of support & preaching from eleders like you. Plus my contribution was not in support of Samar but I was against his statement where he was stating that Bold people never lives in group.
Once again Thank you very much for your inputs and corrections.I seriously aprreciates your efforts and able to understand that their is some problem in my written communication specially my habit of assuming so many thing in line with others thinking.
mpaweria ji u r absolutely right........Mughals and Afgans always conquered us and won because they always get support from local tribal like gujjars and rajput.......rajputs warrior race is a myth and gujjars are nothing more then milkman ....there are only 2 great rajput rulers maharana pratap and prithviraj chauhan and jat has endless list starting from maha raja ranjit singh,suraj mal,Raja Nahar Singh,balram singh of ballabhgard,bhim singh rana 7 out of 11 sikh misls belongs to jatts of punjab,akali phula singh who bring so called muslam rajput to his knees .....in punjab 90% of rajput 95% of gujjar convert to islam ...80% of jatt in punjab converted to local religion sikhism and not to arab based religion
Dear Brother Your Quote is very good if we are living in virtual world.
Answer me.
Why we were ruled by others since long?? Why we lost our all good trades and education system?? Nalanda and takshilla were very good universities in India but we lost. Mughals and Afgans always conquered us and won. Eventhough In Jungle also Lion is King and most powerful animal but 5-6 Junglee dog were capable enough to kill single lion. Their family also lives together for survival. Be united doesn't mean that we are not capable. You may found thousands of example "of very powerful person" in our commudity but we never ruled because of this thinking.We are social animal and we need to survive in society with long term vision.We need to understand and replication of our each action. Living in well and thinking that this well boundries are the longest boundries will not solve any purpose. We were land lord. We are capable enough of doing anything But always others ruled us.
In Rajathan JATS MLA's are maximum but CM of rajasthan is of other cast only.In Haryana every time Bhajan lal appointed CM by congress, Only this time huda become JAT CM by congress but his father was also very senior leader of Congress and never got chance to become CM.
Brother Individual man can win the race when fight is between one is one but right now we are in a country where every body wants to become more powerful and rich with others money and if you want to stop them, Only answer is to become United.
Last edited: