08-27-2006, 05:08 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-digvijay+Aug 27 2006, 11:13 AM-->QUOTE(digvijay @ Aug 27 2006, 11:13 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Nandi,Ravi and other fellow Jats,
 The assertion that Jat is the MOST ancient race is false.Â
 The assertion that all rajputs are descendants of Jats is also a lie.
 Rajput is literally "Raja Putra" i.e son of the king.
 I will ask you a few questions:
 a) Why is that rajputs and Jats are socially so different? If they were same people
   they should be socially same. Rajput women do not go and work in the fields
   while Jat women do. (Do not give me one off examples. We are taking about
   what generally happens in Jat and rajput villages).
 b) Why is that rajputs and Jats do not intermarry?
 c) Why is it that the ancient Hara and Khichi clan of chauhan rajputs absent in Jats? Â
  Â
Â
    Jats were pastoralists whose help was taken by rajput kings to make there
  kingdoms richer by giving them land.
  Â
  The Jat Khap of that area gave there lands to Bika
  without a fight and Bika gave them lots of honours like using a part of jat clans name
  to name his kingdom.
In this section below (written by a good friend) origin of different people with same
last name is discussed. Also note that Gujjars and jats refer to there surnames as
there gotras but rajputs do not.
Khokra are a shakha of rathore rajputs who descended from Rao Khokhra, an ancestor of present day Jodhpur/Bikaner royal houses.
There are multiple possibilities how jats and gurjars have similar surnames as rajputs.
a) [right][snapback]56277[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is one example of running away from facts.
You didn't reply a single point raised by me.Why rajputra not used for some group why rajanya not used afterwards where is word rajput in ancient texyts where is huna rajanya etc.. etc.. For how long you can run away from facts that you have to face one day or other.
Now let me answer you.
You give me a single proof that rajputs are ancient to jats whose ancient existence is proved from mahabarat and arabic, persian and greek records references.I gave proofs for my statement but you could not find a single evidence...even a single I repeat to substantiate your existence .Than what moral authority you have to assert that jats are not ancient to rajputs.I again give you a chance to prove if you can rajput word even existed or rajputra was used for some group and not as title.
And than started again imagination that it could have happened like this like that now don't say that we were called by some rajanya or or some khastriya as you even can't explain why there is no kashtriya group or rajanya group today why they started calling rajput.
Again the kashtriya group(khatris) don't say we are rajputs why?
You atleast should provide some supporting matter not mere suppostion.
And your literature says that you were born out of Fire lit in mount abu in tenth century than who were those vedic rajanyas and rajaputras before fire ?
A discussion can lead to a fruitful result when we keep our mind open to any reasoning in stead of false ego.
Now I never claimed that all rajputs came out of jats and gujjars or huns.I accepted that These chandels were Bhars chohans were gujjars kushwaha were brahmans ,Guhilots called themselves Vipr or brahmans in their genealogies.Soda decendants of Dahir were mohyal brahmans ,hun rajputs were huns invaders ,mair rajputs of saurastra claim med ancesstery sumara records relate them to churra tribe as reported in Sindh story byKR Malkani ,Himachali and nepali were a seprate tribe as is well known.
Now as these facts are well known and well known is this habit of keeping many concubines may be of any cast by rulers than I request you to be honest in your reply .
What cast these sons of kings from different cast concubines would have given to themselves.I again ask Honesty and truth in your reply.
So jats are now different and rajputs are different and they don't marry in to each other.Rajpus had power jats had Pride.
Yes they are different socially also and jat women work in fields along with their men also as farming is never considered as bad but respectable thing in jats .There can be one jat king but if you see jat republics didn't have this exploitative jamindari system and it was a great tradition.
Yes please keep one stand in atleast one post as you say jats took lands from rajputs and than again say bika got lands from jats.
Yes we know how Bika used the rivalvry of Godara and Johiya jats by pampering the ego of godara and then exploiting both,This is why we must learn lession from history.
This time I expect my original answers and honesty regarding ancientness as of Rajputs
 The assertion that Jat is the MOST ancient race is false.Â
 The assertion that all rajputs are descendants of Jats is also a lie.
 Rajput is literally "Raja Putra" i.e son of the king.
 I will ask you a few questions:
 a) Why is that rajputs and Jats are socially so different? If they were same people
   they should be socially same. Rajput women do not go and work in the fields
   while Jat women do. (Do not give me one off examples. We are taking about
   what generally happens in Jat and rajput villages).
 b) Why is that rajputs and Jats do not intermarry?
 c) Why is it that the ancient Hara and Khichi clan of chauhan rajputs absent in Jats? Â
  Â
Â
    Jats were pastoralists whose help was taken by rajput kings to make there
  kingdoms richer by giving them land.
  Â
  The Jat Khap of that area gave there lands to Bika
  without a fight and Bika gave them lots of honours like using a part of jat clans name
  to name his kingdom.
In this section below (written by a good friend) origin of different people with same
last name is discussed. Also note that Gujjars and jats refer to there surnames as
there gotras but rajputs do not.
Khokra are a shakha of rathore rajputs who descended from Rao Khokhra, an ancestor of present day Jodhpur/Bikaner royal houses.
There are multiple possibilities how jats and gurjars have similar surnames as rajputs.
a) [right][snapback]56277[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is one example of running away from facts.
You didn't reply a single point raised by me.Why rajputra not used for some group why rajanya not used afterwards where is word rajput in ancient texyts where is huna rajanya etc.. etc.. For how long you can run away from facts that you have to face one day or other.
Now let me answer you.
You give me a single proof that rajputs are ancient to jats whose ancient existence is proved from mahabarat and arabic, persian and greek records references.I gave proofs for my statement but you could not find a single evidence...even a single I repeat to substantiate your existence .Than what moral authority you have to assert that jats are not ancient to rajputs.I again give you a chance to prove if you can rajput word even existed or rajputra was used for some group and not as title.
And than started again imagination that it could have happened like this like that now don't say that we were called by some rajanya or or some khastriya as you even can't explain why there is no kashtriya group or rajanya group today why they started calling rajput.
Again the kashtriya group(khatris) don't say we are rajputs why?
You atleast should provide some supporting matter not mere suppostion.
And your literature says that you were born out of Fire lit in mount abu in tenth century than who were those vedic rajanyas and rajaputras before fire ?
A discussion can lead to a fruitful result when we keep our mind open to any reasoning in stead of false ego.
Now I never claimed that all rajputs came out of jats and gujjars or huns.I accepted that These chandels were Bhars chohans were gujjars kushwaha were brahmans ,Guhilots called themselves Vipr or brahmans in their genealogies.Soda decendants of Dahir were mohyal brahmans ,hun rajputs were huns invaders ,mair rajputs of saurastra claim med ancesstery sumara records relate them to churra tribe as reported in Sindh story byKR Malkani ,Himachali and nepali were a seprate tribe as is well known.
Now as these facts are well known and well known is this habit of keeping many concubines may be of any cast by rulers than I request you to be honest in your reply .
What cast these sons of kings from different cast concubines would have given to themselves.I again ask Honesty and truth in your reply.
So jats are now different and rajputs are different and they don't marry in to each other.Rajpus had power jats had Pride.
Yes they are different socially also and jat women work in fields along with their men also as farming is never considered as bad but respectable thing in jats .There can be one jat king but if you see jat republics didn't have this exploitative jamindari system and it was a great tradition.
Yes please keep one stand in atleast one post as you say jats took lands from rajputs and than again say bika got lands from jats.
Yes we know how Bika used the rivalvry of Godara and Johiya jats by pampering the ego of godara and then exploiting both,This is why we must learn lession from history.
This time I expect my original answers and honesty regarding ancientness as of Rajputs