Talk:Cheema

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cheema article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (`~~~~`). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

[edit] added info

I've been asked to help with this article. I have added some info I had on the tribe. I have also removed some info regarding the Puranic literatire, as it is at odds regarding the specifics of this tribe. They cannot have been called Rakshas if they weren't known as Cheema until the 13th century. (if they are from the Chauhan clan) Any elaboration, welcomed.--Raja 11:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Nice work the article looks much better now, I added the information about the Rakshas see: [1] I have a feeling in the folklore section the quote in Punjabi maybe offensive I am not sure about it though, maybe if someone can translate that. Also I am needing information on creating a template so I can just add list of famous Cheema people and also villages. Any advice on that would be welcomed. --Street Scholar 12:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I would not put up anything offensive here bro, if you think it may offend anyone, it would be unethical and gainst policy to do that. Secondly there has been some vandalism by someone who is contesting the Chauhan connection with the Cheema. I am removing his words and putting them now on this page.

[edit] Vandalism

The below was added on the article wrongly;

"[Please note that the above extract from Sir Denzil Ibbetson's "Punjab Castes" also mentioned in "Tribes and Castes of Punjab and NWFP" by HA Rose is totally absurd. Both these officers were mis-informed by mirasi's of Cheema. Please note in those times mirasi tried to link almost most all jatt clans with Rajputs. But I have talked to many Cheema wadherey, who clearly indicated all this prithvi raj stuff is mere bullshit.

Secondly, if Chima was Prithvi raj's son, how do you explain huge Cheema villages which predate Prithvi Raj's era ? Prithvi Raj reigned during 1100 AD, how do you explain during this short time did Pritvi Raj's son create a population that is one of the largest clans of Jatts.

Also it is well known that Cheema strong hold is in Sialkot (also sometimes refferred to as "Cheema Desh"), so it makes no sense saying that one of their first establishments were in Beas, when very old and populous cheema villages exist in Sialkot and Gujranwala.

Finally, I would request the owner of this page to remove this absurd and incorrect information]"

This user has been asked to be somewhat civil or he will be blocked. However, he is adamant in his points and I believe that we should give him a fair chance to provide info for the article. I can only add what I find in books regarding this tribe. Besides I can answer a couple of his points;

a)"Punjab Castes" also mentioned in "Tribes and Castes of Punjab and NWFP" by HA Rose is totally absurd. Both these officers were mis-informed by mirasi's of Cheema. Please note in those times mirasi tried to link almost most all jatt clans with Rajputs.

To this I would say that I cannot fathom how a strong officer would question mirasi's about the heads of the clans historys. They would almost always meet with the heads for the census reports and a brief background to their previous history and current social influence. I dont think this is a valid point.

b)Secondly, if Chima was Prithvi raj's son, how do you explain huge Cheema villages which predate Prithvi Raj's era ?

Please provide evidence for this from referenced books on the subjects which state this info. I promise you I will do my best to put this into the article.

c)Prithvi Raj reigned during 1100 AD, how do you explain during this short time did Pritvi Raj's son create a population that is one of the largest clans of Jatts.

No Prithviraj's reign was towards the end of the 1100's, almost just before 1200ad. The reference did NOT state that Cheema's are his sons, but one of his tribe. That is an important difference. It is very possible within 800years to create a massive tribe, numbers of sons, many wives would easily be accomodated by large land holders such as Jatts. You can only see the numbers of other tribes, such as Gujjars etc.

d)Also it is well known that Cheema strong hold is in Sialkot (also sometimes refferred to as "Cheema Desh"), so it makes no sense saying that one of their first establishments were in Beas, when very old and populous cheema villages exist in Sialkot and Gujranwala.

This point makes no sense. How can a tribe sustain a stronghold for 800years? Climates of rule changed many areas under many different rulers etc. So to have moved to another area is possible and plausible. Just because Sialkot is their stronghold now, doesnt mean the first stated area (near Beas) wasn't first? Do you understand this? for e.g. the Bhatti stronghold used to be in Rajasthan, they were pushed out then century or so later they returned and ruled Jaisalmer. Then times changed and this stronghold was compromised. Many other clans can be given as example.

Overall my message is work with us, discuss and bring forward evidence to elaborate the article to a good page. Thats all.

[edit] Claim of Cheema descent from Rajputs ????

This kind of statement often appears,, and is incorrect.

Ibbetson, Rose etc are wrong. they rerly too much on the tales of wandering mintsrels.

For a certain period of time, the Rajput 'star' was hyped, and some bards would sing to this tune. Tis occurred in the ltae Islaomuc period, and the British colonial period, when the British were pushing the colonial view, and working hard to win over the Rajput class. The succeeded.

The term rajput did not exist before 11- 12 century, and only came into notice with the Islamic period and was glorified/hyped in the Colonial period.

The rajput class, were awarded Jagirs, fuedal estates, and they acted as the tax collector first for the Islamics and later for the british.

It became the a fashion, to associate oneself with a rajput pedigree to obtain favours.

The Jats resisted both the islamic invasions and later the British ones, and were either, reviled in the history texts, or completely ignored in them.

The jats have been working assidiously to reconstruct their History.

Much material has been coming out over the last 100 years.

Recently a lot of papers have been presented at the annual conferences on Jat history, by numerous historians, in India, in Delhi

For indepth archives visit and join

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/

Supersaiyan, if you do not mind, I will revert our edit, unless you can provide better evidence than Ibbetson.

Would one week be enough?

The artcile also needs to bring out the fact that the Cheemas are an old clan and folowed Buddhism , Vedicism, Hinduism, before some converted to Islam and later to Sikkism

Best regards

Ravi Chaudhary 03:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Ravi,

First of all thank you for providing the somewhat civil tone to this discussion. I was asked to provide some help in this article and the only reference I have is Ibbetson. I can locate more, but I did consider contacting you for this article as you appear the better Jatt informed.

With regards to finding better evidence to counter this evidence, I am the wrong person to suggest that to. I merely offered some evidence from a recorded source (whatever the opinion of it is, it is still a documented reference) at someones request, it is clearly not my opinion, but an statement from a source. If you feel it is incorrect, please, by all means offer the alternative history in the article. I have no idea where they came from and only have one reference to explain this.

I would welcome ALL sources for input to project a more correct picture of their history. But I would say, origins are a very tricky and somewhat,(as you implied) hyped expedition . Trying to keep with their modern achievements from where their name was in use onwards would be much more beneficial in my opinion, with some references to possible origins etc.

Therefore, please dont wait a week on my part, I am more than happy for you to work on the article asap, it's not my exclusive page lol.

Goodluck.--Raja 12:07, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Response>

Dear Raja

The way we are technically looking at the information of Ibbotson, Rose, Todd, etc is something like this.

The terms 'rajput, Jat, Brahmin, Islamic, British', should be treated as nomenclature only, definitions, to allow a discussion.

Ibbetson,Todd, were British bureaucrats, not historians. Any history they wrote was, as might and should be expected, was from theirs' a 'british' perspective.

Ibbetson, a good example, was in charge of the census conducted by the British, and his work is largely a summary ( hasty/superficial?)of compilations of descriptions on tribe, castes, etc, based on the data that the census generated.

Todd's work is an unabashed attempt to portray and associate all signifiacnt history to the 'rajput'category.

To assess his work, we have to keep a few factors in mind.

Firstly, the accuracy of the data, considering that this was done in late 1800 say 1890.

Then the method collection of data?

We are all largely in agreement that today some 100- 150 years later we have much more material as our disposal, and that we have better ways of analyzing it.

We need to primarily distinguish between what Ibbotson wrote, as “fact”: based on the census data, and his ‘ opinion’.

His data, was it to say” there are 200 Cheema, villages, and they share the villages with the following goths, X, Y, and Z,” would be fact, as best as possible..

If we have him writing” they are thieves, or low bandits or descended from rajputs” for example we should treat his opinion, as just another opinion.

Simply because it is published, by a “ reputable’ publisher, does not make his opinion any more reliable than it was, and it should be treated just as if, it was published as a post on this web page by an anonymous writer.

To understand the background of the theory ’ Jat’ descent from ‘rajputs’, we have to keep in mind the political environment of the times.

The British were establishing their power. They needed allies. Their aim was then to seek out alliances with groups who were already holding feudal power. That way there was no need to go the grassroots.

Their aim was to create an organization, with themselves in top, and the rest of India’s population at the bottom, and in between who ever would assist them in their goal of ruling/exploiting the resources and people of India.

This is a standard picture in all societies, nothing new here.. The Rajput society was ready made for their purpose. They had served the Islamics loyally, though the ages. Transferring the loyalty would make victory complete.

The British achieved this aim, with the like of James, Todd, Ibbotson, and Rose, etc who they glorified every warlike people/group/clan, with Kshatriya status and gave them a glorified ‘rajput’. The ‘Brahmin’ priest also got what he wanted, a place at the public trough, and they all served the British loyally as their clerks, and in their judiciary, and in the bargain got to write a hype up version of their/rajput history, which got taken as the real 'McCoy' .The same was done by the ‘Islamic’ Nawab.

All joined together to exploit India and its resources. The society was destroyed. Education was denied, and the educational system was systematically decimated. In a few generations most of the Indian populace were reduced to that state of ignorant serfs.

This is not to be unexpected, as denial of education, and income, will bring any family to penury and ignorance in two generations.

For am account of the decimation of the Indaian education system in Puanjab and elsewherm,, based on British Data see:

Beautiful Tree, Indian Education in the 18th century http://www.esamskriti.com/html/new_inside.asp?cat_name=why&cid=1062&sid=174

A time also, came that some of the Jats in Punjab, also started to believe this hype that they were descend from Rajputs. The princely houses of Patiala, Nabha, Jind, also acquired this belief.

However it was belief based on a ‘version’ they had been brainwashed into.

The Jats, themselves never thought of themselves as descended from rajputs, but considered that a few Jats families/villages, had accepted the ‘rajput identity’

As the Jats are re constructing their history, some among them, react strongly to someone portraying themselves as descendants of rajputs, a class that was created only circa 9- 12 th century, and took hold as an identity only in later medieval/colonial times.

Hope this helps

Best regards

70.50.227.175 18:49, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Hi !

I am the person who vandalized your page. I also added the list of cheema villages, number of villages in districts of punjab plains and the folklore about Cheema and Chatha. Sorry about that I am new to Wikipedia.

FIrst of all let me introduce myself. I belong to the Cheema clan. I am well aware of Cheema customs and history from folkores and elders.You seem to be adamant about Chauhan ancestry. Well if you were a Cheema yourself you would have known better. If you go to Punjab and visit Cheema villages and tell wadheras about this Prithvi raj story and his son Chima, they are going to laugh on you.

regards Cheema_Jatt

Ok, well welcome to Wikipedia. Your info regarding the villages and the folklore is most welcome, please by all means add what you know into the article, I whole heartedly encourage this. If you read the above, it didnt imply Chima was Prithvi's son, but his tribal member, but if it is incorrect, and you know better, then do make the relevant changes etc. It is not MY page as you state, it is a WIKIPEDIA page but with a record on the CHEEMA clan. I hope you now understand this and proivde some decent info. If you dont know about outlaying info, style, presentation, then I am more than happy to help you out in this. I have some experience in this. Put up what you know and I will do my best to help you with this. Like wise if you have any pics of Cheema elders/ wadherey and plains, that would do much for the article presentation too. --Raja 15:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism part 2

   d)Also it is well known that Cheema strong hold is in Sialkot (also sometimes refferred to as "Cheema Desh"), so it makes no sense saying that one of their first establishments were in Beas, when very old and populous cheema villages exist in Sialkot and Gujranwala.
   This point makes no sense. How can a tribe sustain a stronghold for 800years? Climates of rule changed many areas under many different rulers etc. So to have moved to another area is possible and plausible. Just because Sialkot is their stronghold now, doesnt mean the first stated area (near Beas) wasn't first? Do you understand this? for e.g. the Bhatti stronghold used to be in Rajasthan, they were pushed out then century or so later they returned and ruled Jaisalmer. Then times changed and this stronghold was compromised. Many other clans can be given as example.

How can a tribe sustain a stronghold for 800 years ? there goes your inexperience and lack of cultural knowledge of Punjab Plains. Let me explain by example. Cheema is not a tribe with 7 or 8 villages. We are talking about 200 villages in "Majha" area only. My village is atleat 500 years old(my ancestral record), we dont have any information prior to that, but IMO it will be older than that. Cheema villages like Jamke Cheema should be much older. Generally speaking smaller/newer villages are 150-350 years old.Much bigger villages are much older.

You give an example of the Bhatti tribe. But Bhatti tribe is a vastly scattered tribe all along the NW plains. Cheema tribe still is heavly concentrated in "Majha" and has been for atleat 500 years. The names of villages tell that they were established by Cheema, if they had moved leaving the original Cheema villages like Jamke Cheema, Ramke Cheema, Saroki Cheema, Bainka Cheema etc., they would have been living in villages with different names. And these villages as I told are counted among bigger villages.

Good point. Now incorporating this into the article would be a good idea. If you provide the reference for up to even 500 years, that's still good to mention, certainly.

Climate changes ! again your lack of knowledge, Let me give you another example. My friend is a Virk Jatt. Some of his ancesters left their ancetral village in Gujranwala some 250 years ago due to a drought. This does'nt mean that their stronghold changed. There are about 132 Virk villages in Gujaranwala and it is still is their stronghold.

Yes, but that doesnt negate the point that droughts aren't the only removers of clans from strongholds. But if you do have an alternative evidential record, please by all means provide it into the article. It would help to clear up the Chauhan misconception?

Finally, let me be blunt, your points in reponse to my first argument make no sense, apparently due to lack of expirience living and interacting with people of this clan and Punjab plains.Copying information from some controvercial books by British authors and pasting them here does'nt make you an expert on the subject. This is information about my clan, it was my duty to correct the information. Go ahead if you wanna ban me.I dont give a f.

regards Cheema_jatt

You weren't asked to give a f, you were asked to provide sources to help develop the article. Again and Again I stress put your info into the article and develop it. I am not being adamant about Chauhan history, just asking you to politely explain why it is wrong (for the official record), then provide alternative correct info. I have no idea from who to what Cheema history is, but had a reference and provided it. If it is incorrect, you are most welcome to correct it. It wasn't my view at all, it was Ibbetson's reference so no hair off my back dude. If you can work the article, then do it, otherwise continue with incivility and your article won't get anywhere. Take a page or two from Ravi's book. Have a nice day :-)--Raja 15:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No signitures on comments...

When you make a comment at the end of it add --~~~~ this is so we know whos, who. --Street Scholar 21:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Response by 59.145.136.

1Today some Cheemas might deny the Prithvi Raj connection and blame the Mirasis for misleading Rose, Todd, Ibbetson etc but during the Rajput period and later they would have surely cherished any Rajput connection for the social prestige.

Even if we agree that Rajput identity exists only from 9th century only and has been hyped up because of political prominence it is quite natural and understandable for many sections of society including persons who lost their Rajput identity and merged in the Jat identity to remember with pride their earlier Rajput identity. There are many such groups other than Jats even today including the Muslim Rajputs of Pakistan and India.

Some revisionists are seeking to fashion out a new pure and mythical identity for Jats by arrogating all pre-Rajput era political leadership to Jats excluding many other groups such as Gujjars, Yadavas which might have a stronger claim.

It has always been very difficult to rise to the highest levels of society but very easy to fall from that position and be forced to merge in the next level society.

Rajputs might have been only the politially highest social group but other tribal groups would never have passed up an opportunity for upgradation to Rajput status and by the same logic would have clung to the memory of their lost Rajput status even after merger in the Jat group.

Today under the influence of learned and intelligent myth makers who make outlandish claims such as Jutland being the home of Jats etc etc we have this argument about origin of Cheemas.[59.145.136.1]

Comment:

It is good idea to sign off, and use a user name, so we can follow your discussion.

When you write you should provide some references, rather than opinions, based on ' might have a stronger claim 'etc

Ravi Chaudhary 03:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: No signatures on comments...

No you retard, it's not today's Cheemas who disclaim rajput connection.

There was no such connection and niether did our ancesters fantacise Raputs connection.Besides, in my area, the term Rajput was'nt even known.

My grandfather, great grandfather and great great grandfather were all proud Jatts. My grandfather did'nt even have an idea about the term Rajput.I told him about Prithivi shit from Ha Rose etc. and his reaction was "What Bullshit !!". So stop giving importance to your tribe more than they deserve.

--Cheema jatt 07:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hindu Cheema

Hi Ravi Chaudhary ! I deleted your information on Hindu Cheemas. Please understand that there is nothing aa a Hindu cheema. If you are so sure please provide names of villages where these so called Hindu Cheemas reside.

Cheema stronghold Sialkot and Gujranwal in West Punjab, are exclusively Muslim. Before partition, Cheemas of these areas were also inhabited by Sikh Cheemas. Cheemas in East Punjab are found in Amritsar, Moga, Sangrur and Ludhiana, where they are exclusively Sikh.

Street Scholar, if possible please write protect the top portion of the page, as some idiots are constatnly editing it and adding: "large population of Hindu cheema", which is complete bullshit, as they are no Hindu cheema villages in East or West Punjab.

--Cheema jatt 20:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, and I have reverted it back. Ravi has not provided any sources for his claims. So I have reverted it back. --Street Scholar 18:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Who are - R.S Joon, Chanuma, Urdas (Ardas), Gandhara Kshatriyas

Who are all these people frankly I have never heard of them? --Street Scholar 18:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: AFAIK Ram Swaroop Joon is a Jat historian from India who a book on Jat history under his belt. Gandhar was an ancient kingdom roughly situated in the region of current day eastern Afganistan and NWFP. So ghandhara kshatriyas would be people of kshatriya tribe from this area. They would probably be ancestors of present day Khatris and Khwajas of the Punjab plains. Khandhar derives its name from this kingdom.

Also there is an error on the top of the page where Cheema is spelt in Gurmukhi and Shahmukhi. Punjabi is language which can be written in Gurmukhi as well as Shahmukhi. Therefore, correct terms would be Gurmukhi and Shahmukhi, instead of Punjabi and Urdu, respectively.

--Cheema jatt 20:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, cool - I can't fix the Punjabi/Urdu thing. I will try to get someone who can.

PS. Are you saying, it should be changed from "Punjabi" to "Guurmukhi"? - I can't read Urdu or Punjabi --Street Scholar 10:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah ! technically it should be Gurmukhi instead of Punjabi and Shahmukhi instead of Urdu. Thats because Punjabi is a language which is written using script Shahmukhi or Gurmukhi. Before partion of Punjab, Punjabi was popularly written using Shahmukhi. Writings of Bulleh Shah, Waris Shah, Baba Farid Sakaraganj was in Language Punjabi using script Shahmukhi.

We also need to put a list of "Pir"s respected by Cheema tribe, if possible put pictures of their shrines. BTW are you a Chima ? Where is your ancestral village ? What "Pir" do you follow ?

--Cheema jatt

My village is Sui Cheemian. We have pir in our village there which we follow I don't know their name though. We call them Kilay alay Pir - But thats not their name. Apparently our pir come from the blood line of Prophet Mohamed. --Street Scholar 20:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Corrected Shahmukhi and Gurmukhi error, thanks to "Sial" wiki page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sial_%28tribe%29

--Cheema jatt 21:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good article

Got to say a well done for the article, looks and sounds very good. The addition of pictures is also a good idea. You incorporated the the more recent prominent info re the Mohd. bin Qasim Alliance too which I had heard a reference of a while ago. Top work guys.--Raja 10:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Indo-Aryan or Indo-scythian ?

Most british authors like Cunningham, Ibbeston, Rose claim that Jatts are from the scthian stock. What do you guys think ? Should'nt it be Indo-scythian rather than Indo-aryan ?

[edit] Vandalism

Some idiot is adding incorrect information without any references. We have seen our family trees and there are no Hindoos. Nor does our clan has remenants of Hindoo customs. Importance of Jhand is tree universal to most tribes of Punjab. Cheema clan only follows Sikhism and Islam. Before these religions Cheemas were either Ancestor worshippers, or followed Pirs ( As informed by our elders). Read the references like RS Joon's book. Stop vandalising and putting bullshit on the page. Street Scholar I will keep a watch on the Page, but you also try to watch the page.

PLease refrain from making racist slurs as it is grounds for reporting. Furthermore, there are several problems with the neutrality and unscholarly hate-propaganda touted in this article. Also, the Jat text does not reflect the hateful dialectic spat out in this article so there are several mis-citations.Hkelkar 09:21, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Hkelkar, please can you not go around adding excessive {{cn}} tags, when the citations are clearly there. --James Wanten 11:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I dispute the authenticity of the citations and have the resources to verify. Plz refrain from removing tags until all parties are satisfied thx.Hkelkar 12:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I will go to the University library and look at the texts to see if they are not mis-cited.Until then, I suspect that the citations are wrong or misleading and, if I confirm as such, will file an RfA against this article.Hkelkar 12:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] dispute over sources

Hey all, I think we should try and talk this out civilly. This conversation is getting a little heated, but there's no reason a source dispute has to get uncivil.

What seems to be the problem here? - Che Nuevara 20:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

User:Hkelkar Keeps adding {{disputed}} tag to the oppression section and says the citations are not there or he hasn't read the books when the citations are clearly there. If you look at the footnotes, you can actually sign up on the yahoo groups and retrieve the actual book. RS joon is a Jatt Historian and has written a book about Jatt history which is a scholarly piece of work and is also peer-reviewed. Due do the nature of the (Cheema) gorta there are only few sources out there. My only problem is he should not add the tags, and make the issue of Jatt oppression something ambiguous. Many Hindus at the time followed the caste-system which is racists in its own nature. Today man Hindus do not follow the caste system and this shouldn't effect Hinduism so as much of the oppression on the Jatt was brought on by the ruling Hindu kings. My problem is there is no reason for him to add the disputed tags. When this information can be verified in books and is generally acknowledged by all Jatts. There are many references in Hindu texts calling the Jatt sub-tribes demons for not following Hinduism as many Jatts followed Buddhism. This can be verified in the Mahabharata 13/33/20-2. And Manusmriti X.43-44 so I really don't see what problems he has as its stated in ancient Hindu texts. --Street Scholar 20:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Here I have actually verfied the claim for you in Manusmriti: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/manu/manu10.htm see verses, 43 onward. --Street Scholar 20:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I Don't dispute the ManuSmriti claim, but you are clearly lying about the "History of the Jat's" reference as no such book exists per my post on CheNuevara's Talk page. There is no record of a published work in any peer reviewed publication or editorially reviewed publication. Yahoo groups does not satisfy WP:RS. I am at the library right now and will shortly check the Thakkur ref. I am reasonably certain that that is also mis-cited.Hkelkar 21:00, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Right. I have the book "Sindhi Culture" by Thakkur with me right now. The book is a University of Bombay Sociology Series No 9 publication and has a total of 250 pages (including index).It is divided into 5 Chapters. Cradle, People & Occupation, Human Relations, Religion, Spirit World, Rituals and Re-formation of society. I have run through the pages and

I have not found this sentence " Humiliating conditions were imposed on the Jats depriving them of many civil rights.This sentence is not there anywhere.

This sentence:"The Brahmim chamberlain who usurped the throne of Rajput King Sahasi II went to Brahmanabad, he enjoined upon the Jats and Lohanas not to carry swords, avoid velvet or silken cloth, ride horses without saddles and walk about bare-headed and bare-footed" anywhere" is there on page 14. However, it is ONE sentence that does not necessarily bolster the claim of systemic discrimination against the Jats.

In fact, several of MY assertions concerning Qasim are SUPPORTED by theis book viz pgs 14-15

When Muhammad Kasim invaded Sind in 711 AD, Buddhism had no resistance to offer to their fire and steel. The rosary could not be a match for the sword and the terms Lov and Peace had no meaning to them. The carried fire and sword wherever they went and obliterated all that came their way.Muhammad triumphantly marched into the country, conquering Debal etc. one after the other in quick succession, and in less than a year and half, the far-flung Hindu kingdon was crushed, the great civilization fell back and Sind entered the darkest period of it's history.

Nasty little bugger wasn't he, eh?

There was a fearful outbreak of religious bigotry in several places and temples were wantonly desecrated. AT Debal, Nairun and Aror temples were demolished and converted into mosques.(Resistors) were put to death and women made captives.The Jizya was exacted with special care.(Hindus) were requird to feed Muslim travellers for three days and three nights.

The Arabs left no legacy behind except a few colonies and a few families as the memorial of their conquest. They had no constitutional doctrine (implying that the natives did),no higher culture (author takes position that pre-Islamic Sind was culturally superior), and no superior art or language.

There is more on p16 qbout forced conversions and other atrocities inflicted on Hindus.

Gee, thanks. I have a lot of stuff I can add in bin-Qasim from here :-).

I do not see any mention of atrocities inflicted on the Jats by Hindus in this book. The tone of the book is positive to the pre-Islamic Jats, Hindus and Buddhists and is generally pejorative to Arabs.Hkelkar 21:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Thus, I conclude that Street Scholar just practiced some good-old-fashioned "taqqiya" here by a little mis-citing ^__^.Hkelkar 21:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

There's no need to be sarcastic; we can all be civil here. Street Scholar - unfortunately, Yahoo! Groups is a public site and therefore not a particularly reliable publisher. Is there another way of verifying the book? - Che Nuevara 05:23, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I don;t think so as I don't believe that the book even exists as I understand the definition of the word 'book' :-). You're right about my little quips.I'll stop but Street Scholar needs to fess up.Hkelkar 05:28, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm aware of your position on the source. I would like to hear what Street Scholar has to say. - Che Nuevara 05:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that is a good idea. Let's wait for him.Street Scholar please contribute.Thanks.Hkelkar 05:41, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] For the benefit of RfC

Summary of issues:

partisanship of source "Chach-Nama" in the article
Misrepresentation of "Sindhi Culture" by U.T. Thakkur to indicate exaggerated claims of persecution of Cheema by Hindus (see section above)
Bogus source:

Ram Swarup Joon: History of the Jats, Rohtak, India, 1967. (Available online in files section on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/)

"Yahoogroups" is not reliable as decided by third party mediator [2].Hkelkar 18:28, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

how aobut this:

All the books I cited can be found in a good library. --Street Scholar 16:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I already talked about the Thakkur reference (which I have on my desk). One offhand comment hardly suggests systemic persecution unless, of course, you can back it up with the other refs, which I will check.Hkelkar 16:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The Ram Swaroop Joon does not exist in the Univ of Texas library or any library that my librarian could contact. UT has one of the largest and most exhaustive repositories ofIndian history/culture in North America so this little JOon ref is highly suspect.Hkelkar 16:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I have found the Qureshi book.

[3]

Could you cite page numbers etc so that I may know what to look for? ThanksHkelkar 16:38, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Its not in your library so what? what does that have to do with anything? and anyway I am not your slave you'll have to find the references yourself. Here is the link to the Hisotry of the Jats by Ram Sarup Joon a libary which has it: Harvard University, Harvard College Library Cambridge, MA 02139 United States here is a direct link [4] so stop denying the book dosen't exist. Its also in the following states Massachusetts New York Pennsylvania Michigan Manitoba, Canada Illinois Ohio Minnesota Georgia Missouri If you ask me nicely I will tell you the name of the libraries. --Street Scholar 16:55, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citecheck template

An editor added the citecheck template to this article on 10 November. Citecheck has a narrow purpose and sometimes editors apply it in the wrong situations: it only covers misuse of reliable sources, such as quotes taken out of context and assertions that contradict a source author's statements. Please express the reasons for using citecheck so the problems can be fixed or choose a more appropriate template. Respectfully, Durova^Charge! 04:10, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

the problem is with the references of UT Thakkur, where one sentence is being used out of context. I have the book with me and it clearly states that no systemic persecution of Jatts existed (barring isolated incidents that were based largely on mutually consentual common law). The Chach Nama (cited as a scholarly reference) cannot be used without qualification since medeival Arab literature tended to use exaggerated phraseology and a lot of poetic liscense. More contemporary works need to be cited on the Chach Nama so that the claims made therein can be put in the right context. In that sense, the sources have been misrepresented.Hkelkar 04:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Scythian origins

Its it intellectual dishonesty to claim persecution of Cheemas based on few passages from Manusmriti on Shakas. Origin of Jatts is hotly debated issue. Indo-Sycthian origin is ascribed to not only Jatts but also Rajputs, Gurjars, Marathas by various historians and athropologists. I'd regard all such claims with sckepticism if i were you. 59.95.15.193 18:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree. The edits were made by User:Street Scholar, who got blocked for racist attacks related to this matter. I have filed an rfC on this. I tried to fix up the bias but was only partly successful (Street Scholar did a real number on this and other articles related to the Jatts). I have called better editors into looking at this article.Hkelkar 18:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hkelker

Hkelker, you mention that the whole article is deisputed, however, I totally disagree, scholar or not, you cannot have your way, this is a public encylopedia. This is more of a propganda.

I have written the following sections and they have no errors and proper citations are given where necessary:

First four paragraphs: Scythian decent has been argued by various british authors, of the British empire. Cheema tribe comes in the catagory of martial races, this is also mentioned by Rose, Todd and others. Third paragraph about religion of Cheema's is also correct. Besides following various "Peers" they follow two mainstream relgion viz> Sikhism and Islam.
Information about Cheema's during Akbar's reign has been taken from Ain I Akbari. If you want you can cross check it with english translation of Ain I Akbari under Sarkar of Rechna Doab.
Sections Customs and Geography have been taken from Glossary of Tribes by Rose and are also consistent with information from elders of our tribe
The adage in Section Folklore is very common among Cheema Jatts of district of Gujranwale.

Therefore, RfC or NOVP comments should be used for only specific sections which under dispute.

Please see this post.Hkelkar 06:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have not read anything about Chach-nama or oppression of Jatts, I am not contending the authenticity of that part. Martial race part was added by Street Scholar, and there is nothing wrong with it, British did classify Jats and many other races as martial races. re

"I also have my doubts as to whether all Cheemas are now Muslims - most of the major Jat clans have representatives on both sides of the border, and are divided between Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs." This is coming from someone who has no background knowledge about Cheemas. You call him a scholar ? well , that statement is totally absurd. He is simply generalizing based on a few common Jatt clans Hindu jatts and Sikh jatts (Like dhillon, mann, benipal etc.) and few common clans between muslim jatts and hindu jatts (like Tarar). Majority of Cheema's are Muslim Jatts followed by Sikh Jatts. If you think otherwise, please provide a list of Hindu Cheema villages. I can provide you a list of Sikh and Muslim Cheema villages. When I speak of Cheema, I speak of Jatts not Chamar, Ravidasia, Chura, Tarkhan, these people sometimes use Cheema as their last name, since large number of Cheema villages are named Cheema. These people can be Hindu, but not Jatts, it is a well known fact in Punjab.

Please do not deduce taht I am an anti-hindu or specific parts of my contributions to the article are anti-hindu, as I am simply stating facts. Stating that Punjabi jatt clans like dhillon, mann are hindu, is plausible, however, stating Punjabi Jatt clans like Virk and Chatha are hindu, would be as absurd as stating that Jatt clans like Khrail and Ranjha are not exclusively Muslim.

It seems to me that your rather bizarre statement above is based on the premise that Cheema villages are segregated by religion, an assertion you have failed to prove.You have provided no sources to back your outlandish claim of there being no Hindu Cheemas. You have demonstrated that there are Muslim and Sikh Cheemas, but that does not imply that there are no Hindu ones. The absense of Hindu names for Cheema villages (and I doubt that that even is true, though it may be so in islamist theocratic pakistan) does not exclude the possibility that there are Hindu Cheemas inside Cheema villages, or that they may be in cities, for instance.Hkelkar 08:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Not actually, my claims would seem obvious rather than outlandish, if you had knowledge about the tribe in question. Let me clarify a few things for you, Cheema tribe has been historically concentrated in Gujranwala and Sialkot ( also called Cheema Des, which constitutes of the north-eastern Rechna Doab). In this area the prominant relgions have been Islam and Sikhism among Jatts in the recent past. Other erstwhile religions included ahmediya and hinduism and its variants like gossain, followed Khatris and Aroras, and some other tribes such as Lobana, Kamboh, Tarkhan.

Jatt villages are predominantly inhabited by Jatts of the same clan. In Sialkot and Gujranwala, either cheema villages were eclusively Sikh or exclusively muslim or mixed (I come from a mixed Cheema village). During the partition of the Punjab majority of Sikh Cheemas migerated to East Punjab ( India ). Therefore, the possibility of Hindu Cheemas or even Sikh Cheemas inside or outside villages is minute if not nil.

I can give you references from a Punjabi book called "Jattan da Itihas", but it is well known in Punjab that this tribe follows Sikhism in East Punjab ( majority of which are refugees from Pakistan Punjab) and Islam in West Punjab.

As somebody with Jatt relations. I;d say Hindu Cheema Jats are unheard of. But there might be a few. अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey 19:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Hkelker, I suggest you to refrain from long shots on stuff you do not have clue a about. Your arguments are lame (pardon me, if that is offensive). Cheema jatt 01:29, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

We'll see what the more scholarly editors have to say. Hkelkar 01:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you related to RSS by any chance ? By the way, did you get Street Scholar banned ? Cheema jatt 05:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

An interesting question. As it happens I am not even a Hindu so questions of RSS affiliations (a Hindu group) are largely moot.Are you affiliated to al-Qaeda?

I did not get Street Scholar banned as I am not an admin and do not have the authority. He got blocked for making racist comments against Bengali people, making anti-semitic attacks against myself, and making sexist remarks to lady wikipedians.Hkelkar 06:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

hmmm .., since my parents follow Sikhism, and I am an atheist/unreligious, the possibility of my affiliation with that group would be none.

"Sexist comments on lady wikipedians", lol. Cheema jatt 06:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Good. We have established that I can't be RSS and you can't be al-Qaeda. lol, eh?Interesting that you find sexism amusing. Lady wikipedians don't.Hkelkar 06:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

"sexism amusing" lol, not amusing, but I did not expect that coming from scholars of wikipedia. Cheema jatt 07:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Hkelkar, I would like to ask you the same question if you do not mind, and please do this time think abut it before you answer, are you associated with any fanatical pro Hindutva groups? You have a hard time answer simple questions, someone asked you if you can prove of any Hindu Cheema villages, or even if you know of a Hindu Cheema, however you cannot even do this yourself. Shall I tell you the real reason why there are no Hindu Cheemas? maybe you should try to read your "holy" books, the Cheemas have been called Demons not having Darshan of the Bahamian. Furthermore, this is one of the reasons why there are no Hindu Cheemas, its an oxymoron. You accused me of quoting nonexistent books, ask anyone if RSJ has written a booked title "history of the Jatt" you clearly have no understanding of the Cheema clan. Also Kkelkar, you're hardly in a position to be taken seriously when you have case's pending against you. When you have RaF against you? See here --StreetScholar 17:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Hkelkar, "Plentiful Punjabi Hindu Jatts", are you kiding, please do not make up things. There are only a handful of Punjabi Hindu Jatts found in Indian Punjab. If you are referring to Jats of Hariyana, then, they are certainly not Punjabi and do not mingle or inter-marry with Jatts of Punjab. Jats and Jatts are different, as they do not inter marry and speak different languages. There are however, a few common clans between Jats and Jatts. Cheema jatt 23:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

You people need to start following wikipedia policy and source your edits. And Street Scholar, considering that I'm getting flak from someone who got banned for a net total of 3 weeks for making sexist and racist attacks, accusations from you are rather rich, no?Hkelkar 23:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why I removed statements about language

These subjective comments were absolutely not supported by the source, which talked about the status of the Punjabi language in Pakistan without mentioning the Cheema clan at any time. If it is the case that Cheemas are Punjabi speakers, then this should go in the lead. Itsmejudith 11:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I have a Cheema friend and he tells me Cheema's speak Punjabi? --Logic20 22:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Cheema tribe is from the heart of West and East Punjab. Punjabi is the language of the majority in both provinces. Cheema jatt 09:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hkelker

You have constantly been adding offensive remarks to this page. This is not your personal page, where you can put articles to suit your bias and ignorance. Passing out offensive unfounded references about Cheema woman and making statements like "Large number of Punjabi Hindu Jats" are hardly traits of a scholar.

Cheema was a warrior tribe of North West Punjab. Our tribe has stayed put in this highly disturbed area for last 1000 years, unlike other tribes of the plains who took refuge in the Hills. Your comments are insult not only to me, but also to my ancestors, who fought Afgan Invaders and Mughals for centuries.

Cheema jatt 10:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/h/e/Talk%7ECheema_ccf8.html"

Categories: Unassessed India articles | Unassessed India articles of unknown-importance | Unknown-importance India articles | Discussion pages which may contain trolling

Talk:Cheema

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] added info

[edit] Vandalism

[edit] Claim of Cheema descent from Rajputs ????

[edit] Vandalism

[edit] Vandalism part 2

[edit] No signitures on comments...

[edit] Re: No signatures on comments...

[edit] Hindu Cheema

[edit] Who are - R.S Joon, Chanuma, Urdas (Ardas), Gandhara Kshatriyas

[edit] Good article

[edit] Indo-Aryan or Indo-scythian ?

[edit] Vandalism

[edit] dispute over sources

[edit] For the benefit of RfC

[edit] Citecheck template

[edit] Re:Scythian origins

[edit] Hkelker

[edit] Why I removed statements about language

[edit] Hkelker

Views

Navigation

Search