Discussion in 'Religion & Culture' started by sob, Sep 30, 2012.
Perception vs reality: Is the Punjabi muslim really martial? | Firstpost
Punjabi Muslims are great so long as they are winning.
At the first whiff of defeat, they bolt.
This was told to me by a senior General, when I was a child, and who had commanded a Company with Punjabi Muslims during WW II.
Aakar Patel's argument is that the Punjabi 'martial' tribes upon converting to Islam did not show any martial character or prowess before and/or after the British rule ergo they are not martial ( does this mean Islam is a religion of peace ?) However, he does not suggest an unsatisfactory record under British rule.
His second argument is that Punjabi muslims are of Jat peasantry, a caste/profession which is not martial. However, historically Jats(non-muslims) have been involved in many rebellions/wars.
Among the muslims in the subcontinent the most martial/warlike are the Pathans/Pashtuns.
Acc.to the words of Dominique Lapiere and Franks collins they were the most troublesome people in the Raj.
In this interview to BBC in 1951 Major General RE Atkins told that Pathans and Sikhs were the most formidable warriors in India.
It is said they have been rebelling against authority since time immemorial,they rebelled against Ashoka,Mughals,Huns,Greeks,British,Russians,Pakistanis etc etc.
In contrast Punjabi Muslims were mainly Brahmins or shudras from Punjab or Jat Peasants.
Yes Pathans have had a formidable relationship.
I am not sure of the Brahmin ancestry ?
Many upon conversion to Islam adopted different castes to elevate their hierarchy amongst Muslims for eg many adopted the caste/title/surname Khan upon conversion if they were from an elite Hindu family.
Shudras are the most war like caste in India.Regarding pathans they were rebellious when conquered but were not a threat like Turks
Mazhbi Sikhs are the most war like Sikhs in India
here is something that i wrote for another forum in 2009 under the title PUNJABIS VS PATHANS---
The MAHAR was the eyes and ears of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj.
They scaled up Sinhgarh and captured it for Shivaji.
Read Longer's 'Forefront Forever'.
To be frank, I don't think that caste has anything to do with valour and courage. It is an individual trait that is honed by training. Many have shown abject cowardice, his caste notwithstanding.
Have you seen them in action? You fought alongside them? Which battle, if I may ask?
Or are you going by old wives tales?
What makes you think that the Jat Sikhs are merely eating rations and defecating all over the countryside?
For Christ's sake quit this silly line of thought that you shove in, in every damn sane discussion!
And just remember, there are no good or bad battalions, there are only good or bad officers.
I never said that. Napoleon and others did.
You know more than Napoleon?
They were Guru Govind Singhs and Banda Bahadurs first followers and soldiers.The Jats entered the show later
That bequeaths soldierly qualities for generations?
What utter tommy rot.
High time you develop some rational thought!
If you want to know about courage and Sikhs and castes, here it is for you:
Guru Gobind Singh Ji, who had abolished the institution of masands replaced charan pahul with khanda di Pahul. He summoned a special assembly in the Keshgarh Fort at Anandpur on the Baisakhi day of 1756 Bk/30 March 1699. After the morning devotions and kirtan, he suddenly stood up, drawn sword in hand, and, to quote Bhai Santokh Singh, Sri Gur Pratap Suraj Granth, spoke: â€œThe entire sangat is very dear to me; but is there a devoted Sikh who will give his head to me here and now? A need has arisen at this moment which calls for a head.â€ A hush fell over the assembly. Daya Ram, a Khatri of Lahore, arose and offered himself. He walked behind the Guru to a tent near by. Guru Gobind Singh returned with his sword dripping blood and demanded another head. The Guru again asked for another head, this time Dharam Singh, a Jat from Hastinapur, presented himself to the Guru. Guru Gobind Singh gave three more calls. Mohkam Chand, a calico printer/tailor from Dwarka, Himmat Rai, a water-bearer from Jagannath Puri, and Sahib Chand, a barber from Bidar, stood up one after another and advanced to offer their heads.
So that puts paid to your always bringing in the shudra being the bestest or the most deprived in every damned discussion.
Quit having this chip on your shoulder.
The world has changed.
Embrace its goodness and not perpetually gripe. It is consuming you and you are not enjoying the goodness of this world!
Forgive me, but I sometimes wish I was born a shudra in AP, owing huge tracts of land, with massive bank balances and having the luxury of cribbing to high heavens of deprivation and yet great courage and valour, as I live in a mansion and have the choice of many SUVs at my command and a whole lot of minions to toil my land and bring me the moolah so that I can have my annual holidays in the Caribbean, Mauritius or Europe!
It is my misfortune that I do not come under the caste category, not being of that religion where caste seems to be the sole preoccupation of the lower ones of their system, and instead cast aside from all the goodies thrown in for the so called minorities and so called constitutional brahmins - the deprived class with all the privileges and quotas and sops!
Actually, I feel sorry for the scrawny, underfed, steeped in malnutrition Brahmin pandits who bless the various stall and get a few coins when I go to the market to buy my provisions and daily needs.
More so since I have seen the rich, overfed, obese landowning so called deprived shudras of Andhra Pradesh.
Attend one of their weddings and you will see where India's gold lies and the money that can flow.
If they are deprived, then derivation takes a new meaning!
I have no reasons not be deprived like them.
Just give me the goodies and call me what you want!
Ambani are modh banias.
Shudras as per your definition.
Never heard them cribbing!
This same Aakar Patel had written an article in Dawn or Tribune, not sure, praising the Pakistanis as a martial race. Of course much appreciated by the readers going by the comments...
If Punjabi Muslims were at all "martial" then India would not have been invaded as many times as it was in the past 1000 years.
I cannot think of a single powerful state based in Punjab in our entire history, besides the Sikh State.
Another nail in the coffin of paki myth that pakis = mughals.
I put forward this question of resident paki when he claimed pakis ruled India, not surprisingly he couldn't come up with an answer.
Separate names with a comma.