 | This is an archive of past discussions about Rajput. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
--69.142.10.64 22:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)==Rajputs==I am a muslim and claims to be a rajput.My parents migrated from india.I can see that rajput are not included in the caste system,But you have to understand that you cannont change your caste. it comes with you.if you dont have a last name you cannot make any document or get admission in a school .I am not proud of my heritage.I pray for the first person in my ancestors who became muslims.If i have a choice i will get rid of my last name.But it is sticking to my back like a devil.If you wants to know the history and enjoy it you have to be [email protected]
"Sons of the Kings"
If the arguement were baseless, then perhaps it would not have stirred so much passion. And perhaps you have clearly misunderstood the basic fact that Rajput does not immediately imply that someone is a king, it is a Jati within the Varna System. Furthermore, once someone belongs to Islam, they should follow the dictates and practices of that faith, but trying to keep yourself on both sides in order to gain priviledges from one group and status from another simply does not work.
The entire concept of Rajputs is one that is not understood by any non-Rajputs but only those who were born and brought in the noble families and bloodlines of the Rajput lineages. Our beliefs and practices, our philosophy, our martial training, the code of ethics, our view of life and death, none of these have been understood or studied by non-Rajputs, and yet it is so simple for the many to simply comment on what we should and should not accept.
It has become en vogue for people to simply claim that they are Rajputs without any understanding of the price that must be paid for carrying such a title. Our ancestors, whose blood flows through our veins, would have wanted us to choose death before dishonour and thus we have remained Rajputs and not subordinates to a foreign land or philosophy.
Although it may be the case that an individual could be descended from Rajputs and be a muslim is very likely since Rajput history dictates the forcible conversions of many Rajputs who were given the choice of conversion or having to witness their families destroyed in front of them. We have the Islamic historians to thank for recording these atrocities which would have otherwise been forgotten to the dusts of time.
Although many Rajputs chose death (such as the great Jauhars of Chittor and Ranthambore), others were subjugated and converted. However, Islam dictates that there are no ties with the ancestral faith or culture of a people once they have become muslims, and thus if someone claims to be a muslim and a rajput, that simply is not being true to their faith.
Islam is a beautiful concept and it should be of the utmost importance for any muslim to be true to his/her faith, but by claiming to be Rajputs as well, is a desire to hang on to their "Prestige" which is only found in the culture of an alien faith being Hinduism. You do not see Persians claiming titles of non-Islamic origins or pre-Islamic status, they have adapted and changed with their circumstance of being a conquered but proud people.
Another question comes to mind, not every muslim can be descended from a Rajput, so why are there no claims of Brahmin-Muslim, Vashya-Muslim, Shudra-Muslim, Buniya-Muslim etc etc etc, and yet you will find so many claiming to be Rajputs and yet do not follow even a thread of Rajput culture or practice. Instead the so-called Rajput Muslim has a vicious contempt for his/her ancestors (if they are Rajput at all) which is not a Rajput trait, furthermore they view Arabs and Turks as being superior to them, which again is not a Rajput trait. Thus, it has also been stated that Rajput is a Status, and that in a sense is true, however it is a Status within the Hindu hierarchy, and for one to claim they are a Rajput and then a Muslim, really does not fit since this status does come with rules, code of ethics, practices and rituals. In order to maintain that status one must live as a Rajput, not simply claim to be one.
Your claims about the origins of Rajput families is also inaccurate. It is sad that we could not have met over a coffee to further discuss this matter. However, as my Muslim friends have stated, it is simply against Islam to claim such a status in order to have prestige over others especially if that prestige comes from a foreign culture which is not Islamic.
Furthermore, your sense of history is highly inaccurate since Chandragupta Maurya was not Jain, he was a Hindu, as was Asoka who then became a Buddhist. (Too bad you were not at the University of Toronto, we could have had a good laugh with your sense of Rajput history).
Your opening statement: “There are many Indian counterparts that counter the fact that there can be Muslim Rajputs. You are fundamentally wrong. Simply Muslim/Hindu refers to faith regardless of your social standing. There have been Muslim Rajas from both the Kokar, Janjua, Bhatti, Rathore and Chauhan clans all Suryavansh and Chandravansh lineages. The term Raja is just that, 'King/lord ruler' of a region. Their faith is regardless of their status. A ruler no matter what his faith is still a ruler, so the question of outcaste or leaving the Hindu faith means that you are no longer King is ludicrous as nowhere in history has this occurred or been accepted.”
First of all to be muslim and claim divine origin from the Sun and Moon is against Islam. Secondly, Rajput does not automatically designate someone as a King, thus your argument does not hold, since this is not what is being discussed. Thirdly, you can loose your Jati and become an outcaste, and this is where the reasoning lies, which you obviously do not understand.
You yourself have stated: “The Varna was very dynamic and many Rajputs were downgraded to Jats during the Hindu reign pre Islamic times on account of their poor service as rulers……”
Thus you also state that one can loose their Jati, and in the extreme case one is an outcaste once they leave the Hindu fold (Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Buddhist etc etc.), they are an outcaste, and this is in accordance with the Bhagavad Gita, the highest authority for the doctrine of Rajput codes and ethics.
To simply throw around a few names without credible historical accuracy does not make one's arguement stand solid.
About Rajputs, how should I know? Well, simply because I am one. About the royal houses? Well, anyone from the Royal Houses of Patiala, Nabha, Nepal, Mewar, Nahan, Kashmir, Baroda, Bijawer etc will recognise my words since I have discussed this before with family members, and I am after all their cousin (I will sign off with my designation so that any relative will recognise who I am). On that note, I have other work to get to, as for the Muslims who are confused on their identity, I really feel bad for them.
Rajputs became famous due to our brave resistance and sacrifice against the Islamic Invasion, thus we owe this fame to Islam who gave us a good fight and chose to record our heroic resistance and the defeat of the invaders in Islamic history books. However, if a Muslim claims he is a Rajput, he is simply confused about where his loyalties should lie.
A Muslim should be proud of his/her Islamic culture, religion and society. In the same token, even if one could be descended from an ancestral home which is not Arabic, once one is Islamic, they should be fully committed to Islam and follow the dictates of Islam which simply put states that one should have no loyalties to other nations except Islam. If one claims to be a Rajput, that is seriously putting to question their loyalty and faith towards Islam.
Rajputs can only be Hindu or Sikh, nothing more, nothing less.
-Kunwarji (Ojaswi Kunwar, Projawal Chamba Tara). Kunwarji is GorkhaliGorkhali 17:01, 30 December 2005 (UTC)