Inter-Caste Marriage, Sikh Jatt Girl Wanting To Marry Chamar Boy.

[Guest Anonymous]

Hi All,

I am a Sikh girl, and I have been in a relationship with a Sikh guy for over a year.

He is a Chamar, and I am a Jatt, however, we do not believe in the caste system nor do his family. On the other hand, my family believe in the caste system strongly.

My Father feels people will laugh at him if I marry a chamar and it will bring shame on the family as I am marrying a 'lower' caste. My Mother has the same mentality, and unfortunately so does my sister. The only person on my side is my brother.

I have told my family about my boyfriend, and I have told them I deeply love him. They were very hurt and feel like I had disrespected them and basically ruined their lives.

I love this guy so much and I know I want to spend the rest of my life with him. I've explained to my family the caste system doesn't even exist but it seems to make NO difference. How do I show my family that he is just a human, he is just like us, he is SIKH!

Please could somebody offer me some advice.

Thank you.

[S4NGH]

There is no untouchability, but there is jaat. All Sikh gurus married other khatris.

But go ahead and ruin your vansh, you are already in Uk. So already game over, lol!

What? Have u completely lost it?

a) there is no jaat in sikhi. Retard.

b) dont dream of drawing comparisons between us, and Akal Purkh.

c) wtfaah is wrong with the uk?! Sikhi is more 'kehm' here than it is in ur hindustan with all you bharti rss melech

[JagsawSingh]

To the OP:

If you are a Sikh and he is a Sikh then there is no problem as Sikhi has no caste.

However, if you are a Sikh and he belongs to the Ravidassia faith, which is totally seperate and different to Sikhism, then yes, your family are right, there is a big problem.

As most chamars are Ravidassias rather than Sikhs, are you saying your boyfriend is one of the small minority that are not ?

[Guest]

Brother, these lies that the Guru's married Khatri's is a lie put out by Mughal and Hindu authors in order to discredit Sikhi.

If Mata Gujjar Kaur Ji, as merely one example of several I can provide, were of Gujjar ancestry it's pretty clear that our Guru Sahibaan despised the caste system as evident in their lives.

This is completely wrong. First off just cause the Mata Gujjar kaur Ji's name is Gujjari does not mean she was a Gujjar! These claims of yours are false. All the gurus were khatris and all of the gurus wives were khatris..

Now hypothetically if mata Gujjar Kaur was a Gujjar what about all the other gurus wives... I am certain they are all khatris. What we tend to forget is That back then people would only get married to the same caste people. It was like taboo for people back then... Am I advocating khatriism?? No Im just showing the facts. This does not make the guru less guru...

https://books.google.ca/books?id=gqIbJz7vMn0C&pg=PA132&lpg=PA132&dq=was+mata+gujri+a+khatri?&source=bl&ots=fQB3CeNHQC&sig=DZOGKSbDUNmsOVPaaF0yKs2t4dQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yzMIVe7QLYHXgwSqroHIBA&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAg

Read the little thing about lal chand.

[Guest]

There is no untouchability, but there is jaat. All Sikh gurus married other khatris.

This...

[JagsawSingh]

Brother it is only Dera Ballan who pimp the lie that most in east Punjab of a leatherworking ancestry are non-Sikhs. In fact the majority of those with a leatherworking ancestry in East Punjab are indeed Sikh (the region of Doaba notwithstanding in which Sikhs are a minority as a consequence). We have to counter these Congress pimps false claim by claiming that ONLY Sikhs (all of us) have the right to be considered True Ravidassi's as we actually follow the teachings of Dhan Dhan Ravidas Ji Maharaj in opposition to the caste system, whereas Dera Ballan crooks are Congress pimps who actively support the caste system.

Singhsabha1669, Now that we know you advocate our Sikh girls marrying Ravidassias let me ask you a question :

Lets suppose a majority of jatts got together and decided they wanted to make Bhagat Dhanna Jatt not only the 12th Guru...not only the premier Guru but actually refer to him as Satguru. This group then go on to refer to themselves as Dhannasias.

Could anybody rightly refer to them as Sikhs ?

Would it be right for a Sikh family to marry their Sikh daughter into such a clearly non-Sikh group ?

I'm asking you but, as you stated in your message previously, you've already said you approve of such alliances.

I stand by what I said before. If the boy is a Sikh than the OP should marry him because Sikhi knows no caste. But if, however, he is a Ravidassia rather than a Sikh (and this is the more likely scenario) then her parents are absolutely right in condemning the alliance and she ought to feel ashamed of herself for suggesting it.

A Sikh, regardless of gender, must always marry a Sikh.

[dontcallmebhaji]

Your parents are talking of their izzat but who is standing up for yours! You have a good brother and if your sister is married,she is more than likely thinking of what her in laws will say. Fast forward 2 years and who do you think will care, NO ONE. Because know one bothers with people who are happy and content. If on the other hand you marry a jaat punjabi via your parents choice, who thinks his the bees knees, because thats what mummy has always told him, it will end in divorce or you will end up in another trapped marriage which society will keep you in, its the Sikh thing. OR you might get a nice jaat boy who will resent you because you had an ex, regardless of how modern jaat men claim to be we all have the same insecurities and high expectations of our wives. If you decide not to follow your heart and marry someone introduced via your parents, you will be asked to keep your past boyfriend a secret. Relationships are built on trust and trust breeds confidence and security, which turns to love,which leads to a strong family which will keep its Sikhi ! just be sure your partner is worth fighting for and his genuine, also he should be fighting for your hand and proving himself to your family. Your hand in marriage is a testament to the parents who raised you and his acceptance that his new family will hold the highest respect in his heart.

[JagsawSingh]

You're going round in circles mate talking gibberish.

Let me repeat what I said before:

I stand by what I said before. If the boy is a Sikh than the OP should marry him because Sikhi knows no caste. But if, however, he is a Ravidassia rather than a Sikh (and this is the more likely scenario) then her parents are absolutely right in condemning the alliance and she ought to feel ashamed of herself for suggesting it.

A Sikh, regardless of gender, must always marry a Sikh.

Now, just because the OP says he is a 'Sikh' that doesn't make it so. After all, even you keep on saying people who promote bhagats to 'Gurus' and then believe in that bhagat as 'Satguru' are 'Sikhs'. She could just as easily be as foolish as you.

Note: Please please stop talkinga about Dera Bhallan. I've not mentioned it. Nobody else has mentioned it. And yet you keep going on about it like its the issue of the day.

[Koi]

OP, have any of these views helped?

[Guest]

First off just cause the Mata Gujjar kaur Ji's name is Gujjari does not mean she was a Gujjar!

1699 = With all due respect bir'ay are you next going to tell me that Bhagat Dhanna Jatt Ji was not Jatt, right?

All the gurus were khatris and all of the gurus wives were khatris..

1699 = Nonsense bir'ay. I'm disappointed that you have fallen for the lies originally interjected by Hindu and Muslim authors against our Guru Sahibaan.

1699 = First off our Guru's had no caste. They emphasised repeatedly upon Kul Nash. Whilst it is true that Guru Nanak Dev Ji Maharaj's parents were of Khatri ancestry, there is no evidence that our subsequent Guru Sahibaan and their Mahal were Khatri, other than politically motivated Hindu and Muslim scribes ascribing the Khatri background upon all our Guru Sahibaan thereafter purely for the reason of discrediting Sikhi and everything Guru Sahib stand for.

Now hypothetically if mata Gujjar Kaur was a Gujjar what about all the other gurus wives... I am certain they are all khatris.

1699 = Not at all Bhai Sahib. Are you aware that Sodhi, Trehan and Bhalla were not recognised as Khatri gotra's at Hardwar prior to the 16th century. That is conclusive proof to demolish this Mughal-inspired so-called "all-Khatri" lie.

What we tend to forget is That back then people would only get married to the same caste people.

1699 = Guru Sahib broke all the lies that Hinduism and Islam espoused. I don't understand why it should trouble you bir'ay that our Guru Sahib were not 100% Khatri as anti-Sikh authors in the employ of the Mughals deliberately claimed. Do you not see that the example of even our Guru's discarding the lies of apartheid matrimonials according to the caste stystem actually strengthens Sikhi rather than diminishing it? Think about it logically bir'ay without emotion.

Oh please... Mughals conspired against us and so did the Hindus according to you... Where are the sources?