Read on Twitter
This is a phenomenon that has been recorded by several historians and chroniclers. Firstly, Guru Granth Sahib is no authority on Dharmic affairs/classifications. The claim of Khatris to a Kshatriya status is similar to those Shudras who claim they were former/degraded Kshatriyas. https://twitter.com/abdkcbsah/status/1338769581024759808
A prominent myth/tradition among the Khatris is that they took to mercantile/clerical traditions due to Parashurama, and hence abandoned their Kshatriya identities. Interestingly this is the same excuse used by non-Kshatriyas to assume a Kshatriya status, even if a degraded one.
They are primarily heterodox Sikhs (of Nanak Shah's religion), who claim to be Kshatriyas. This was the overwhelming notion/narrative recorded across Sindh and Punjab.
Source: Sindh and the Races that Inhabit the Valley of the Indus (1851) ~ Captain Sir Richard Francis Burton
Source: Sindh and the Races that Inhabit the Valley of the Indus (1851) ~ Captain Sir Richard Francis Burton
The oldest Khatri in record ever would be Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism, a contemporary of Babur's. He recorded Babur's invasion in the Babur Bani, ostensibly through a first hand account. By this time Rajputs already were synonymous with the Kshatriya identity.
The Gur Panth Parkash of Rattan Singh Bhangu (1810), even with this version's severe mistranslations and a hostility towards Rajputs/Hindus, puts together the Khatris with other non-martial and even lowly castes (Jat Kamini), who were supposed to be militarized by Gobind Singh.
Translations:
Etymology also involves linguistic history, we already know that by the time of Guru Nanak, from whose works the Khatris source their etymology as well history, Kshatriya only meant Rajput. He was no foreigner to this either. He was born in Talwandi now known as Nankana Sahib.
His parents had sought refuge in Rai-Bhoi-Di-Talwandi, founded by Rai Bhoi Bhati, and his son is supposed to have renamed it to Nankana Sahib after Guru Nanak.
Both Bhoi and Bular were first generation converts to Islam and clearly didn't comprehend the recital of the Kalma.
Both Bhoi and Bular were first generation converts to Islam and clearly didn't comprehend the recital of the Kalma.
Pointless to mention but the event of circumcision seems to be part of a non contemporary/later narration as even the Afghans (Daulat Khan Lodi) under whom they converted didn't observe circumcision until recently, as it wasn't part of their tribal code. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Circumcision-no-longer-acid-test-to-identify-Indian-spies/articleshow/4387116.cms
The argument of etymology, that "Khatri comes from Kshatriya" falls flat when we observe its etymological, circumstantial and historical roots around Guru Nanak's time. The next most probable explanation comes from their traditional clerical-mercantile role of Bahi-Khata workers.
Khatri ≠ Kshatriya, thread continuation:
In the wake of newer dishonest attempts, we shall bring forth and debunk more misinformation that is being spread by the group that tried challenging the Kshatriya status of Rajputs and appropriate it for themselves at the same time.
In the wake of newer dishonest attempts, we shall bring forth and debunk more misinformation that is being spread by the group that tried challenging the Kshatriya status of Rajputs and appropriate it for themselves at the same time.
I would suggest the readers to first go through the assertions of the other side, through the following link... https://twitter.com/therajaputra/status/1337307650065719300?s=19
Here the quoted source is Ferishta, a 17th century historian of the Deccan, of course years after Guru Nanak who himself didn't have any Kshatriya credentials. The original translation of this source was done by General John Briggs (1785-1875). https://twitter.com/RaiUppal/status/1339140053486850048
When we see the original translation, it uses 'Ksetry', but this is not the point. The text refers to the Purushasukta and its derivatives, which come from Hindu scriptures. There was no Khatri then.
Source: John Briggs' Tarikh-i-Firishta > Introductory Chapter on the Hindoos.
Source: John Briggs' Tarikh-i-Firishta > Introductory Chapter on the Hindoos.
For something so ancient as the creation of the varnas by Lord Brahma, a 17th century text is cited, that too Mohammedan, and that too Ferishta, a historian of dubious credentials. Even if Khatri etymology came from the Deccan, this would be a textbook case of misquotation.
Let this also be made clear that the sole source of the thread that seems to counter mine is the 'Kshatriya Prakasha' by Savarna Lal Tandan, written during the height of Sanskritisation era and to the same effect - Present Khatris as Kshatriyas.
The book not only retrospectively and dishonestly conflates Khatri with Kshatriya, but also puts their timelines to the pre-Mauryan era.
Etymologically speaking, this becomes paradoxical, Khatri is a word from Punjabi but is from a time when the Punjabi language didn't exist.
Etymologically speaking, this becomes paradoxical, Khatri is a word from Punjabi but is from a time when the Punjabi language didn't exist.
The author of the thread then shifts to another source - The Tribes & Castes of Punjab & NWFP, Vol. 2 (1911) ~ H.A. Rose.
It compiles the native Punjabi Khatri notions recorded in from census reports of 1883 and 1892. Of course we again are in the Sanskritisation era.
It compiles the native Punjabi Khatri notions recorded in from census reports of 1883 and 1892. Of course we again are in the Sanskritisation era.
Now that we are into Gazetteers, let's see the claims of non-Punjabi Khatris. For example, the Khatris of Mysore are Silk weavers, despite their claims to a Kshatriya status that no one take seriously.
Source: Mysore Gazetteer, Vol. 1, 1897 ~ Benjamin Lewis Rice
Source: Mysore Gazetteer, Vol. 1, 1897 ~ Benjamin Lewis Rice
More...
Source: Castes and Tribes of Southern India (Vol. 3) ~ Edgar Thurston
Source: Castes and Tribes of Southern India (Vol. 3) ~ Edgar Thurston
