Mass Conversion To Christianity: A Case Study Of Chuhra Community In Sialkot District (1880- 1930)

[M. Sarmad]

There is a reason behind it, many people in pakistani punjab don't know but both "mochi" (shoe maker) and "julaha" (weaver) were the relatively "clean professions" adopted mainly by people who were originally leather workers "chammars". The bias against "julaha" weavers in punjab is due to their predominantly "chammar" origins just like mochis.

The theory that Chamars and Julahas are probably the same by origin was first propounded by James Wilson, the Secretary to the Board of Control (the chief official in London responsible for Indian affairs) from 1848-1852. However, the 1881 Panjab Census report, while endorsing Wilson's theory, does concede that Julahas were recognized by both Hindus and Muslims as fellow believers and admitted to religious equality. Hindus treating Julahas as equals in religion (in a Varna-based society) does raise serious doubts about the Chamar/Scavanger origins of Julahas.

Denzil Ibbetson further writes: "we find Koli-Julahas, Chamar-Julahas, Mochi-Julahas, Ramdasi-Julahas, and so forth ; and it is probable that after a few generations these men drop the prefix which denotes their low origin, and become Julahas pure and simple." (he has completely ignored the possibility that some among those mentioned castes might have adopted weaving as their profession)... The Brirish accounts seem to be a little biased against Julahas. ... The British had described Julahas as 'one of the most turbulent classes of the community'. And it was quite common for the Britishers to show in a bad light those castes they deemed 'unfriendly'. Interestingly, Denzil Ibbetson claimed that the rulers of Bahawalpur were purely an indigenous tribe whose founder Daud Khan was a Julaha or weaver by profession. (This view is endorsed by other orientalists like J D Cunningham and James Tod as well).

From the late 19th century onward (ever since they were officially identified as a low caste), Julahas had been struggling to gain social and political recognition. As the first step, they rejected the nomenclature of Julaha altogether and started identifying themselves as 'Ansari' and 'Momin'. They founded a political party (All India Momin Conference) in 1911 to articulate the interests of the Ansari community. The All India Momin Conference became a platform for lower-caste Muslims (particularly Julahas) and mounted a serious challenge to the Muslim League’s attempt to speak on behalf of the high-class Indian Muslims. In 1940, they went as far as passing a resolution in Patna that opposed the partition of India.

 

[Crusher]

Denzil Ibbetson further writes: we find Koli-Julahas, Chamar-Julahas, Mochi-Julahas, Ramdasi-Julahas, and so forth ; and it is probable that after a few generations these men drop the prefix which denotes their low origin, and become Julahas pure and simple. The Brirish accounts seem to be a little biased against.......................................

There is nothing wrong if a signficant number of julahas of punjab are descended from chammar communities of punjab. Even the Ranjeet Singh the sikh maharaja of punjab in 19th century also belonged to "Sansi" community which was also a branch of chammars. That is another thing that Ranjeet Singh Sansi family marrried heavily among jatts and made alliances with them and their later descendants identified more with jatts than their oiriginal sansi community.

 

[M. Sarmad]

There is nothing wrong if a signficant number of julahas of punjab are descended from chammar communities of punjab. Even the Ranjeet Singh's the king of punjab in 19th century also belonged to "Sansi" community which was also a branch of chammars. That is another thing that Ranjeet Singh Sansi family marrried heavily among jatts and made alliances with them and their later descendants identified more with jatts than their oiriginal sansi community.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with being Julaha or Chamar or Chuhra. My point is, the British accounts regarding the origins of Julaha caste are not entirely trustworthy.

As for Ranjit Singh being Chamar, that is debatable. But that's not the topic here.
However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with him being Sansi. (Sansis are not Chamar b/w)

 

[Jaanbaz]

Kind of sad they converted to Christianity thinking they would become equal to the white man instead end up getting all Christians in Pakistan being labelled as churas. Mind you Karachi's Christian population is far more educated and generally wealthier then Christians in Punjab. The caste system is alive and well in Punjab despite what people may claim, is it not true even now in rural Punjab Jatts vote for jatts, Rajputs for rajputs?

 

[takeiteasy]

Hindus and Sikhs regard them as lowly based on Caste. Although, honestly many look similar to them.

Yes. Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs of northern India look around and see that the low castes are the converts to Christianity. Thus, in their minds they occupy Christianity to low castes. This was a new knowledge for me, when I lived with northern Indians during my Engg days. They know only either elite Anglo-Protestants or Goan Catholics and most of the "others" are native tribals converted to Christianity. That's why, I remember a Pakistani member here few years back tried to call Christians as Choor-Chamars, since his exposure to Christians in South Asia is limited to low caste/tribal converts. I did not understood this then, since I'm from Kerala.

 

[Kabira]

They came from gangetic plains for sure. They are found all over. In KP apparently they go by name of shah khel or something and speak pashto.

Their ancestors went from village to village looking to do jobs no one else would do.

My guess for their origin? They came from gangetic plains and are mostly found in northen indus region from Kashmir to punjab. Much more in punjab plains then in mountains. Hardly any in Sindh and Balochistan, not counting recent migrants. This mean they are not south indian in origin but from north indian gangetic plains. Though sindh and balochistan not so ideal agricultural economy in older days was likely main reason not many went there.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

lso, there is nothing 'Southern' about the names of their gotras: Sahotra, Gill, Bhatti, Khokhar, Mattu, Kharu, Kaliyana, Ladhar, Sindhu, Chhapriband, Unthwal, Hansi, Dhariwal etc.

They are known for adopting the surnames of their Zamindars or their ancestral area (none of which are in Pakistan).

Dhariwal were originally migrants from Dhari in Gujarat
Sindhu is most common in South India
Chapriband is a Rajasthani surname
Unthwal were camel traders from Rajasthan
Hansi gotra are from Hansi in Central India
Kaliyana were sandstone miners caste from Bhiwani in Central India

Adopted from Zamindars:
Sahotra is a Central Punjabi Jatt clan
Bhatti is a Jatt-Rajput clan
Khokhar is a Potohari clan
Mattu is a Kashmiri clan
Ladhar is a mostly Sikh clan of East Punjab
Kharu is a Kashmiri clan

----------------

I am very surprised that a Punjabi as you, who seems to be very defensive about the Punjabi identity and is sometimes sensitive on Punjab-related topics do not know basic things like these...

These people today are Pakistani and I will never consider them lower. Being native or not, does not make you any less Pakistani. However, as someone who is well-learned in our heritage, I will always resist perversions of history; claiming that these people were the original inhabitants of Punjab is misleading and grossly inaccurate.

Also, I do not wish to come off as confrontational, I believe that we are both brothers and have much to learn from each other.

Most Muslims in Pakistan either claim foreign descent or come from groups you'd consider low. But there is a sizeable minority of higher caste folk (mainly Rajputs).

Please do tell me what groups is it that most Pakistanis come from that would be considered "low" by Indians.
The largest tribes of Punjab are Jatts, Rajputs, Sheikhs, Arains and Awans; which of these tribes would be considered 'low'. They are mostly non-existent (except for Rajputs) in India out of Greater Punjab and were designated as Martial Races by the British.

 

[M. Sarmad]

----------------

I am very surprised that a Punjabi as you, who seems to be very defensive about the Punjabi identity and is sometimes sensitive on Punjab-related topics do not know basic things like these...

But I am not at all surprised ... Someone who believes that Chuhras are South Indians can claim anything of course.. Re-check your facts (or you want me to do that for you?).. and then post here ...

Also read through the previous posts to learn a few things about Punjab's lower castes

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

(Muslim Chamars) and 5,028 Chamrangs and we are talking about almost 15% of the total population of Punjab here.

You seriously believe they are South Indian immigrants in Punjab?? It is probable that they are essentially of aboriginal origin.

And Chuhras may look out of place in Gujranwala/Sialkot areas, but at the time of partition, they (excluding Musallis) made up 9.56% of the total population of Gujranwala Tehsil, 8.67% of Daska Tehsil, 9.12% of Sheikhupura Tehsil, 8.09% of Shahdara Tehsil, 7.23% of Narowal Tehsil, 6.20% of Sialkot Tehsil, and 6.84% of Gurdaspur Tehsil. These numbers are simply too large to ignore.

The same people make up 45% of Trinidad, 40% of Guyana, 30% of Suriname, etc... does that make them native to any of these nations?

They refused to give up their aboriginal beliefs and dietary habits, and that's why they had become 'outcasts' in the first place. Leave aside your bias and try to think rationally.

Could you kindly elaborate on the dietary habits and aboriginal beliefs?

The fact that they were the fourth largest caste in British Punjab undermines the migration theory.

British Punjab was massive. Majority of the Chuhras are found in India, which further supports a Westward migration.

Tell me, am I correct to presume that the Chuhras are still a marginalised community ??

Unfortunately yes, but I have seen a trend where many are breaking out of that bubble. One of my teachers was a Chuhra Christian, great guy.

 

[M. Sarmad]

They are known for adopting the surnames of their Zamindars or their ancestral area (none of which are in Pakistan).

Dhariwal were originally migrants from Dhari in Gujarat
Sindhu is most common in South India
Chapriband is a Rajasthani surname
Unthwal were camel traders from Rajasthan
Hansi gotra are from Hansi in Central India
Kaliyana were sandstone miners caste from Bhiwani in Central India

Dhariwal is a Punjabi Jat clan (or Rajput as per some sources) found chiefly in Ludhiana, Firozpur, and Patiala
Sindhu is the second largest Punjabi Jat clan whose origin probably is Satrah, Sialkot
Unthwal simply are camel-men and a lot of them live in and around Thal, Punjab also
Hansi is a city in Hisar, Punjab (now Haryana)
Mattu is a sub-clan of Jats

British Punjab was massive. Majority of the Chuhras are found in India, which further supports a Westward migration.

The Majority of Chuhras/Christians were NOT found on the Indian side of Punjab. Indian Punjab's Christian population was not even one-fourth of the Pakistani Punjab's Christian population at the time of partition .

Even as per the 1881 Census, when no Chuhra had converted to Christianity, almost two-thirds of the total population of Chuhras lived in the parts of Punjab that are now in Pakistan.

Do not make up your own facts and figures, bro

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

This bias in Punjab society has more to do with the 3500 years long influence of the Vedic Varna (class/caste) System that categorized certain professions and people as 'impure' and 'polluted'. 'Working with one's hands' or 'hard work' itself was not looked down upon as the Jats of Punjab (with their women and children alike) had been historically engaged in manual agriculture; a very challenging task physically. Only the big landlords (they were far and few between) who were too proud to cultivate with their own hands used to employ Barwalas, Chamars, Chuhras etc. as ploughmen and field laborers.

The laborers (or Shudras) were not included in the Varna System originally and after a millennia-long segregation they were finally allowed into the folds of Hindu society (partly because of the mixing of Foreigner 'higher' class with the local 'lower' class over centuries) as the Fourth Varna, at the foot of the social ladder which they of course were not allowed to 'climb'. But the pure aboriginal communities were never accepted in the society, they remained 'outcasts' and eventually became the Fifth class; the Dalits or untouchables.

The landless and poverty-stricken vagrant, menial and artisan castes fell within the 4th and 5th classes. In the Muslim dominated western parts of the Punjab, the discrimination against Shudras was significantly less compared to the eastern parts (and the rest of Hindu dominated India). However, the lowest of the low, i.e. Dalits, were not accepted into the folds of the society even in the Muslim dominated areas. They were caused to be segregated and will continue to be caused to remain segregated by us until and unless we completely remove the unwholesome influence of the Vedic Varna System from our society.

This is quite inaccurate; the original (excludes Mandalas 1 & 10) Rigveda composed in Sapta Sindhu (Punjab) never mentioned a caste system. They were culturally and religiously were very contrasting and even contradicting to the post-Vedic religions that sprouted in the Gangetic Plains and later became Hinduism.

Our social structure is still very much parallel to the Vedic tribal system which is now known as the Biradari system; which has no clear hierarchy. The concept of the caste system is foreign and has only been relevantly introduced to us recently under the Mughals and British. Even the word 'caste' which we mistakenly use to refer to our tribes was introduced to us by the British.

Our pre-Islamic ancestors ate meat, buried their dead, elected their chiefs, rejected the caste system and followed other practices/traditions that were seen as taboo by Gangetic Indians.

This is clearly seen in the Mahabharata (composed in the Gangetic Plains) which refer to our ancestors as Bahlika/Vahika (meaning outsider), followers of Nastadharam (meaning destroyed religion) and berates our ancestors for not following the Caste system and other Gangetic traditions.

“Where these five rivers, Shatadru, Vipasha, the third Iravati, Chandrabhaga and Vitasta flow and where there are Pilu-forests and (where) Sindhu is the sixth to flow out, this country is called Aratta…”

“that (region) where these five rivers, emerging from the mountains flow, this Aratta (country) is called Balhika where the Arya should not stay even for two days”.

"The regions are called by the name of Arattas. The people residing there are called the Vahikas. (VIII.30.47) The lowest of brahmanas also are residing there from very remote times. They are without the Veda and without knowledge, without sacrifice and without the power to assist at other's sacrifices. They are all fallen and many amongst them have been begotten by Shudras upon other peoples' girls. The gods never accept any gifts from them. The Prasthalas, the Madras, the Gandharas, the Arattas, those called Khasas, the Vasatis, the Sindhus and the Sauviras are almost as blamable in their practices.'" (VIII.30.74)"

^ This verse names all of the major ethnic groups/tribes of the Indus region at that time. Madras were people of North Punjab, Gandharas were a people of (modern-day) KPK, parts of Afghanistan and parts of West Punjab, Arattas was an umbrella term for all of them, Sindhus were a people that inhabited Sindh and South Punjab, Sauviras were a people that lived to the East of Sindh, most likely Thar region of Sindh and parts of Rajasthan, Khasas were in modern-day Kashmir, and we don't know much about the Vasatis.

A Brahmin that visited the people of the five rivers (Vahikas) describes their social structure.

"Travelling through various countries following various religions, I at last, O king, came among the Vahikas. There I heard one at first becomes a Brahmana and then he comes a Kshatriya. Indeed, a Vahika would, after that become a Vaisya, and then a Sudra, and then a barber. Having become a barber, he would then again become a Brahmana. Returning to the status of a Brahmana, he would again become a slave. One person in a family becomes a Brahmana: all the others, falling off from virtue, act as they like. The Gandharas, the Madrakas, and the Vahiks of little understanding are even such."

The Brahmin further goes on to describe their "lack of religion".

"The sisters' sons of the Arattas, and not their own sons, become their heirs. The Kauravas with the Panchalas, the Salwas, the Matsyas, the Naimishas, the Koshalas, the Kasapaundras, the Kalingas, the Magadhas, and the Chedis who are all highly blassed, know what the eternal religion is. The wicked even of these various countries know what religion is. The Vahikas, however, live without righteousness. Begging with the Matsyas, the residents of the Kuru and the Panchala countries, the Naimishas as well and the other respectable peoples, the pious among all races are conversant with the eternal truths of religion. This cannot be said of the Madrakas and the crooked-hearted race that resides in the country of the five rivers. "

(Madrakas were a people of North Punjab, by modern-day Sialkot)

 

[M. Sarmad]

This is quite inaccurate; the original (excludes Mandalas 1 & 10) Rigveda composed in Sapta Sindhu (Punjab) never mentioned a caste system. They were culturally and religiously were very contrasting and even contradicting to the post-Vedic religions that sprouted in the Gangetic Plains and later became Hinduism.

Our social structure is still very much parallel to the Vedic tribal system which is now known as the Biradari system; which has no clear hierarchy. The concept of the caste system is foreign and has only been relevantly introduced to us recently under the Mughals and British. Even the word 'caste' which we mistakenly use to refer to our tribes was introduced to us by the British.

Our pre-Islamic ancestors ate meat, buried their dead, elected their chiefs, rejected the caste system and followed other practices/traditions that were seen as taboo by Gangetic Indians.

This is clearly seen in the Mahabharata (composed in the Gangetic Plains) which refer to our ancestors as Bahlika/Vahika (meaning outsider), followers of Nastadharam (meaning destroyed religion) and berates our ancestors for not following the Caste system and other Gangetic traditions.

“Where these five rivers, Shatadru, Vipasha, the third Iravati, Chandrabhaga and Vitasta flow and where there are Pilu-forests and (where) Sindhu is the sixth to flow out, this country is called Aratta…”

“that (region) where these five rivers, emerging from the mountains flow, this Aratta (country) is called Balhika where the Arya should not stay even for two days”.

"The regions are called by the name of Arattas. The people residing there are called the Vahikas. (VIII.30.47) The lowest of brahmanas also are residing there from very remote times. They are without the Veda and without knowledge, without sacrifice and without the power to assist at other's sacrifices. They are all fallen and many amongst them have been begotten by Shudras upon other peoples' girls. The gods never accept any gifts from them. The Prasthalas, the Madras, the Gandharas, the Arattas, those called Khasas, the Vasatis, the Sindhus and the Sauviras are almost as blamable in their practices.'" (VIII.30.74)"

^ This verse names all of the major ethnic groups/tribes of the Indus region at that time. Madras were people of North Punjab, Gandharas were a people of (modern-day) KPK, parts of Afghanistan and parts of West Punjab, Arattas was an umbrella term for all of them, Sindhus were a people that inhabited Sindh and South Punjab, Sauviras were a people that lived to the East of Sindh, most likely Thar region of Sindh and parts of Rajasthan, Khasas were in modern-day Kashmir, and we don't know much about the Vasatis.

A Brahmin that visited the people of the five rivers (Vahikas) describes their social structure.

"Travelling through various countries following various religions, I at last, O king, came among the Vahikas. There I heard one at first becomes a Brahmana and then he comes a Kshatriya. Indeed, a Vahika would, after that become a Vaisya, and then a Sudra, and then a barber. Having become a barber, he would then again become a Brahmana. Returning to the status of a Brahmana, he would again become a slave. One person in a family becomes a Brahmana: all the others, falling off from virtue, act as they like. The Gandharas, the Madrakas, and the Vahiks of little understanding are even such."

The Brahmin further goes on to describe their "lack of religion".

"The sisters' sons of the Arattas, and not their own sons, become their heirs. The Kauravas with the Panchalas, the Salwas, the Matsyas, the Naimishas, the Koshalas, the Kasapaundras, the Kalingas, the Magadhas, and the Chedis who are all highly blassed, know what the eternal religion is. The wicked even of these various countries know what religion is. The Vahikas, however, live without righteousness. Begging with the Matsyas, the residents of the Kuru and the Panchala countries, the Naimishas as well and the other respectable peoples, the pious among all races are conversant with the eternal truths of religion. This cannot be said of the Madrakas and the crooked-hearted race that resides in the country of the five rivers. "

(Madrakas were a people of North Punjab, by modern-day Sialkot)

Did you even bother to read my post before declaring it 'quite inaccurate'??
I am seriously disappointed
And copy/pasting loads of irrelevant stuff from Rigveda won't prove you right...

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Dhariwal is a Punjabi Jat clan (or Rajput as per some sources) found chiefly in Ludhiana, Firozpur, and Patiala

Thank you, for further proving my point; I wonder how Chuhras serving East Punjabi Sikh Zamindars got to West Punjab in large numbers.

Sindhu is the second largest Punjabi Jat clan whose origin probably is Satrah, Sialkot

You are mistaken with Sandhu.

Unthwal simply are camel-men and a lot of them live in and around Thal, Punjab also

Unthwal are generally associated with Bhil camel-traders, especially in the context of Chuhras.

Hansi is a city in Hisar, Punjab (now Haryana)

Thank you, for further proving my point.

Mattu is a sub-clan of Jats

You are correct, Mattu is also a Kashmiri clan; I mixed up the two.

Did you even bother to read my post before declaring it 'quite inaccurate'??

Oh I definitely did; have you read my reply?

And copy/pasting loads of irrelevant stuff from Rigveda won't prove you right...

The fact that you think this was from the Rigveda, show how much you really know.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Thank you, for further proving my point; I wonder how Chuhras serving East Punjabi Sikh Zamindars got to West Punjab in large numbers.


You are mistaken with Sandhu.


Unthwal are generally associated with Bhil camel-traders, especially in the context of Chuhras.


Thank you, for further proving my point.


You are correct, Mattu is also a Kashmiri clan; I mixed up the two.

You don't even know who Sindhus are ... Are you even Punjabi?
And who said that Dhariwal Churahs are in large numbers in West Punjab??
How old are you? seriously

Thank you, for further proving my point; I wonder how Chuhras serving East Punjabi Sikh Zamindars got to West Punjab in large numbers.


You are mistaken with Sandhu.


Unthwal are generally associated with Bhil camel-traders, especially in the context of Chuhras.


Thank you, for further proving my point.


You are correct, Mattu is also a Kashmiri clan; I mixed up the two.


Oh I definitely did; have you read my reply?


The fact that you think this was from the Rigveda, show how much you really know.

Stop quoting me ...
I am not interested in your childish nonsense.
This is a serious thread ...

 

[B.K.N]

You don't even know who Sindhus are

Than educate him about them who they are what they do where they do live
BTW who you are