![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. 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 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
The smrithis of Manu, Vishnu, Apasthamba and Gautama mention the profession of cattle-tending as a Vaishya occupation. How are Yadavs claiming to be Kshatriyas? This article and that of Lunar_Dynasty needs to be cleaned up. -- = No ||| Illusion = ( talk) 19:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)Mayasutra
Hi, Agro-pastoral communities are generally considered to have produced many kings. Some claimed to be suryavanshi, some claimed to be chandravanshi. Some linked themselves up with existing warrior clans to gain legitimacy (case in point is that of Shivaji's Sisodia connection), and some adopted the practice of yagnopavitham (like the malayala kshatriya of kerala and kayastha of bengal) to claim kshatriya status. One cannot go by one or two inscriptions or sources alone. Further research needs to be done, esp wrt origins, before concluding something. Let there be further discussion with comparison of sources from several historical works on this. -- = No ||| Illusion = ( talk) 17:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)Mayasutra
See WP:NOR, also go through archives of different pages like this one, Rajput, Yadav, Ahir, Maratha, Jat etc., and suggest something keeping in view wikipedia policy. Ikon No-Blast 18:26, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I've disabled the request for now. A very specific request is needed, so that we know exactly what you are proposing to change. Regards — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 13:02, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
{{ Editprotected}}
Are Laloo Prasad Yadav & Mulayalam Singh Yadav, Kshatriyas ? Thanks.
Rajkris (
talk)
21:16, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Reference is of the inscription of an abhira king whic reads "Ornament of Lunar Kshatrya clan Smvamsa". Also, if you guys are so concerned about these Thakurs, Bhumihars, can you establish their claim. Ikon No-Blast 05:13, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
The intent of this section appears to be to provide information on Kshatriya duties within the vedic caste system. As is, it is written in a non-encyclopedic style and provides little relevant information that is not stated elsewhere more clearly. I think the section needs to be removed or else rewritten in an entirely different format. However I'd like to hear arguments from other interested editors before I remove it again. Black Platypus ( talk) 15:11, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
You have done some good job on this page yesterday, but removing 'Dutiful Warrior' chapter was a clearly a mistake. This chapter is here to outline the importance of the kshatriyas caste in ancient India through references from old Hindu texts; I still have to add some more references(at least one more). Indeed, contrary to what you have written in the first lines of this wiki page (another mistake), initially kshatriyas used to occupy the very first rank. All the old Hindu texts (both religious and non religious) glorify them, it is the caste which the most glorified. This chapter is here to underline this. Maybe the name of the chapter should be changed, maybe its place should be changed, maybe it should be merged with another chapter, but its content must not be removed. Thanks Rajkris ( talk) 17:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
As it is mentioned above, wikipedia is not made for original research!...Some people are adding informations without serious reference. It is particularly true concerning caste membership!...When I say proper reference, I mean a serious reference like a book written by an independant scholar and where the caste is clearly mentioned as a noble, ruling class (kshatriya). Every castes which claim kshatriya status must provide very serious references, it is the only way to prevent vandals, impostors from adding false informations on this page!... Rajkris ( talk) 00:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Indeed the Kshatriyas are the purest of Aryans. their colour like all Aryans ranges from light to brown.
All the castes who can prove clearly, without any doubt that were a noble caste that ruled (part) of Bharat and gave their blood to defend this wonderful land & its great culture/civilisation can honestly claim kshatriya rank and must be recognised as such by others!... If Jats can prove that, they must be considered as kshatriyas by the others, same for Kathris and everybody else... No need to have a brahmanical approval!... For Brahmins, we're all Shudras, they're the only high caste and therefore the only ones who can govern Aryavarta. It's a Brahmin plot to divise us, we must not fall in their trap!...Please do not despise each other. 90.46.110.243 ( talk) 21:42, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I added this near the top of the article where linguistic derivation in Hindi and Sanskrit are discussed, but didn't know now to formalize it in devanagari etc. Some help here would be appreciated. Although "Kshatriya" is certainly understood by everyone who is literate, it's simplified to "Chhetri" in everyday speech.
Nuances of meaning should also be discussed in the Nepalese context. Khas peoples in far western Nepal often belong to the Thakuri sub-caste, notably the Shah family that unified the country and ruled it until recently. Nepalese Chhetris often originated in marriages between Brahman men and indigenous peoples such as (Kham) Magars, so it is more of a synthetic caste in Nepal than it might be in India.
Also some of Nepal's "martial tribes" claim Chhetri status on the basis of their long history of soldiering (a tradition that probably was well developed before the Shahs took advantage of it to unify the country, then the British exploited it by recruiting Gurkha mercenaries). Also the martial tribes had their own independent kingdoms before unification under the Shah. LADave ( talk) 17:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Vanniyars are not at all Kshatriyas, they're a low, backward class. They were confered the MBC (Most Backward Class) status in TamilNadu. How can they claim Kshatriya status without any historical proof. They are just vandalizing Kshatriya wikipedia page. Kshatriyas were Kings, Nobles/Landlords, Army chieftains... Vanniyar is a community which constitutes around 30 percent of the whole tamil population. It would mean that 30% of tamils have noble origins ??!!... What a nonsense!!... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.46.213.126 ( talk) 22:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Please read history thoroughly my friend. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.72.70 ( talk) 18:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Vanniyars are a labour caste = shudras. Vanniyars (which is not even a caste but a community of castes) constitute around 30 percent of the whole tamil population. It would mean that 30% of tamils have noble origins ??!!... this is joke!!... Noble caste doesn't account for than 5 to 10% of a (feudal) society, it is true everywhere in the world. Many of them converted to christianity (that's another sign of their low caste status). See these links:
My DEAR FRIENDS - YOU SAY IN THE ARTICLE THAT DRAVIDIANS ARE KSHATRIYAS THEN YOU SAY RAJUS ARE KSHATRIYAS THEN YOU REBUKE OTHER DRAVIDIAN CASTES SAYING THAT THE LINEAGE SHOULD CONTINUE THEN RAJUS LIKE MANY DRAVIDIAN CASTES CLAIM KSHATRIYA STATUS AND CLAIM DESCENT FROM SUN OR MOON (CHANDRAVANSHI OR SURYAVANSHI) BUT DRAVIDIANS CLAIM DESCENT FROM EARTH (BHOOMIVANSHI) RAJUS CLAIM TO BE DECENDANT FROM ALL RULING CASTES IN SOUTH AND ALSO CLAIM IN THE ARTICLE TITLED RAJU ON WIKIPEDIA THAT THEY ARE ALSO RAJPUTS OF THE NORTH WITH NO RAJPUTS ACCEPTING THEM AS SUCH. WHY THIS HYPOCRACY? THERE IS NO WHERE IN EVEN ANDHRA HISTORY WHERE A DYNASTY WAS MADE OF RULING RAJU DYNASTY, THERE WERE DYNASTY LIKE VELAMAS,REDDY,ETC THEN YOU SHOULD GIVE THESE CASTES KSHATRIYA STATUS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.135.215 ( talk) 21:04, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FRIENDS_of_UP/message/1544
The everyday politics of labour: working lives in India's informal economy By Geert de Neve page 77.
Kshatriya wikipedia page must be protected to prevent vanniyars vandals to edit it.
Kshatriyas do not account for more than 5 to 10% of the whole indian population —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.46.96.182 ( talk) 21:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
122.167.72.70, I know history of Bharat & Tamils much better than you. If you look at Tamil history very carefully, you will come to only one (scientific) conclusion: the 30% (or more) Vanniyars are a labour caste that is shudra... That's why most of Vanniyars still remain uneducated & received the MBC status, they're not able to succeed on their own like a normal high/forward caste. 90.46.96.182 ( talk) 00:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
by the way 122.167.72.70, don't call me friend, i will never agree to be the friend of vandals, impostors. If you continue your vandalism, i will inform wiki admin of vanniyars vandal acts in different wikipedia pages like the one where you wrote pandya/chola/chera were vanniyars!!!...
90.46.96.182 (
talk)
01:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
IP 59.92.135.215, first of all, do not confuse the words 'dravida' and 'dravidian'; the first one was the name of an unknown caste, clan mentioned in old hindu texts, the second one is used nowadays to designate people from south india (according to your play on words, all south indians, from Brahmins to Dalits are kshatryas!)... Second, castes which can prove with proper references that they were a noble/ruling caste (like books written by serious, independant scholars adn where the are clearly described as a noble/ruling caste) can honestly claim kshatriya status and add their name in this wikipedia page. But this is not the case of Vanniyars. So please, do not disturb this wikipedia page, some people are working hard to maintain it in a proper way. Thank you. Rajkris ( talk) 01:06, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Dear contributors please read Vanniyar Puranam - based on one of the 18 Puranams written in Sanskrit & subsequant research works by Archeologists.
It is understood that this Vanniyar Puranam / Mythological Story was written at Madurai Tamil Sangam during Pandiya King Sundara Pandian’s regime by Saiva Shri Veera Pillai as a translation from Sanskrit ‘Agni / Agneya Puranam’ which is one of the 18 Puranams written in Sanskrit. The puranam / story is…
‘Vilvalan’ & ‘Vatapi’ were Asura brothers born to ‘Dhurvasar’-a saint & ‘Kajomuki’- younger sister of ‘Sura Padman’ - an Asura later killed by Lord Murugan.
Vilvalan & Vatapi played mischief’s with ‘Agasthier’ - saint which resulted in swallowing and digestion of Vilvalan by Agasthier. The left out Vatapi prayed Lord Shiva and attained further strength and started ruling ‘Rathina Puri’ situated in the middle of southern sea. Vatapi married ‘Chokka kanni’ daughter of ‘Mayan’ – Deva’s Viswakarma. The Asura Guru ‘Sukhracharuyar’ supported him with Asura battalion. As expected, he started torturing all the Devas which ‘Naradhar’ noticed and complained to Lord Shiva. Saint ‘Sambu’ maharishi also started ‘Yagnam’ on Shiva to safeguard Devas. Then Lord Shiva came over there and a drop of sweat from his third eye dropped in the yagnam which created the first “Rudhra / Veera Vanniyan’ with his horse, weapons & crown.
Then Lord Shiva & Matha Parvathi asked Devendran to offer his second daughter “Mandhira Maalai’-younger sister of ‘Deivayanai’ wife of Lord Murugan, for the marriage of Rudhra Vaaniyan. Upon mutual acceptance & Horoscope matching, marriage between Rudhra Vaaniyan & Mandhira Maalai was solemnized and become parents for four Sons. They were named as “Krishna Vanniyan, Brahma Vanniyan, Sambu Vanniyan & Agni Vanniyan. These four boys were getting the entire warrior training from Lord Murugan – their Uncle. Subsequantly, they were married to the Four daughters of ‘Kandha(Susheela)’saint, namely-Indhrani, Narani, Sundhari & Sumangali.
Then, as per the advice of Lord Shiva, they moved towards south along with their soldiers created by Lord Shiva to fight Vatapi – Asuran and reached the ‘Durga Parameshwari Amman’ Temple in south. The Rudhra Vanniyan & his four sons requested Durgai Amman to help them in combating Vatapi which she accepted and came along with them with her ‘Boodha’ battalion. While they are crossing the Sea, the sea gave way to them by moving the water away in both sides and reoccupied itself. However, one pet dog of Vanniyars could not cross the Sea and returned home.
After reaching Rathina puri, Rudhra Vanniyan sent Naradhar as mediator which failed and resulted in full-fledged War between Vanniyars & Vatapi Asuran. The ‘Kali Amman’ Asura’s family God was also helping the Asuras in the War. The Fighting was intensive and finally Vatapi was killed by Rudhra Vanniyan. Subsequently, all the Asuras were killed including women. But, finally, Four Asura Women (as per the arrangement of Sukrachariyar – Asura Guru, to protect Asura Kulam) came out in Human form and the Vanniyars did not kill them and took them along with them to home.
After the War, the entire battalion reached back the shore and the Durga Goddess stayed at her Temple at south and Vanniyars after worship returned home. At their surprise, it was noticed that all the four daughter-in-laws of Rudhra Vanniyan already died by jumping into Fire pots after seeing one of their dogs is returning home alone which indicates that all the Vanniyars have died in the War. This event was also due to a ‘Sabam’ by Sukrachariyar to all the four sisters, since these brides were once denied to him by their Father – Kandha Saint.
After that all the Four Sons had ‘Kandharva Vivah’ with the Four Women brought by them (supposed to be Asura Women but in Human Form) and started living with them. Then Lord Shiva & Lord Vishnu have allocated ‘Sambu region’ to First Rudhra /Veera Vannian, upto north of ‘Palar’ to Brhama Vanniyan, upto ‘Pennaiyar’ to Krishna Vanniyan, up to north of Kaveri to Sambu Vanniyan & Western side of East coast to Agni Vanniyan for their Ruling.
After that the First Rudhra Vanniyan had another son named ‘Chandra sekara maharajan’ and became their heir for sambu region & then both First Rudhra Veera Vanniyan and his wife Mandhira Maalai left to Devalogam at the invitation of Lord Devendran.
It is understood that their descendents are spread all over India & neighboring countries. It may also be noticed that the descendants of the above Vanniyars viz Agnikula Kshatriya / Vanniyakula Kshatriya / Vahnikula Kshatriya – the Warrior community are predominantly available in Rajastan, Gujarat, West Bengal, Andhra, Kannada, Kerala, Tamilnadu etc. and their main deity is Goddess Durga/Baghavathy/Maiamman etc. in different names in different parts of India & neighboring countries according to local practice. However, there are no interlinks between them since they were weakened by subsequent Rulers.
There are Two Books available to narrate the Vanniyar story. The First book narrates the Vanniyar Puranam / Mythological Story originated from Sanskrit Literature and the second book is a research work by an Archelogist providing Historical references about their kingdom in different parts of India & neighboring countries.
1) ‘Veera Vanniyar Kathai’ by Durgadoss S.K.Swamy
Published by : Prema Prasuram, 59, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai-24. Phone : 044 - 24833180 / 24800325
2) ‘Vanniyar’ by Nadana Kasinathan, Archeologist
Published by : Manivasar Pathippagam, 31, Singer st., Parry’s, Chennai – 108. Phone : 044 - 24357832 / 25361039 Website : www.manivasagarpathippagam.com ( Branches are available in Chidambaram – Ph – 230069, Madurai- Ph- 2622853, Coimbatore – Ph- 2397155, Salem-Ph- 3207722 & Trichy-Ph- 270645)
Further, it is understood that the Vanniyars are the normal soldiers and the Vanniyakula Kshatriyas are the Kings Ruled & secured the common public, which merged over a period as Vanniyars. Also, it is due to the invasion of various communities like Aryans/Mughals/British etc. overpowering the native Dravidians, all those Rulers & warriors became farmers & poor and are classified as a most backward class in the society. It is the fact that the Vanniyar’s agricultural products were not adequately priced even now and education was denied to them which resulted in poverty and illiteracy due to which they become an unprivileged community.
The Glory of Dravidians / Tamils & Vanniyars is yet to be understood by its own community youths which will be achieved in due course & will emerge as a Literate, Economically advanced community very soon and preserve their Glory.
When it is written citation needed, it does not mean putting a link which sends you to another wikipedia page written without any proper citation, references!... It simply means adding serious references, like a book written by a scholar!!!... 90.46.216.136 ( talk) 18:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I have noticed that some people descending from the Nagavanshi in this article are mongoloid groups (The Balinese 'satrias' and the Balamon/Cham people). How are they connected to Jats, Bunts and Nairs? These three groups are Indo-Scythians with Aryan features. Even in the Vedas the Nagas called themselves 'Arya' (see indepth article of Nagavanshi, which could also be wrong. I dont know). Anyway, there is something wrong here.-- Zero.vishnu ( talk) 09:53, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
In order to maintain the quality of this wikipedia page, to protect the reputation of wikipedia and also the kshatriya caste around the world, to prevent vandals/impostors from adding false informations, all the castes which claim Kshatriya status must provide (very) serious references. By this I mean: they should provide scientific/historical proofs mentioned in books written by independant schcolars and in which the caste is clearly described as noble, ruling caste. All the castes which can prove, without any doubt, that they were a noble caste that ruled (part of) Bharat, gave their blood to defend this great land and the Arya Dharma (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism) can add their name in this chapter. Others have absolutely no right to put their name in this chapter! Thanks. Rajkris ( talk) 22:28, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rajkris, Since you have put a citation needed tag on Ror in the Suryavanshi lineage section, I had initially proposed a citation from the Puranas but you rejected saying that this is not proper history. So, I've brought in a book reference now that I would like to add to the page. Not able to do that currently as the page is protected. The details of the book are as follows -- Title "Ror: Badgujar, Indo- Gangetic Plain, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, Suryavansha, Harishchandra", Editors "Frederic P. Miller, Agnes F. Vandome, John McBrewster", Publisher "Alphascript Publishing, 2009", ISBN 6130071205, 9786130071202, Length 108 pages. Kindly build consensus and add this change to the page. Thanks for your time. Regards 112.110.210.11 ( talk) 17:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.110.210.11 ( talk) 16:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello. Can anyone help me to find a sentence in the Bagavad Gita; in one of the page, Krishna tells Arjuna a sentence like this: fear, doubt are unfit of an aryan. Thanks Rajkris ( talk) 20:47, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I request all editors on this page to refrain making any attempt to link with mythical personalities and lineages like that of lord Rama & Krishna. Upper section is full of such claims, please clean them. No mention of Rajput, jat etc., should be made there. Please, also bear in mind Mahabharata caegorically denies existence of any Yaduvanshi after Mahabharata, so every community that is claiming is a claim only and should be treated as such. As per historians historicity of Krishna is itself debatable. Ikon No-Blast 17:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
"Actually , the legend reports a westward march of the Yadus (MBh. 1.13.49, 65) from Mathura, while the route from Mathura to Dvaraka southward through a desert. This part of the Krsna legend could be brought to earth by digging at Dvaraka, but also digging at Darwaz in Afghanistan, whose name means the same thing and which is the more probable destination of refugees from Mathura..."
-- History Sleuth ( talk) 18:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Since there's a content dispute and too much edit warring going on in the article. This is not an endorsement of the current version of the article. Please discuss your edits here on the talk page and gain consensus. Once you reach consensus I can edit the page to add or remove the relevant content. Procedure for requesting edits to the article:
- Spaceman Spiff 16:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Some user is portraying Khatri as Vaishya without any sources. Stop this, else provide enough sources. 122.177.232.141 ( talk) 14:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Here are some sources to consider for this debate. I first saw it on a message board but checked the sources before posting here. Sources are genuine. Link to online version of book is also given for verification.
Origin of Khatris
The source is a book published in 1904 called 'Kshatriyas and would-be kshatriyas' by Chedi Singh Varma, an Allahabad High Court Barrister, who offers a very good insight on the issues of Khatris, a merchant and trading caste of Punjab. The following comes on page 62 of this book:
Quote:
"In Behar", says Dr. Buchanan, "one-half of the Khatris are goldsmiths". In Mysore there is a caste of weavers called Khatris; there are also Khatri weavers in Gujerat. Mr Kitts says :- "The Khatris are traders in Punjab, and silk-weavers when we find them in Bomday. The Census Report of 1891 classifies as weavers the Khatris of Berar , Baroda, Bombay and Hyderabad. The Punjabi Khatris , however, make no mention whatver of their Gujerati brethren, who in 1891 numbered 67000; nor is any explanation found as to how they took the occupation of weaving.
Page 59 says following:
Quote:
Mr. Risley has the following on the origin of Khatris:- "It seems to me that the internal organization of the caste furnishes almost conclusive proof that they are descended from neither Brahmans nor Kshatriyas, and that the theory connecting them with the latter tribe rests on no firmer foundation than a resemblance of name, which for all we know may wholly be accidental...If then it is at all necessary to connect Khatris with the ancient four-fold system of castes, the only group to whuch we can affiliate them is the Vaishyas" (The Tribes and Castes of Bengal", 1891, Chapter on Khatris).
The same book says the following about Khatris on page 60:
Quote:
"Pandit Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya, M.A, D. L., President of the College of Pandits, Nadia, says of the Khatris:-" "Some authorities take them to be as the ******rd [sic] caste Kshatri, spoken of by Manu as the offspring of a Sudra father by a Kshatriya mother. The people of ths country include the Kshettries (Khatris) among the Baniya castes , and do not admit that they have the same position as the military Rajputs. The Kshettries themselves claim to be Kshatriyas, and observe the religious rites and duties prescribed by the Shastras for the military castes. But the majority of them live either by trade or by service such as clerks and accountants...."
Book reference:
Kshatriyas and would-be kshatriyas: a consideration of the claims of certain ... By Kumar Cheda Singh Varma, Allahabad, 1904
-- 130.101.152.43 ( talk) 03:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Raju is a Telugu variation of the Sanskrit word Raj and Raja[1] meaning King, Prince or Lord.[2] Rajus (Rajulu in Telugu) is used to refer to a prominent and influential Telugu Kshatriya Caste in Andhra Pradesh.[3][4][5] Kshatriya Rajus are said to be descendents of ancient Royal dynasties like Eastern Chalukyas, Chalukya-Cholas, Vishnukundina, Gajapati, Chagi, Paricheda and Kota Vamsa.[6][7][8]
Over the centuries they have been called by various alternative names that signified their military status. During the British Raj they were known as Ratsas[9] and Rajavars, which means of or belonging to the caste of Ratsawars[10] (Raja Caste),[11] using the title of Raju. They are around 1.2 percent of the Telugu population,[12] concentrated mainly in the Coastal Andhra region with pockets in the Rayalaseema, North Arcot and Rajapalayam of Tamil Nadu, Bellary of Karnataka and Ganjam of Orissa. In last few decades significant population of Rajus have migrated and settled in US and UK.
Rajus use Raju or Varma in the Andhra regions and Deo in the Orissa regions as an agnomen for their last name. Varma in Sanskrit means Armor, Protection[13][14] and Deo in Sanskrit means God or Lord. In Telugu tradition the family name is written first followed by the given name and then the caste title. For example Alluri Sita Rama Raju, a prominent freedom fighter in the mid 19th century, is interpreted as Sita Ram of the Alluri family and Raju for Kshatriya caste. Similarly name of Penmatsa Ram Gopal Varma, a prominent Bollywood and Tollywood movie director-producer, is interpreted as Ram Gopal of the Penmatsa family and Varma for Kshatriya. There have been varying accounts about the origins of the Raju community. Some include them among the military tribes of Rajput descent.
Regarding this community Edgar Thurston in his seven volume Castes and Tribes of Southern India writes...The Maharajas of Vizianagaram (noclaim to be Kshatriyas from the Rajputana and the leaders of the people of gotrams said to have come to the Northern Circars centuries ago. It is noted in connection with the battle of Padmanabham(in present Visakhapatnam district) in 1794 AD that Rajputs formed a rampart round the corpse of Vijay Rama Raju. Padmanabham will long be remembered as the Flodden of the Rajputs of Vizianagaram...[15]as a class they are the handsomest and best developed men in the country and differ so much in feature and build from other Hindus that they may usually be distinguished at a glance...they are mostly Vaishnavites, and their priests are Brahmans...Rajus of course assume the sacred thread, and are very proud and particular in their conduct. Brahmanical rites of Punya Havachanam (Purification), Jata Karma (Birth ceremony), Nama Karanam (Naming ceremony), Chaulam (Tonsure), and Upanayanam (Thread ceremony) are performed...at weddings the Kasi Yatra (Mock flight to Benares) is performed...at their wedding they worship a sword, which is a ceremony usually denoting a soldier caste...they use a wrist string made of cotton and wool, the combination peculiar to Kshatriyas, to tie the wrists of the happy couple...[16]in some villages, Rajus seem to object to the construction of a pial, or raised platform, in front of their houses. The pial is the lounging place where visitors are received by day.[17]
Historically South Indian royal families of Kshatriyas (Rajus) had marital relationship with Central and North Indian royal families, like Rajas of Vizianagaram, Salur and Kurupam had marital relationships with the Rajputana royal families.[18] and bramins are no gods to say who are kshatriyas and who are not well kshatriyas are superior than bramins —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.125.85 ( talk) 06:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
The Rajus/Varma if they perform the function of a dwija and are invested with a sacred thread - they are definitely Kshatriya and legitimately recognized so, where as the nayar claim is pretentious and propagated by a few on web and bologosheres. The objective of the above user is simply to drag the users in this platform towards the nair article page where a dispute exists. Sanam001 ( talk) 10:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Status of Thevar community as kshatriya
Thevars are having the strong proves to claim that they are Kshatriyas. If you see the history from 2000 years back, they have the strong ethics and brave moments to prove that they are kshatriys. I don't know why they still not recognized as kshatriyas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.21.231.199 ( talk) 17:59, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Dear Kshatriya brothers,
No doubt Brahmana divided kshatriya for their benefit and this division was intense after Buddha and Jain period, the two kshatriyas having large impact on Indian society. Brahmanas claim that they are superior, however Buddhist and Jain text throw diffirent light. They were priest, farmers, carpenters, Hunters and even did menial jobs...However, they were sharp enough to divide kshatriya and then ruling the entire India without giving their blood..read this http://books.google.co.in/books?id=8-TxcO9dfrcC&pg=PA239&dq=the+brahmanas+of+this+period+may+be+divided&client=firefox-a&cd=2#v=onepage&q=the%20brahmanas%20of%20this%20period%20may%20be%20divided&f=true —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.118.109.218 ( talk) 14:51, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I have removed Haiheya being tagged as Rajput, because Haiheya, also known as ahiheya, are an offshoot of Chedi Dynasty, of Abhira-Trikuta-Kalachudi-Chedi Era and are of abhira ancestry. These people never joined the Rajput banwagon. Ikon No-Blast 11:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
It is extremely painful to see that Talk page and article are not related. If I continue to see Rajput spam on this page i would start shifting them to Shudra page, because after so much discussion, it is more than clear that Rajputs are Shudra/mlechha and can't be called Kshatriya. Ikon No-Blast 03:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
So many people are writing about the so called "Kshatriya descent" of Jats, Marathas, Gorkhas.etc. But in Hinduism, only the Rajputs are recognized as true Kshatriyas. Every other claim of being Kshatriya is contentious or fabricated.
Dude u r speaking really bullshit . 96 out of half a million maratha families ??? dude at current age marathas have about 2-3 million families .. How come they had 0.5 million 350 years ago . You are a really a dumbass .If you have little or no knowledge of what 96 kuli maratha is , then stop bulshitting ..
Can a shudra become powerful than uppercast ?? No right , thats logical ..Then how come marathas are so strong ?? Dont u remember ur ancestors begged at our doresteps to earn bread and butter ..
You dont have guts dude . I am sure u will delete my message as soon as u see it ..
I dont want u begger brahmins to call us kshatriyas ( because i know u wont like to accept this fact ) We marathas are real kshatriyas .. We have rules maharashtra ,are ruling maharashtra and will rule maharashtra for 1000 years .
blah My views: Dear sir, the above mentioned information about the realtion between The JAT People and Rajputs is false. The JAT People and Rajputs are distinct ethnic groups; and obviously The JAT Clans have nothing to do with those Rajputs Clans who lost their power . On the basis of historical facts, the presence of The JAT People can be traced to MILLENNIUMS ago. Now-a-days, The JAT People are sometimes even termed as true representatives of the Vedic Culture. Please respect this fact. I humbly request You to please a have look at the information that I am sharing with You below (my intension is not to hurt the feelings of any person; but is purely to put true facts in front of the readers of Wikipedia):
The name JAT, originates with the jñātisaṃgha (ज्ञातिसंघ) [1].
The Linguistic and Religious Etymology about the origin of the word, 'Jat' is that it finds mention in most ancient Indian literature like Mahabharata and Rig Veda. Jat historian Thakur Deshraj writes that the word Jat is derived from sanskrit word jñāta (ज्ञात). This later on changed to Jat in prakrart language. Panini's Mention of Astadhyayi in the form of shloka as जट झट सङ्घाते or “Jat Jhat Sanghate” confirms it. [2] Deshraj mentions that Krishna formed a federation of Vrishni and Andhaka clans which was known as jñātisaṃgha (ज्ञातिसंघ). Shanti Parva Mahabharata Book XII Chapter 82 gives details about this sangha. [3]
धन्यं यशस्यम आयुष्यं सवपक्षॊथ्भावनं शुभम ज्ञातीनाम अविनाशः सयाथ यदा कृष्ण तदा कुरु Mahabharata (XII.82.27) dhanyaṃ yaśasyam āyuṣyaṃ svapakṣodbhāvanaṃ śubham jñātīnām avināśaḥ syād yathā kṛṣṇa tathā kuru Mahabharata (XII.82.27)
माधवाः कुकुरा भॊजाः सर्वे चान्धकवृष्णयः (Andhaka+Vrishni) तवय्य आसक्ता महाबाहॊ लॊका लॊकेश्वराश च ये Mahabharata (XII.82.29) mādhavāḥ kukurā bhojāḥ sarve cāndhakavṛṣṇayaḥ tvayy āsaktā mahābāho lokā lokeśvarāś ca ye Mahabharata (XII.82.29)
Bhim Singh Dahiya has enlisted over sixty clans those are named in the Rig Veda. [4]
The famous Sanskrit scholar Panini (traditionally dated 520-460 BCE, with estimates ranging from the 7th to 4th centuries BCE) has mentioned in his Sanskrit grammar known as Astadhyayi in the form of shloka as जट झट सङ्घाते or “Jat Jhat Sanghate” . [5] This means that the terms 'Jat' and 'democratic federation' are synonymous.
And, nobody can question the shlokas mentioned above, as they are from a source which is of the very high importance for the followers of Hinduism. May LORD KRISHNA bless You. And please, now I am looking forward to a change in Your thoughts about The JAT People. I am always here to co-operate with You, till we can discuss facts in a civilized manner. Thank You! Abstruce ( talk) 11:11, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
the Rajput was a later development than the Kshatriya . [6]
The Rajputs emerged around the seventh century after the Gupta empire collapsed . [7]
Intothefire ( talk) 12:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)The Rajputs are Hindu warriors who came into prominence in the 7th century in north western and central India [8]
“ | By the sixth century AD there are historical indications of groups calling themselves Rajputs settled in the Indo Gangetic plain [9] | ” |
Suresh Varma is busy in pointing out that Kshatriyas as a race became extinct during the Treta Yuga. This is just pure propaganda pushed forward by Brahmins to divide and rule the non-Brahmin bulk. This orthodox Brahmin view is supported by very few historians. I can point out a fine evidence here (from The Penny Cyclopaedia of the Society), in which the author argues:
Suresh Varma is brainwashed by Brahmin ideology and still believes that Kshatriyas are extinct. Please read a few history books to see what the historians have to say about this.
Also see these sources:
Reply expected from Suresh Varma. Axxn ( talk) 16:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
According to Brahmins, all Kshatriyas have been exterminated by Parasurama (the champion, hero of the Brahmins). According to scholars, this kind of Brahmin story and the non recognition of Hindu ruling caste as Kshatriyas by Brahmins was only part of the political game between the priests caste and the ruling caste. Brahmins did not recognise the Hindu ruling castes as proper Kshatriyas in order to hold an absolute control over the Hindu society. They did not want to relive their ancient position (in those times, they were only the servants of the ancient Kshatriyas lineage (Suryavamsa, Chandravamsa,...)), by giving them too much importance. In the ancient times, the Indian/Hindu society was completely dominated by the Kshatriyas; parasuram story illustrates brahmins attempt to liberate themselves from this jail. The British power supported this Brahmin POV to avoid the revival of the Indian/Hindu nobility, ruling class. For them Brahmins were not a threat, they were a pacific, servile vegetarian caste ( [5]). It is not accident that most of the freedom fighters were non Brahmins, many were Kshatriyas, especially among those who were in favour of military action against the British (see Subash Chandra Bose). Brahmins acceeded to dominance within the Hindu society only after Muslim & British conquest. Rajkris ( talk) 19:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Point two, the Brahmins never decided on caste status. It was the kings and Rajanya who conferred caste status and at times made Kshatriyas into Shudra and Brahmins into Vaishyas. Case in point is the revenge reeked by Raghuvansh on Haihayas after re-claiming Ayodhya and in the second part, the account of conferring landholdings on the ancestors of Tyagis by Janmejaya. After this episode, Tyagis gave up Brahmin jobs and became farmers. It was Rajas and Rajanya who could carry out such operations. The Brahmins had no authority whatsoever to challenge the King's writ. Thanks and regards, 112.79.192.240 ( talk) 19:48, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Rajputs were rituallistically recognized as legitimate Kshatriyas (dwijas) by Vedic-Brahmins in recognition for their support of Vedic-Brahmins to preserve the Vedic religion from onslaught of Budhism. Although present Rajputs were not originally part of the Vedic-Kshatriyas lineages , Rajputs were provoted to Kshatriya status with Brahminical recognition with blending of their genealogies to older Kshatriya lineages using the Agnikula myth by sanction of Vedic-culture. After attaining ritualistic sanction as Kshatriya, Rajput lineages solidified their political hold on Rajputanana and gradually severed their dependence on Agnikula myth. However in the effort of social mobility , certain pastoral agrarian communities , managed to enter into the Rajput fold as lower ritual ranking Rajputs. You may read a detailed chapter in the link below.
-- Sanam001 ( talk) 12:33, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. 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 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
The smrithis of Manu, Vishnu, Apasthamba and Gautama mention the profession of cattle-tending as a Vaishya occupation. How are Yadavs claiming to be Kshatriyas? This article and that of Lunar_Dynasty needs to be cleaned up. -- = No ||| Illusion = ( talk) 19:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)Mayasutra
Hi, Agro-pastoral communities are generally considered to have produced many kings. Some claimed to be suryavanshi, some claimed to be chandravanshi. Some linked themselves up with existing warrior clans to gain legitimacy (case in point is that of Shivaji's Sisodia connection), and some adopted the practice of yagnopavitham (like the malayala kshatriya of kerala and kayastha of bengal) to claim kshatriya status. One cannot go by one or two inscriptions or sources alone. Further research needs to be done, esp wrt origins, before concluding something. Let there be further discussion with comparison of sources from several historical works on this. -- = No ||| Illusion = ( talk) 17:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)Mayasutra
See WP:NOR, also go through archives of different pages like this one, Rajput, Yadav, Ahir, Maratha, Jat etc., and suggest something keeping in view wikipedia policy. Ikon No-Blast 18:26, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I've disabled the request for now. A very specific request is needed, so that we know exactly what you are proposing to change. Regards — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 13:02, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
{{ Editprotected}}
Are Laloo Prasad Yadav & Mulayalam Singh Yadav, Kshatriyas ? Thanks.
Rajkris (
talk)
21:16, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Reference is of the inscription of an abhira king whic reads "Ornament of Lunar Kshatrya clan Smvamsa". Also, if you guys are so concerned about these Thakurs, Bhumihars, can you establish their claim. Ikon No-Blast 05:13, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
The intent of this section appears to be to provide information on Kshatriya duties within the vedic caste system. As is, it is written in a non-encyclopedic style and provides little relevant information that is not stated elsewhere more clearly. I think the section needs to be removed or else rewritten in an entirely different format. However I'd like to hear arguments from other interested editors before I remove it again. Black Platypus ( talk) 15:11, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
You have done some good job on this page yesterday, but removing 'Dutiful Warrior' chapter was a clearly a mistake. This chapter is here to outline the importance of the kshatriyas caste in ancient India through references from old Hindu texts; I still have to add some more references(at least one more). Indeed, contrary to what you have written in the first lines of this wiki page (another mistake), initially kshatriyas used to occupy the very first rank. All the old Hindu texts (both religious and non religious) glorify them, it is the caste which the most glorified. This chapter is here to underline this. Maybe the name of the chapter should be changed, maybe its place should be changed, maybe it should be merged with another chapter, but its content must not be removed. Thanks Rajkris ( talk) 17:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
As it is mentioned above, wikipedia is not made for original research!...Some people are adding informations without serious reference. It is particularly true concerning caste membership!...When I say proper reference, I mean a serious reference like a book written by an independant scholar and where the caste is clearly mentioned as a noble, ruling class (kshatriya). Every castes which claim kshatriya status must provide very serious references, it is the only way to prevent vandals, impostors from adding false informations on this page!... Rajkris ( talk) 00:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Indeed the Kshatriyas are the purest of Aryans. their colour like all Aryans ranges from light to brown.
All the castes who can prove clearly, without any doubt that were a noble caste that ruled (part) of Bharat and gave their blood to defend this wonderful land & its great culture/civilisation can honestly claim kshatriya rank and must be recognised as such by others!... If Jats can prove that, they must be considered as kshatriyas by the others, same for Kathris and everybody else... No need to have a brahmanical approval!... For Brahmins, we're all Shudras, they're the only high caste and therefore the only ones who can govern Aryavarta. It's a Brahmin plot to divise us, we must not fall in their trap!...Please do not despise each other. 90.46.110.243 ( talk) 21:42, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I added this near the top of the article where linguistic derivation in Hindi and Sanskrit are discussed, but didn't know now to formalize it in devanagari etc. Some help here would be appreciated. Although "Kshatriya" is certainly understood by everyone who is literate, it's simplified to "Chhetri" in everyday speech.
Nuances of meaning should also be discussed in the Nepalese context. Khas peoples in far western Nepal often belong to the Thakuri sub-caste, notably the Shah family that unified the country and ruled it until recently. Nepalese Chhetris often originated in marriages between Brahman men and indigenous peoples such as (Kham) Magars, so it is more of a synthetic caste in Nepal than it might be in India.
Also some of Nepal's "martial tribes" claim Chhetri status on the basis of their long history of soldiering (a tradition that probably was well developed before the Shahs took advantage of it to unify the country, then the British exploited it by recruiting Gurkha mercenaries). Also the martial tribes had their own independent kingdoms before unification under the Shah. LADave ( talk) 17:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Vanniyars are not at all Kshatriyas, they're a low, backward class. They were confered the MBC (Most Backward Class) status in TamilNadu. How can they claim Kshatriya status without any historical proof. They are just vandalizing Kshatriya wikipedia page. Kshatriyas were Kings, Nobles/Landlords, Army chieftains... Vanniyar is a community which constitutes around 30 percent of the whole tamil population. It would mean that 30% of tamils have noble origins ??!!... What a nonsense!!... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.46.213.126 ( talk) 22:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Please read history thoroughly my friend. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.72.70 ( talk) 18:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Vanniyars are a labour caste = shudras. Vanniyars (which is not even a caste but a community of castes) constitute around 30 percent of the whole tamil population. It would mean that 30% of tamils have noble origins ??!!... this is joke!!... Noble caste doesn't account for than 5 to 10% of a (feudal) society, it is true everywhere in the world. Many of them converted to christianity (that's another sign of their low caste status). See these links:
My DEAR FRIENDS - YOU SAY IN THE ARTICLE THAT DRAVIDIANS ARE KSHATRIYAS THEN YOU SAY RAJUS ARE KSHATRIYAS THEN YOU REBUKE OTHER DRAVIDIAN CASTES SAYING THAT THE LINEAGE SHOULD CONTINUE THEN RAJUS LIKE MANY DRAVIDIAN CASTES CLAIM KSHATRIYA STATUS AND CLAIM DESCENT FROM SUN OR MOON (CHANDRAVANSHI OR SURYAVANSHI) BUT DRAVIDIANS CLAIM DESCENT FROM EARTH (BHOOMIVANSHI) RAJUS CLAIM TO BE DECENDANT FROM ALL RULING CASTES IN SOUTH AND ALSO CLAIM IN THE ARTICLE TITLED RAJU ON WIKIPEDIA THAT THEY ARE ALSO RAJPUTS OF THE NORTH WITH NO RAJPUTS ACCEPTING THEM AS SUCH. WHY THIS HYPOCRACY? THERE IS NO WHERE IN EVEN ANDHRA HISTORY WHERE A DYNASTY WAS MADE OF RULING RAJU DYNASTY, THERE WERE DYNASTY LIKE VELAMAS,REDDY,ETC THEN YOU SHOULD GIVE THESE CASTES KSHATRIYA STATUS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.135.215 ( talk) 21:04, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FRIENDS_of_UP/message/1544
The everyday politics of labour: working lives in India's informal economy By Geert de Neve page 77.
Kshatriya wikipedia page must be protected to prevent vanniyars vandals to edit it.
Kshatriyas do not account for more than 5 to 10% of the whole indian population —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.46.96.182 ( talk) 21:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
122.167.72.70, I know history of Bharat & Tamils much better than you. If you look at Tamil history very carefully, you will come to only one (scientific) conclusion: the 30% (or more) Vanniyars are a labour caste that is shudra... That's why most of Vanniyars still remain uneducated & received the MBC status, they're not able to succeed on their own like a normal high/forward caste. 90.46.96.182 ( talk) 00:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
by the way 122.167.72.70, don't call me friend, i will never agree to be the friend of vandals, impostors. If you continue your vandalism, i will inform wiki admin of vanniyars vandal acts in different wikipedia pages like the one where you wrote pandya/chola/chera were vanniyars!!!...
90.46.96.182 (
talk)
01:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
IP 59.92.135.215, first of all, do not confuse the words 'dravida' and 'dravidian'; the first one was the name of an unknown caste, clan mentioned in old hindu texts, the second one is used nowadays to designate people from south india (according to your play on words, all south indians, from Brahmins to Dalits are kshatryas!)... Second, castes which can prove with proper references that they were a noble/ruling caste (like books written by serious, independant scholars adn where the are clearly described as a noble/ruling caste) can honestly claim kshatriya status and add their name in this wikipedia page. But this is not the case of Vanniyars. So please, do not disturb this wikipedia page, some people are working hard to maintain it in a proper way. Thank you. Rajkris ( talk) 01:06, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Dear contributors please read Vanniyar Puranam - based on one of the 18 Puranams written in Sanskrit & subsequant research works by Archeologists.
It is understood that this Vanniyar Puranam / Mythological Story was written at Madurai Tamil Sangam during Pandiya King Sundara Pandian’s regime by Saiva Shri Veera Pillai as a translation from Sanskrit ‘Agni / Agneya Puranam’ which is one of the 18 Puranams written in Sanskrit. The puranam / story is…
‘Vilvalan’ & ‘Vatapi’ were Asura brothers born to ‘Dhurvasar’-a saint & ‘Kajomuki’- younger sister of ‘Sura Padman’ - an Asura later killed by Lord Murugan.
Vilvalan & Vatapi played mischief’s with ‘Agasthier’ - saint which resulted in swallowing and digestion of Vilvalan by Agasthier. The left out Vatapi prayed Lord Shiva and attained further strength and started ruling ‘Rathina Puri’ situated in the middle of southern sea. Vatapi married ‘Chokka kanni’ daughter of ‘Mayan’ – Deva’s Viswakarma. The Asura Guru ‘Sukhracharuyar’ supported him with Asura battalion. As expected, he started torturing all the Devas which ‘Naradhar’ noticed and complained to Lord Shiva. Saint ‘Sambu’ maharishi also started ‘Yagnam’ on Shiva to safeguard Devas. Then Lord Shiva came over there and a drop of sweat from his third eye dropped in the yagnam which created the first “Rudhra / Veera Vanniyan’ with his horse, weapons & crown.
Then Lord Shiva & Matha Parvathi asked Devendran to offer his second daughter “Mandhira Maalai’-younger sister of ‘Deivayanai’ wife of Lord Murugan, for the marriage of Rudhra Vaaniyan. Upon mutual acceptance & Horoscope matching, marriage between Rudhra Vaaniyan & Mandhira Maalai was solemnized and become parents for four Sons. They were named as “Krishna Vanniyan, Brahma Vanniyan, Sambu Vanniyan & Agni Vanniyan. These four boys were getting the entire warrior training from Lord Murugan – their Uncle. Subsequantly, they were married to the Four daughters of ‘Kandha(Susheela)’saint, namely-Indhrani, Narani, Sundhari & Sumangali.
Then, as per the advice of Lord Shiva, they moved towards south along with their soldiers created by Lord Shiva to fight Vatapi – Asuran and reached the ‘Durga Parameshwari Amman’ Temple in south. The Rudhra Vanniyan & his four sons requested Durgai Amman to help them in combating Vatapi which she accepted and came along with them with her ‘Boodha’ battalion. While they are crossing the Sea, the sea gave way to them by moving the water away in both sides and reoccupied itself. However, one pet dog of Vanniyars could not cross the Sea and returned home.
After reaching Rathina puri, Rudhra Vanniyan sent Naradhar as mediator which failed and resulted in full-fledged War between Vanniyars & Vatapi Asuran. The ‘Kali Amman’ Asura’s family God was also helping the Asuras in the War. The Fighting was intensive and finally Vatapi was killed by Rudhra Vanniyan. Subsequently, all the Asuras were killed including women. But, finally, Four Asura Women (as per the arrangement of Sukrachariyar – Asura Guru, to protect Asura Kulam) came out in Human form and the Vanniyars did not kill them and took them along with them to home.
After the War, the entire battalion reached back the shore and the Durga Goddess stayed at her Temple at south and Vanniyars after worship returned home. At their surprise, it was noticed that all the four daughter-in-laws of Rudhra Vanniyan already died by jumping into Fire pots after seeing one of their dogs is returning home alone which indicates that all the Vanniyars have died in the War. This event was also due to a ‘Sabam’ by Sukrachariyar to all the four sisters, since these brides were once denied to him by their Father – Kandha Saint.
After that all the Four Sons had ‘Kandharva Vivah’ with the Four Women brought by them (supposed to be Asura Women but in Human Form) and started living with them. Then Lord Shiva & Lord Vishnu have allocated ‘Sambu region’ to First Rudhra /Veera Vannian, upto north of ‘Palar’ to Brhama Vanniyan, upto ‘Pennaiyar’ to Krishna Vanniyan, up to north of Kaveri to Sambu Vanniyan & Western side of East coast to Agni Vanniyan for their Ruling.
After that the First Rudhra Vanniyan had another son named ‘Chandra sekara maharajan’ and became their heir for sambu region & then both First Rudhra Veera Vanniyan and his wife Mandhira Maalai left to Devalogam at the invitation of Lord Devendran.
It is understood that their descendents are spread all over India & neighboring countries. It may also be noticed that the descendants of the above Vanniyars viz Agnikula Kshatriya / Vanniyakula Kshatriya / Vahnikula Kshatriya – the Warrior community are predominantly available in Rajastan, Gujarat, West Bengal, Andhra, Kannada, Kerala, Tamilnadu etc. and their main deity is Goddess Durga/Baghavathy/Maiamman etc. in different names in different parts of India & neighboring countries according to local practice. However, there are no interlinks between them since they were weakened by subsequent Rulers.
There are Two Books available to narrate the Vanniyar story. The First book narrates the Vanniyar Puranam / Mythological Story originated from Sanskrit Literature and the second book is a research work by an Archelogist providing Historical references about their kingdom in different parts of India & neighboring countries.
1) ‘Veera Vanniyar Kathai’ by Durgadoss S.K.Swamy
Published by : Prema Prasuram, 59, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai-24. Phone : 044 - 24833180 / 24800325
2) ‘Vanniyar’ by Nadana Kasinathan, Archeologist
Published by : Manivasar Pathippagam, 31, Singer st., Parry’s, Chennai – 108. Phone : 044 - 24357832 / 25361039 Website : www.manivasagarpathippagam.com ( Branches are available in Chidambaram – Ph – 230069, Madurai- Ph- 2622853, Coimbatore – Ph- 2397155, Salem-Ph- 3207722 & Trichy-Ph- 270645)
Further, it is understood that the Vanniyars are the normal soldiers and the Vanniyakula Kshatriyas are the Kings Ruled & secured the common public, which merged over a period as Vanniyars. Also, it is due to the invasion of various communities like Aryans/Mughals/British etc. overpowering the native Dravidians, all those Rulers & warriors became farmers & poor and are classified as a most backward class in the society. It is the fact that the Vanniyar’s agricultural products were not adequately priced even now and education was denied to them which resulted in poverty and illiteracy due to which they become an unprivileged community.
The Glory of Dravidians / Tamils & Vanniyars is yet to be understood by its own community youths which will be achieved in due course & will emerge as a Literate, Economically advanced community very soon and preserve their Glory.
When it is written citation needed, it does not mean putting a link which sends you to another wikipedia page written without any proper citation, references!... It simply means adding serious references, like a book written by a scholar!!!... 90.46.216.136 ( talk) 18:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I have noticed that some people descending from the Nagavanshi in this article are mongoloid groups (The Balinese 'satrias' and the Balamon/Cham people). How are they connected to Jats, Bunts and Nairs? These three groups are Indo-Scythians with Aryan features. Even in the Vedas the Nagas called themselves 'Arya' (see indepth article of Nagavanshi, which could also be wrong. I dont know). Anyway, there is something wrong here.-- Zero.vishnu ( talk) 09:53, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
In order to maintain the quality of this wikipedia page, to protect the reputation of wikipedia and also the kshatriya caste around the world, to prevent vandals/impostors from adding false informations, all the castes which claim Kshatriya status must provide (very) serious references. By this I mean: they should provide scientific/historical proofs mentioned in books written by independant schcolars and in which the caste is clearly described as noble, ruling caste. All the castes which can prove, without any doubt, that they were a noble caste that ruled (part of) Bharat, gave their blood to defend this great land and the Arya Dharma (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism) can add their name in this chapter. Others have absolutely no right to put their name in this chapter! Thanks. Rajkris ( talk) 22:28, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rajkris, Since you have put a citation needed tag on Ror in the Suryavanshi lineage section, I had initially proposed a citation from the Puranas but you rejected saying that this is not proper history. So, I've brought in a book reference now that I would like to add to the page. Not able to do that currently as the page is protected. The details of the book are as follows -- Title "Ror: Badgujar, Indo- Gangetic Plain, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, Suryavansha, Harishchandra", Editors "Frederic P. Miller, Agnes F. Vandome, John McBrewster", Publisher "Alphascript Publishing, 2009", ISBN 6130071205, 9786130071202, Length 108 pages. Kindly build consensus and add this change to the page. Thanks for your time. Regards 112.110.210.11 ( talk) 17:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.110.210.11 ( talk) 16:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello. Can anyone help me to find a sentence in the Bagavad Gita; in one of the page, Krishna tells Arjuna a sentence like this: fear, doubt are unfit of an aryan. Thanks Rajkris ( talk) 20:47, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
I request all editors on this page to refrain making any attempt to link with mythical personalities and lineages like that of lord Rama & Krishna. Upper section is full of such claims, please clean them. No mention of Rajput, jat etc., should be made there. Please, also bear in mind Mahabharata caegorically denies existence of any Yaduvanshi after Mahabharata, so every community that is claiming is a claim only and should be treated as such. As per historians historicity of Krishna is itself debatable. Ikon No-Blast 17:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
"Actually , the legend reports a westward march of the Yadus (MBh. 1.13.49, 65) from Mathura, while the route from Mathura to Dvaraka southward through a desert. This part of the Krsna legend could be brought to earth by digging at Dvaraka, but also digging at Darwaz in Afghanistan, whose name means the same thing and which is the more probable destination of refugees from Mathura..."
-- History Sleuth ( talk) 18:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Since there's a content dispute and too much edit warring going on in the article. This is not an endorsement of the current version of the article. Please discuss your edits here on the talk page and gain consensus. Once you reach consensus I can edit the page to add or remove the relevant content. Procedure for requesting edits to the article:
- Spaceman Spiff 16:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Some user is portraying Khatri as Vaishya without any sources. Stop this, else provide enough sources. 122.177.232.141 ( talk) 14:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Here are some sources to consider for this debate. I first saw it on a message board but checked the sources before posting here. Sources are genuine. Link to online version of book is also given for verification.
Origin of Khatris
The source is a book published in 1904 called 'Kshatriyas and would-be kshatriyas' by Chedi Singh Varma, an Allahabad High Court Barrister, who offers a very good insight on the issues of Khatris, a merchant and trading caste of Punjab. The following comes on page 62 of this book:
Quote:
"In Behar", says Dr. Buchanan, "one-half of the Khatris are goldsmiths". In Mysore there is a caste of weavers called Khatris; there are also Khatri weavers in Gujerat. Mr Kitts says :- "The Khatris are traders in Punjab, and silk-weavers when we find them in Bomday. The Census Report of 1891 classifies as weavers the Khatris of Berar , Baroda, Bombay and Hyderabad. The Punjabi Khatris , however, make no mention whatver of their Gujerati brethren, who in 1891 numbered 67000; nor is any explanation found as to how they took the occupation of weaving.
Page 59 says following:
Quote:
Mr. Risley has the following on the origin of Khatris:- "It seems to me that the internal organization of the caste furnishes almost conclusive proof that they are descended from neither Brahmans nor Kshatriyas, and that the theory connecting them with the latter tribe rests on no firmer foundation than a resemblance of name, which for all we know may wholly be accidental...If then it is at all necessary to connect Khatris with the ancient four-fold system of castes, the only group to whuch we can affiliate them is the Vaishyas" (The Tribes and Castes of Bengal", 1891, Chapter on Khatris).
The same book says the following about Khatris on page 60:
Quote:
"Pandit Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya, M.A, D. L., President of the College of Pandits, Nadia, says of the Khatris:-" "Some authorities take them to be as the ******rd [sic] caste Kshatri, spoken of by Manu as the offspring of a Sudra father by a Kshatriya mother. The people of ths country include the Kshettries (Khatris) among the Baniya castes , and do not admit that they have the same position as the military Rajputs. The Kshettries themselves claim to be Kshatriyas, and observe the religious rites and duties prescribed by the Shastras for the military castes. But the majority of them live either by trade or by service such as clerks and accountants...."
Book reference:
Kshatriyas and would-be kshatriyas: a consideration of the claims of certain ... By Kumar Cheda Singh Varma, Allahabad, 1904
-- 130.101.152.43 ( talk) 03:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Raju is a Telugu variation of the Sanskrit word Raj and Raja[1] meaning King, Prince or Lord.[2] Rajus (Rajulu in Telugu) is used to refer to a prominent and influential Telugu Kshatriya Caste in Andhra Pradesh.[3][4][5] Kshatriya Rajus are said to be descendents of ancient Royal dynasties like Eastern Chalukyas, Chalukya-Cholas, Vishnukundina, Gajapati, Chagi, Paricheda and Kota Vamsa.[6][7][8]
Over the centuries they have been called by various alternative names that signified their military status. During the British Raj they were known as Ratsas[9] and Rajavars, which means of or belonging to the caste of Ratsawars[10] (Raja Caste),[11] using the title of Raju. They are around 1.2 percent of the Telugu population,[12] concentrated mainly in the Coastal Andhra region with pockets in the Rayalaseema, North Arcot and Rajapalayam of Tamil Nadu, Bellary of Karnataka and Ganjam of Orissa. In last few decades significant population of Rajus have migrated and settled in US and UK.
Rajus use Raju or Varma in the Andhra regions and Deo in the Orissa regions as an agnomen for their last name. Varma in Sanskrit means Armor, Protection[13][14] and Deo in Sanskrit means God or Lord. In Telugu tradition the family name is written first followed by the given name and then the caste title. For example Alluri Sita Rama Raju, a prominent freedom fighter in the mid 19th century, is interpreted as Sita Ram of the Alluri family and Raju for Kshatriya caste. Similarly name of Penmatsa Ram Gopal Varma, a prominent Bollywood and Tollywood movie director-producer, is interpreted as Ram Gopal of the Penmatsa family and Varma for Kshatriya. There have been varying accounts about the origins of the Raju community. Some include them among the military tribes of Rajput descent.
Regarding this community Edgar Thurston in his seven volume Castes and Tribes of Southern India writes...The Maharajas of Vizianagaram (noclaim to be Kshatriyas from the Rajputana and the leaders of the people of gotrams said to have come to the Northern Circars centuries ago. It is noted in connection with the battle of Padmanabham(in present Visakhapatnam district) in 1794 AD that Rajputs formed a rampart round the corpse of Vijay Rama Raju. Padmanabham will long be remembered as the Flodden of the Rajputs of Vizianagaram...[15]as a class they are the handsomest and best developed men in the country and differ so much in feature and build from other Hindus that they may usually be distinguished at a glance...they are mostly Vaishnavites, and their priests are Brahmans...Rajus of course assume the sacred thread, and are very proud and particular in their conduct. Brahmanical rites of Punya Havachanam (Purification), Jata Karma (Birth ceremony), Nama Karanam (Naming ceremony), Chaulam (Tonsure), and Upanayanam (Thread ceremony) are performed...at weddings the Kasi Yatra (Mock flight to Benares) is performed...at their wedding they worship a sword, which is a ceremony usually denoting a soldier caste...they use a wrist string made of cotton and wool, the combination peculiar to Kshatriyas, to tie the wrists of the happy couple...[16]in some villages, Rajus seem to object to the construction of a pial, or raised platform, in front of their houses. The pial is the lounging place where visitors are received by day.[17]
Historically South Indian royal families of Kshatriyas (Rajus) had marital relationship with Central and North Indian royal families, like Rajas of Vizianagaram, Salur and Kurupam had marital relationships with the Rajputana royal families.[18] and bramins are no gods to say who are kshatriyas and who are not well kshatriyas are superior than bramins —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.125.85 ( talk) 06:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
The Rajus/Varma if they perform the function of a dwija and are invested with a sacred thread - they are definitely Kshatriya and legitimately recognized so, where as the nayar claim is pretentious and propagated by a few on web and bologosheres. The objective of the above user is simply to drag the users in this platform towards the nair article page where a dispute exists. Sanam001 ( talk) 10:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Status of Thevar community as kshatriya
Thevars are having the strong proves to claim that they are Kshatriyas. If you see the history from 2000 years back, they have the strong ethics and brave moments to prove that they are kshatriys. I don't know why they still not recognized as kshatriyas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.21.231.199 ( talk) 17:59, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Dear Kshatriya brothers,
No doubt Brahmana divided kshatriya for their benefit and this division was intense after Buddha and Jain period, the two kshatriyas having large impact on Indian society. Brahmanas claim that they are superior, however Buddhist and Jain text throw diffirent light. They were priest, farmers, carpenters, Hunters and even did menial jobs...However, they were sharp enough to divide kshatriya and then ruling the entire India without giving their blood..read this http://books.google.co.in/books?id=8-TxcO9dfrcC&pg=PA239&dq=the+brahmanas+of+this+period+may+be+divided&client=firefox-a&cd=2#v=onepage&q=the%20brahmanas%20of%20this%20period%20may%20be%20divided&f=true —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.118.109.218 ( talk) 14:51, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I have removed Haiheya being tagged as Rajput, because Haiheya, also known as ahiheya, are an offshoot of Chedi Dynasty, of Abhira-Trikuta-Kalachudi-Chedi Era and are of abhira ancestry. These people never joined the Rajput banwagon. Ikon No-Blast 11:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
It is extremely painful to see that Talk page and article are not related. If I continue to see Rajput spam on this page i would start shifting them to Shudra page, because after so much discussion, it is more than clear that Rajputs are Shudra/mlechha and can't be called Kshatriya. Ikon No-Blast 03:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
So many people are writing about the so called "Kshatriya descent" of Jats, Marathas, Gorkhas.etc. But in Hinduism, only the Rajputs are recognized as true Kshatriyas. Every other claim of being Kshatriya is contentious or fabricated.
Dude u r speaking really bullshit . 96 out of half a million maratha families ??? dude at current age marathas have about 2-3 million families .. How come they had 0.5 million 350 years ago . You are a really a dumbass .If you have little or no knowledge of what 96 kuli maratha is , then stop bulshitting ..
Can a shudra become powerful than uppercast ?? No right , thats logical ..Then how come marathas are so strong ?? Dont u remember ur ancestors begged at our doresteps to earn bread and butter ..
You dont have guts dude . I am sure u will delete my message as soon as u see it ..
I dont want u begger brahmins to call us kshatriyas ( because i know u wont like to accept this fact ) We marathas are real kshatriyas .. We have rules maharashtra ,are ruling maharashtra and will rule maharashtra for 1000 years .
blah My views: Dear sir, the above mentioned information about the realtion between The JAT People and Rajputs is false. The JAT People and Rajputs are distinct ethnic groups; and obviously The JAT Clans have nothing to do with those Rajputs Clans who lost their power . On the basis of historical facts, the presence of The JAT People can be traced to MILLENNIUMS ago. Now-a-days, The JAT People are sometimes even termed as true representatives of the Vedic Culture. Please respect this fact. I humbly request You to please a have look at the information that I am sharing with You below (my intension is not to hurt the feelings of any person; but is purely to put true facts in front of the readers of Wikipedia):
The name JAT, originates with the jñātisaṃgha (ज्ञातिसंघ) [1].
The Linguistic and Religious Etymology about the origin of the word, 'Jat' is that it finds mention in most ancient Indian literature like Mahabharata and Rig Veda. Jat historian Thakur Deshraj writes that the word Jat is derived from sanskrit word jñāta (ज्ञात). This later on changed to Jat in prakrart language. Panini's Mention of Astadhyayi in the form of shloka as जट झट सङ्घाते or “Jat Jhat Sanghate” confirms it. [2] Deshraj mentions that Krishna formed a federation of Vrishni and Andhaka clans which was known as jñātisaṃgha (ज्ञातिसंघ). Shanti Parva Mahabharata Book XII Chapter 82 gives details about this sangha. [3]
धन्यं यशस्यम आयुष्यं सवपक्षॊथ्भावनं शुभम ज्ञातीनाम अविनाशः सयाथ यदा कृष्ण तदा कुरु Mahabharata (XII.82.27) dhanyaṃ yaśasyam āyuṣyaṃ svapakṣodbhāvanaṃ śubham jñātīnām avināśaḥ syād yathā kṛṣṇa tathā kuru Mahabharata (XII.82.27)
माधवाः कुकुरा भॊजाः सर्वे चान्धकवृष्णयः (Andhaka+Vrishni) तवय्य आसक्ता महाबाहॊ लॊका लॊकेश्वराश च ये Mahabharata (XII.82.29) mādhavāḥ kukurā bhojāḥ sarve cāndhakavṛṣṇayaḥ tvayy āsaktā mahābāho lokā lokeśvarāś ca ye Mahabharata (XII.82.29)
Bhim Singh Dahiya has enlisted over sixty clans those are named in the Rig Veda. [4]
The famous Sanskrit scholar Panini (traditionally dated 520-460 BCE, with estimates ranging from the 7th to 4th centuries BCE) has mentioned in his Sanskrit grammar known as Astadhyayi in the form of shloka as जट झट सङ्घाते or “Jat Jhat Sanghate” . [5] This means that the terms 'Jat' and 'democratic federation' are synonymous.
And, nobody can question the shlokas mentioned above, as they are from a source which is of the very high importance for the followers of Hinduism. May LORD KRISHNA bless You. And please, now I am looking forward to a change in Your thoughts about The JAT People. I am always here to co-operate with You, till we can discuss facts in a civilized manner. Thank You! Abstruce ( talk) 11:11, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
the Rajput was a later development than the Kshatriya . [6]
The Rajputs emerged around the seventh century after the Gupta empire collapsed . [7]
Intothefire ( talk) 12:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)The Rajputs are Hindu warriors who came into prominence in the 7th century in north western and central India [8]
“ | By the sixth century AD there are historical indications of groups calling themselves Rajputs settled in the Indo Gangetic plain [9] | ” |
Suresh Varma is busy in pointing out that Kshatriyas as a race became extinct during the Treta Yuga. This is just pure propaganda pushed forward by Brahmins to divide and rule the non-Brahmin bulk. This orthodox Brahmin view is supported by very few historians. I can point out a fine evidence here (from The Penny Cyclopaedia of the Society), in which the author argues:
Suresh Varma is brainwashed by Brahmin ideology and still believes that Kshatriyas are extinct. Please read a few history books to see what the historians have to say about this.
Also see these sources:
Reply expected from Suresh Varma. Axxn ( talk) 16:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
According to Brahmins, all Kshatriyas have been exterminated by Parasurama (the champion, hero of the Brahmins). According to scholars, this kind of Brahmin story and the non recognition of Hindu ruling caste as Kshatriyas by Brahmins was only part of the political game between the priests caste and the ruling caste. Brahmins did not recognise the Hindu ruling castes as proper Kshatriyas in order to hold an absolute control over the Hindu society. They did not want to relive their ancient position (in those times, they were only the servants of the ancient Kshatriyas lineage (Suryavamsa, Chandravamsa,...)), by giving them too much importance. In the ancient times, the Indian/Hindu society was completely dominated by the Kshatriyas; parasuram story illustrates brahmins attempt to liberate themselves from this jail. The British power supported this Brahmin POV to avoid the revival of the Indian/Hindu nobility, ruling class. For them Brahmins were not a threat, they were a pacific, servile vegetarian caste ( [5]). It is not accident that most of the freedom fighters were non Brahmins, many were Kshatriyas, especially among those who were in favour of military action against the British (see Subash Chandra Bose). Brahmins acceeded to dominance within the Hindu society only after Muslim & British conquest. Rajkris ( talk) 19:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Point two, the Brahmins never decided on caste status. It was the kings and Rajanya who conferred caste status and at times made Kshatriyas into Shudra and Brahmins into Vaishyas. Case in point is the revenge reeked by Raghuvansh on Haihayas after re-claiming Ayodhya and in the second part, the account of conferring landholdings on the ancestors of Tyagis by Janmejaya. After this episode, Tyagis gave up Brahmin jobs and became farmers. It was Rajas and Rajanya who could carry out such operations. The Brahmins had no authority whatsoever to challenge the King's writ. Thanks and regards, 112.79.192.240 ( talk) 19:48, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Rajputs were rituallistically recognized as legitimate Kshatriyas (dwijas) by Vedic-Brahmins in recognition for their support of Vedic-Brahmins to preserve the Vedic religion from onslaught of Budhism. Although present Rajputs were not originally part of the Vedic-Kshatriyas lineages , Rajputs were provoted to Kshatriya status with Brahminical recognition with blending of their genealogies to older Kshatriya lineages using the Agnikula myth by sanction of Vedic-culture. After attaining ritualistic sanction as Kshatriya, Rajput lineages solidified their political hold on Rajputanana and gradually severed their dependence on Agnikula myth. However in the effort of social mobility , certain pastoral agrarian communities , managed to enter into the Rajput fold as lower ritual ranking Rajputs. You may read a detailed chapter in the link below.
-- Sanam001 ( talk) 12:33, 1 March 2010 (UTC)