Talk:Brahmin

Content without references

I) Statements:

• 1a) "Because the priest / Acharya is knowledgeable about Brahman, and is responsible for religious rituals in temples and homes and is a person authorized after rigorous training in vedas (sacred texts of knowledge) and religious rituals and provide advice and impart knowledge of God to members of the society and assist in attainment of moksha, the liberation from life cycle; the priest / Acharya class is called "Brahmin varna."
  
• 1b) "Brahmin priest is responsible for religious rituals in temples and homes of Hindus and is a person authorized after rigorous training in vedas and sacred rituals, and as a liaison between humans and the God."
  
• 1c) "In general, as family vocations and businesses are inherited, priesthood used to be inherited among Brahmin priest families, as it requires years of practice of vedas from childhood after proper introduction to student life through a religious initiation called upanayana at the age of about five"
  

Comments:
Most temple priests follow Agamas (non-vedic texts). So provide references for the above. Also provide sources that a priest / acharya class was responsible for assisting members of society in attainment of moksha.

II) Statement:

• "According to ancient Indian philosophers and scholars, the human society comprises four pillars or classes called varnas or colors. In the ancient Indian texts such as Smritis, vedas, upanishads, puranas, etc., these four "varnas" or classes or pillars of the society are: the priests / Acharya (Brahmins), the rulers and military (Kshatriyas), the merchants and agriculturists (Vaishyas), and the Assistants (Shudras)"
  

Comments:
Provide references that society was organized into four varnas in the vedas (hence, vedic period too). Following above, provide sources that priests (temple priests?) are acharyas and brahmins.

III) Statement:

• "The Brahmin priest has to wake up at four in the morning and bathe in cold water, rain or shine, warm or cold. Then, without a break, he has to perform one rite after another: sandhyavandana, brahmayajna,[1] aupasana, puja, vaisvadeva and at least one of the 21 sacrifices for hours, in front of a sacred fire, with all the heat and smoke."
  

Comments:
Source provided is a blog (karmayoga.net). Provide an academic source.

IV) Statement:

• "So many are the vows and the fasts the priest must keep, and as many are the ritual baths the priest must take in a day. The dharmasastras require that the Brahmin priest adheres to the rules and rituals imposed on the priest not only during the performance of so many rites and rigorous discipline, but also every second of his life, because the Brahmin priest life is dedicated to God. The priest performing rituals, may have his first meal at 1 or 2 PM (and on the day of a sraddha (cremation)) it will be three or four PM). The Brahmin priest's vegetarian meal and dwelling are simple and humble.[2][3]"
  

Comments:
Sources provided are Kamakoti and Vepachedu -- neither of them is an academic source. Provide appropriate source(s) for these statements.
--Mayasutra [= No ||| Illusion =] (talk) 15:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)Mayasutra

Brahmins in Thailand

Recently the following phrase was removed from the article:

"Brahmins in Thailand are known as 'Phram' or 'Paahm' (Template:Lang-th) and claim ancestry to Indian Brahmins who migrated to Thailand in the 6th century AD "

Was this done after checking the cited external reference? Can someone review this reference? If there is no valid reason to remove the phrase, I think the removal should be reverted.

HVN 02:34, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Brahmin from Fallout?

This may sound stupid to some people, but should there a reference to a brahmin from the Fallout series by Bethesda Studios or no. This is just a reference to outside/other uses of the word and if you deem it not worthy of being on the page then so be it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justice508 (talk • contribs) 12:34, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Justice, I feel it might be good to list external references to Brahmin in media, movies, literature etc. This can give another perspective. The current article doesn't seem to focus on much except the duties/interpretation and a vast (debated) list on the different classes of brahmins. The reference you mentioned may be included too. However, the list of external references to Brahmin in media, movies, literature etc, might be very vast. I can contribute with whatever I am aware of. It would be good if we can set up such a section. HVN 02:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harivishnu (talk • contribs)

Bhumihar Brahmins

The inclusion of Bhumihar Brahmins is at present sourced to Saraswati, Swami Sahajanand (2003). Swami Sahajanand Saraswati Rachnawali in Six volumes (in Volume 1). Delhi: Prakashan Sansthan. pp. 519 (at p 68–69) (Volume 1). ISBN 81-7714-097-3. and should not be removed wthout an explanation. I'm unsure about the reliability of that source and raised the matter at here at WT:INB recently. The issue affects several articles and it seems that one person is periodically remvoing the same statement from them but always without providing a reason. Please explain. - Sitush (talk) 09:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

I am hearing this term first time ever, myself. But you are correct, can't remove uncommon as long as it's sourced well. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:38, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure that it is sourced well - that is why I raised it at WT:INB. Feel free to comment about the source there because it affects several articles & I've got doubnts whether we'll get much useful input from the good folk at the reliable sources noticeboard. - Sitush (talk) 13:57, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Namasudra

The info below is copied from a thread on my talk page:

Begin copy Could not understand the comment of your last revision of claimants of Brahmin Status, I quoted from a book written by Dr.N.R.ray translated By John Wood ,Orient Longman::I have no account in Wikipedia.117.194.203.68 (talk) 03:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid that there is a lot of socking going on at that article and some related ones. I cannot divulge why I was concerned that you might be another incarnation of User:Buddhakahika but I am prepared to tell an administrator by email. In any event, what you added said

The results of anthropological measurements and computations concerning the Namahśŭdras are quite remarkable. As far as bodily characteristics go they are of the same line as the Brāhmaņs of north India.

and your source was this. I cannot see that source but there are evident problems:

• The wording looks like you may have just copied the text from the source and is certainly not neutral
• The author, Niharranjan Ray, died in 1981 and the book itself dates from sometime before 1949 - that is old
• Anthropometry has since been rejected - it gave rise to such bizarre schools at scientific racism

• The whole Namasudra issue has been causing problems on Wikipedia for years because of POV-pushing by members of that community. If what you said is to be included then we're going to have to balance it with what everyone else says, which would be fine if Ray was reliable for the point.

I hope that this goes some way to explaining the issues. Feel free to raise it on the article talk page (Talk:Brahmin), where it might be seen by other people. Also, it probably would be advantageous for you to register an account: it isn't required but given the problems being caused by Buddhakahika and the unfortunate similarities between you and them, it might help to offset any possible future claims that you are in fact that person. - Sitush (talk) 13:54, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• • I am the same user ::

Haplogroup R1a1, which has originated either in South Asia[22][23][24] or Central Asia[25][26] or Eastern Europe[27] is the most prevalent haplogroup amongst the Bengali Brahmins. The haplogroup is associated with the spread of the Indo-European culture in Indian sub-continent. A very high percentage of 72.22% among Bengali Brahmins which is also one of the highest found frequencies within world groups hints at its presence as a founder lineage for this caste group.[28]

Is this not Scientific racism in a new form ?What does this sentence , "The haplogroup is associated with the spread of the Indo-European culture in Indian sub-continent.",convey? Is it not scientific racism? If this is true for a community banned for 1000 years due to Hindu Apartheid , then the data are unreliable!!! 117.194.203.137 (talk) 03:32, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I've no idea where you got that quotation from. As a general rule, it is best not to get bogged down in details about genetics in caste-related arguments. They tend to be used selectively, appearing used when a community wants to claim a high(er) status but not when it would be adversely affected. For that and other reasons, such as the often-speculative/small sample/highly qualified nature of the studies and the fast-moving technology, I'm always opposed to using them. - Sitush (talk) 09:14, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

• • • I am the same user ::

Not only that when PNAS monitored the % of R1a1, was maximum 40% amobng Indians , and then it sored to 30% high for .......communities when indigenous studies began, same thing happened to anthropological studies also (under B.S,.Guha) and these data are used more often for these communities than not. Yes this is the Bengali Brahmin page of Wikipedia(they never mention their mtdna).Of course they are more advanced </ref>but I do not think it is for what they are claiming so; your logic is quite clear, but what is the use of screening a particular community then!!!::117.194.202.119 (talk) 12:28, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

You've lost me here, sorry. Are you saying that you think the content should be removed from the Bengali Brahmin article, are you saying that what exists there somehow permits inclusion of the Ray stuff in the Namasudra article, or are you discussing some sort of generality? Apologies for the confusion: genetics stuff, in particular, can tend to make my eyes glaze. - Sitush (talk) 12:45, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

• • • I am The same person::

Considering everything , I just added the book of N.R.Ray in reference.117.194.204.234 (talk) 05:23, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I've reverted you and am copying this thread to the article talk page, which is where it should have been in the first place. If you wish to discuss further, after reading WP:BRD and WP:CONSENSUS, then feel free to do so there. - Sitush (talk) 05:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

End copy - Sitush (talk) 05:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

• • • • I am The same person.

This book this is the most documented and reliable and accepted History of the Bengali People.This article changed the attitude of The Bengali People.There are other sources also ,but I cannot find good English translations.Then came the Genetic studies.That also suported the claim.This is not a problem generated by the community members , the educated persons have highlighted this ideas. The "Vyavastha" signed by the Pundits detrmined many things at the time when it was written. The above Book is , till these days only reliable documentation of the pros and cons of the Bengali People.All the refrences you find here are either hearsay, mythology, scriptures, etc. , those are also same kind of documentations.However a section of the community is now demanding Avarna status, but that does not invalidate the past.117.194.200.132 (talk) 07:46, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

• • • • I am The Same Person.

IF ANY ONE HAS ANY OBJECTION TO ADDING THIS ".....they are of the same line as the Brāhmaņs of north India."P. 28"History of the Bengali People: Ancient Period ;Chapter Two ,The Origins 3,penultimate para" by Niharranjan Ray ,Orient Longman,1994,ISBN 978-0-86311-378-9 [1] " as reference to namasudra as Claimants Of Brahmin Status may please give your opinion with reasons.117.194.211.207 (talk) 13:21, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I object and I've already said so. See the comments above. The opinion of five pundits is pretty worthless but interesting in the context of the vogue for sanskritisation at that period. Ray, though, isn't even interesting, let alone reliable. I've not even managed to fathom who took the measurements on which Ray relied, although I doubt it was him & it is was then I'd like to see a copy of his medical qualifications. I could live with including something about Ray's opinion if we can get the message across that his methodology (anthropometry) was discredited but I'm not sure how we can do that because it was the entire pseudo-science that was rejected, not Ray personally - don't forget, there were some odd people who swore by it. - Sitush (talk) 16:56, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

See perhaps Partha P. Majumder, B. Uma Shankar, Amitabha Basu; et al. (February 1990). "Anthropometric Variation in India: A Statistical Appraisal". Current Anthropology. 31 (1): 94–103. JSTOR 2743350. {{cite journal}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link), which is pretty much a review of the past literature. Its conclusion is "the people of India cannot be classified into a fixed set of ethnic categories based on anthropometric data. Efforts at typological/'racial' classification should be abandoned, and research should concentrate on the sources of anthropometric variation." That's a fairly typical denunciation of the approaches that were commonly used in the first half of the 20C. - Sitush (talk) 18:43, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

• • • • I am The Same Person.

Yes Ray himself collected data . I do not know how much you personally are aware of Indian Hindu or Apartheid Sociological structure (I doubt your knowledge is based on literature published only in English language , and now people are translating Sudra as Assistant to mislead the English language society) .The Sansktitisation is not a phenomenon of that period only, it was, it will be, political hegemony has a great role here and will also be in future .But the way you are thinking would lead only to "A is A".117.194.204.80 (talk) 09:10, 22 Novvember 2013 (UTC)

I would like to know what others think about this.Now their opinion is very important.At that time West raised the Racial identity in terms of Anthrppology , and it was so, now they are raising Y-Haplotype, so that has become obsolete or untenable, some day Y-Haplotype will be obsolete (I am sure of it) , now upper layer will be using the new data , but the hegemony wherever tumbles down , we will have our deepest suspect: It is known to everyone.117.194.204.80 (talk) 09:16, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

• • • • I am The same person::

The Page "Nair" has started with some anthropologist's comment ; then why an acknowledged Historian , Anthropologist and Socilogist , Dr N.R.Ray's reference cannot be used in wikipedia , I do not understand your logic. If anthropological categorisation has become obsolete, then why is it being used there? 117.194.207.242 (talk) 05:38, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Nair has a quote from Kathleen Gough. The difference is, Gough's opinion of the Nairs as an umbrella group is still accepted by her peers whereas Ray's opinion about the Namasudras is not because it was based on discredited methods. - Sitush (talk) 09:51, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

• • • • I am The same person::

Thanks.117.194.207.75 (talk) 12:24, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Kayastha and other Demand :::: (UTC ^^^ refrence

That is Dohakoshpanjika by Adwaibajra , given in Bangla Sahityer Itihas by Sukumar Sen : I think you are an Indian British .Use your connections to know it:117.194.211.101 (talk) 15:01, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm not and I've never heard of Sen. Given how much I've read around the subject, that itself is not a good sign. I'm am reverting you because the statement misrepresents the source as explained in my comment earlier today at the end of this page. - Sitush (talk) 15:48, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Then How do you actually do the editings , what about those written in Indian languages.The scientific racism , the issue that yuo raised , if that be what you really think, there cannot be any page named as "Brahmin" .This is also racism. They are by birth Hindu Priests. Do have any page By the name as jewish priests or of Chritian priests as "Fathers or Reverends" or as "Imams" for Islam. Are you not promitng racism, if this be not a tribal identiy .Is the new person who is in-charge instead of you anyhting different . Why do not leave these pages to the people of the land those know better.Even if there is POV others will oppose and there will be a solution ,tha was what Jimmy Welsh ideals were.17:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.207.25 (talk)

Merger proposal

Request to merge Bahun into this Brahmin; discussion below. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 19:48, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I'd just redirect it to the Brahmin article. The thing is full of OR and the bits that are sourced are already in the Brahmin article. It seems that the intention was to highlight a synonym but it is obvious that the thing has been hijacked by groups of caste warriors. If the synonym is valid then, sure, mention that here but otherwise the article is useless. - Sitush (talk) 19:56, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Bahuns are Nepali Brahmins :They are of different ethnic origin.So different naming should be followed.117.194.204.80 (talk) 09:19, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Agreed with Sitush, 'redirecting' is nice idea. Bladesmulti (talk) 15:54, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Poor structure and lack of referencing

With the depth of modern NPOV material now available why is this article so poor?

Please tidy up and bring this' caste system' into the 21st century using appropriate modern scholarly frameworks not mumbo jumbo.

Evidence first (talk) 16:14, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

It is poor but it was worse a few weeks ago - we're getting there. Meanwhile, why not have a go yourself? - Sitush (talk) 16:26, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Namasudra claim to Brahmin status

I've removed Namasudra as claimants of Brahmin status. This issue has been pov-pushed for years by presumed members of that community on Wikipedia. The source that was cited notes on the preceding page that the community was desperate to rid itself of its Chandala affinity and claimed other statuses also, including that of Kayastha. The situation is far too complex for coverage in this article and, which is worse, even today the claim is not accepted by anyone other than the community itself. The Namasudra article is one that I've been trying to improve for some time and I'll be expanding it considerably - that is the place to expound on what is a very dubious association. - Sitush (talk) 10:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. It belongs in the Namasudra article, not here. I just looked at the source and reverted again since it was overstating the source. Dougweller (talk) 16:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Namasudra Movements in Bengal (1872–1947): R.K.Biswas :ISBN 978-81-88006-19-9: 2010: Progressive Book Forum,33 College Row ,Kolkata-700 009 .This book contains copies of three Memoranda ; First one to The Lieutenant Governor Of Bengal In April ,1901 , demanding Namasudra or Kudar designation.( Kudar is a sect of Brahmin ,also called Debal, this was intially raised by Sri Harichand Thakur) .

It will not be out of place to mention that in 1900 census they were documented as 'Chandala'.

They again gave another memorandum on the 3rd August 1901 ( office memo no.2796) to The Lieutenant Governor Of Bengal ,demanding Namasudra designation in the census.

The third memorandum was submitted to The Lieutenant Governor Of Bengal and Assam , which included the annexed paper ,Vyavastha, signed by 41 Brahmin pundits, and demanded , Brahmin status , by name Namo-Brahmin, although they clearly mentioned that they were backward.

So it is a fact that they claimed Brahmin status and also that they were the only out of castes community ever to be certified by Chief Brahmin Pundits as of Brahmin origin.

It will also to be mentioned here that they never submitted 'Kaystha' demand officially to any authority.That was only a hearsay myth that spread over some easter districts of undivided Bengal and created lot of nuissance.

Most thesis on this community by aspirant scholars , do not include the part properly: they rather try to project their work to be categorised as subaltarn studies and to be contemporary.But they forget that Balkanisation is a recent phenomenon in Europe.How do they ignore their identity movement ,it is not clear:; it seemed to me more funny when I found one tea-shop-gossiping term of Calcuttans , Bhadroloke, becomes the Heading of a wikipedia page.Rnibaraj (talk) 14:31, 21 December 2013 (UTC)