Talk:Bhumihar
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bhumihar article. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| Archives: 1, 2 | |||
| This page was nominated for deletion on 2008-04-12. The result of the discussion was keep. |
| WikiProject India | |||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
| The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unciteable information. |
Contents |
[edit] Citation issues
- Page 168 of the book "Agrarian Movements in Bihar:Studies in 20th century Bihar" by by Arvind N. Das was given as a reference for a claim. However, on investigation, I found that the book had only 152 pages. See [1]
- Page 18 of "Rulers, Townsmen and Bazars" by Christopher Alan Bayly is given as reference here. However, it appears that the specified page in the particular book does not contain the particular claim about "military Bhumihars" increasing their sway. I've repdroduced the contents of the page here
...and consolidated the intermediate classes of society - townsmen, traders, service gentry - who commanded the skills of the market and the pen.
Varieties of eighteenth-century regimes in the Ganges valley
So far an attempt has been made to draw out from the limited secondary literature some tendenceis which seem to be common for many regimes of the area: the search for cash and a local base, the foundation for new towns and an attempt through patronage to grow closer to the power-holders in an agrarian society. But it is important not to lose sight of regional variations. Eighteenth century ruling groups differed in culture and organisation. These differences created patterns in commerce, in the incidenceoftowns and markets or in the organisation of agrarian production which persisted into the colonial period and form the subject mkatter of this study. To take only one example, the greater density of market towns in the west of the region wasone precondition for the more dynamic agriculture and artisan production which existed there well before the coming of the British canals and railways in the mid-nineteenth century. This early urbanisation was consolidated by the settlement in the region after 1720 of town dwelling Muslim warriors from the north-west.
Most of the regional and localpowers which will be encountered in the following chapters gained autonomy between 1735 and 1762. Aurangazeb's attempt to revive the Mughal Empire had foundered through over-expansion before 1700. Faction plagued the ruling elite in Delhi in the 1710s and 1720s
- The article also claims Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya's "Hindu Castes and Sects" as a source that Bhumihars were Brahmins. However, a search for"Bhumihar" in the stated book does not yield any results.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 19:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] ANSWERING YOUR CITATION ISSUES
South of Avadh in the fertile riverain rice growing area of Benares, Gorakhpur and Bihar and on the fringes of Bengal, it was the 'military' or Bhumihar Brahmins who strengthened their sway.[1] And the link can be found here: http://books.google.com/books?id=xfo3AAAAIAAJ&pg=PP1&dq=Christopher+Alan+Bayly,+%22Rulers,+Townsmen+and+Bazaars%22#PPA18,M1
Professor Christopher Alan Bayly has used Brahmins for Bhumihar Brahmins in his entire book. You can check for yourself.
On the social scale, although the Bhumihars are known to be Brahmins, on account of the fact that they were cultivators they were not given the ritual status of Brahmins.[2] And the link can be found here:http://books.google.co.in/books?id=GL_yRdwbQP8C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Agrarian+Movements+in+India#PPA51,M1
And you are hell bent on this page which does not reflect an unbiased approach. All the other community pages are spreading all kinds of silly notions and you are promoting them or not changing them and not demanding better citations. What does this show?
Now, include these portions in the article.
Thanking You, Trayambak Dwivedi
-
- While your cooperation is most welcome, you haven't still specified the exact page from the book "Hindu Castes and Sects" where Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya regards Bhumihars as Brahmins. A search for "Bhumihars" does not yield any results. Instead, you had removed a well-sourced paragraph containing a quote by Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya. Have a look at this.
-
- Of course, some other caste-based articles, too, are made of nonsense. Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. But then, this article contains "controversial nonsense" which is even more despicable than "nonsense". We have previously had editors modifying the contents of this article (like User:Ranvir Sena who could very well be you) on behalf of terrorist organisations. And your edits, too, appear to carry a sympathetic point-of-view.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 09:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] FAST IN DELETING AND SLOW IN ADDING
You are very fast in deleting but slow in making the additions!
Thanking You, Trayambak Dwivedi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.143.99 (talk) 11:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Notes
- ^ Bayly, C.A. (1988). Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars: North Indian Society in the Age of British Expansion, 1770-1870. Cambridge University Press. pp. 504 (at p 18). ISBN 978-0521310543.
- ^ Das, A.N. (September 1, 1982). Agrarian Movements in India: Studies on 20th Century Bihar. Routledge. pp. 152 (at p 51). ISBN 978-0714632162.
[edit] Conflict of interest
I strongly insist that this article be written and edited by non-Bhumihars. This is to avoid a conflict of interest. I find that there a group of members from the Bhumihar community who have been indulging in spreading racism hatred across the internet and online forums by declaring Bhumihars to be "Aryans" and "greatest of all Brahmins" and calling for the destruction of Dalits, Muslims and Christians like here and here. One of them had openly declared in Orkut that he was involved in POV-pushing in Wikipedia. One-sided edits and the presence of users like User:Ranvir Sena seems to justify this fear. Till now, I've been as neutral as possible and have been dealing sternly with these POV-pushers. However, in case, if there is someone who doubts my commitment to NPOV, he/she is free to edit this article. However, I strongly insist that Wikipedians who edit this article are non-Bhumihars so as to avoid this article becoming prejudiced propaganda material or mouthpiece for some terrorist organisation.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 13:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] DO NOT DELIBERATELY DIVERT THE ISSUE
[edit] Running a Propaganda Machine
Some Bhumihar Brahmins were engaged in communal activities in just one district of U.P. alongwith other Brahmins and Rajputs but it is being shown as if the whole community is communal and communal everywhere.........Do not give vent to personal prejudices......The fact is all communities at some point of time have shown communal tendency. I register my protest to this biased reading by wikipedia.
Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.15.61.177 (talk) 15:12, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Past archive
can someone help me pull out archive of this page, which is missing now. Infact, I have come to know the banned user:vandalpatrol whose several anon. IPs had been listed in archive(no more visible now), is actually a Hindi wikipedia admin, whose favorite passtime on english wikipedia is to make abusive remark and vandalize some caste pages and articles. Ikon |no-blast 17:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
I want an admin's help to get the various sockpuppets of above mentioned user:vandalpatrol, because this page was once deleted and, talk page of previous page which is deleted now is missing. Kindly post the details here. It will help me initiate the sockpuppetery investigation against the suspect. Ikon |no-blast 18:17, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Bhumihar Origin
[edit] Bhumihar - The Buddhist Brahmins
Babhan is a Pali word used for Brahmanas. Some historian who worked on Buddhist literature are of firm view that during the period of Ashoka, many Brahmans adopted Buddhism in and around Magadha, the modern Bihar. These Brahmanas gave away the Vedic Karmkands and accpted agriculture as their profession. They were known as Babhans, a separate community than Brahmanas following Vedic culture. The famous Brahmans of Buddhist Sangha listed by Buddha himself were –
1. Aagya Kondinya of village DronaVastu near Kapilvastu 2. Matryayani Putra of village DronaVastu near Kapilvastu 3. Sariputra of village Nalaka in Magadha 4. Mahamaugllayan of village Kolil in Magadha 5. Mahakashyap of village Mahatrith Brahaman in Magadha 6. Pindol Bharadwaj of capital Rajgriha in Magadha 7. Radh of capital Rajgriha in Magadha 8. Mahakatyayan of Ujjayani 9. Rewat Khadir Vaniya of village Nalak in Magadha 10. Upasen BangantPutra of village Nalak in Magadha 11. Vakkali of Sravasti, Kosala 12. Kund-dhan of Sravasti, Kosala 13. Vangish of Sravsti, Kosala 14. Bilind Vatsya of Sravasti, Kosala 15. Mahakothittha of Sravasti, Kosala 16. Shobhit of Sravasti, Kosala 17. Swagatt of Sravasti, Kosala 18. Moghraj of Sravasti, Kosala 19. Uruwel Kashyap of Kasi
Further the Parasurama origin of Bhumihar is probably a myth as land of Parasurama, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka etc do not have any Bhumihar community.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.118.232.189 (talk) 15:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC) we have vast misunderstandings about the bhumihar caste.we must know that bhumihars and brahmins two totally opponent castes.In fact ,brahmans are those budhists who migrated from Iran to India.They did never respect the Rigveda and that is why no vaidic gods are served by them.In vedic traditions,begging alms is always prohibited but the so-called brahmans are always indulged in begging and this indicates that they are budhist bhikshus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.66.106 (talk) 13:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)