 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. |
|
 Start |
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| Mid |
This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
| Comments: |
|
edit · history · watch · purge
Quality of article: This is a comment on the quality and comprehensibility of the article on Brahmins. I came to the article seeking an overview of the subject to refresh my memory and to gain a sense of the evolution of the caste in history and modern India. Sadly, I read the entire article but gained little useful. The article is essentially a dense series of lists for insiders and is pretty well opaque to those who are not. I would suggest that the article does not meet the fundamental criteria of explaining what Brahmins were and are in a straightforward and easily understood manner. The point here is not to suggest the removal/modification of the existing article. What is needed, however, is an article that explains what the Brahmins are; where they came from; how they evolved; their role both religious and secular in society; their role and effect on history; relations between the various branches; the peculiarities or unique qualities of being a Brahmin in Indian society; pressures and stresses upon the Brahmin community and responses: and so on, etc. You have to think of the reader who wants to know what Brahmins are.--Lightflyer (talk) 02:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC) Lightflyer, 0340hrs UTC, 14 July 2009
|
|
|
|
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. |
|
| Start |
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| High |
This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
 |
Brahmin received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
|
This topic is in need of attention from an expert on the subject.
The section or sections that need attention may be noted in a message below.
|
[edit] All Hindu Priests are not Brahmins
hindu Priest serach direct me to here. But in India not all Priests belong to Hindu Religion are Brahman. Many Dravidan Priests also there. :வின்சு (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC).
-
-
- Dravid just mean people living in south(Dakshin.--59.162.59.66 (talk) 11:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
[edit] MAHARSHI TEJANDSWAMI
any body know maharshi tejenand swami
he is a guru of Guru brahman samanj
like, shrimali, shrigod, pandya etc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.204.142 (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Arya is not a tribe.
,,,My friend you will never understand because you never try to undenstand.All your knowledge is based on imparial victorian writer who where trying to justify colonisation.Arya is not a tribe it is a word for nobel in india it has nothing to do with complexion.western scholers says that human originated in africa and from there they travel to other parts of the world.They were black due to there natural condition.so white complaxtion has nothing to do with with brahmins or arya.naver trust the book try to explore the truth yourself.After all knowledge is all about keep learning not geting degree only.knowledge and degree is diffrant thing.--Nkatyan (talk) 10:29, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
-
- Arya and the word Mia(n) mean the same thing "Gentleman" in modern day perspective , first one in Indian language and second one in Arabic.Maxmuller the German scholar made the things worse by making it a symbol of purity and transforming it to Aryan , a stupid proposition followed by the worst by his own countryman : whole world knows that.He was absolutely unaware of Indian social system. And Brahmin is a professional group associated with certain kinds of profession. But the name most probably came from the "Brahman" of Vedas.And the glory of these old writings went to those who studied and used it for their livelihood and the composers were made rubbish.The most unfortunate incidence was justified with the introduction of another stupid term "Aupouresheo". Regarding colour , any one can verify that 70%(minimum) of Brahmin population is black or dark.Rnibaraj (talk) 14:13, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Varna discussions
This is a continuation of the discussions from the Kamma (Caste) page. As mentioned therein, a discussion is required on how various groups came to be designated dvijas from the historical pov. So to begin with, let each group mentioned in the sections of 'pancha-gauda brahmins' and 'pancha-dravida brahmins' in this article put forth proof of the earliest dates since when they were referred to as brahmins in epigraphies / inscriptions.
Additionally,
1) This article mentions 'brahmins' as "scholars, teachers, fire priests". Such a generalized representation is incorrect. The article also needs to take into recognition that people were in different occupations first, and upon gaining positions of power and wealth, have claimed brahmin-hood and kshatriya-hood.
2) This article states that "brahmins, in modern usage of the term, are further divided into various sub-castes". This is incorrect. The term 'brahmin' is a varna, not some caste which can be divided into sub-castes. Moreover historically tribal priests elevated into brahminhood in different parts of the country are unrelated to one another, so it would be obfuscation to claim that each of those groups are sub-castes.
3) The section on "Gotras and Pravaras" in this article concentrates only on biological descent. Please add content on spiritual descent also (elaborate on the rishi-shishya parampara), and also add content on the puranic origin of gotras, as well as the effects of Buddhism on the concept of gotras.
4) In the "Practices" section of this articles, vegetarianism has been mentioned. This is incorrect as eastern-indian 'brahmins' consume fish, and communities claiming to be brahmins were consuming non-vegetarian diet even in the colonial period. If a consensus is reached on how to represent the article, i would gladly add the relevant into to this article.
5) The section on "Brahmins in other religions" requires clean-up. because the context of who is a brahmin in Buddhism is different from the hindu version.
Thanks. --= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 04:55, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Mayasutra
There are a lot of dead links throughout the page. Are all of these really notable and will be made or can some be taken out? If anyone that has knowledge of all of this wants to remove some that would be great. Leefkrust22 (talk) 06:43, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
