Talk:Nair

The material refered as copyrighted is quoted from public domain work by Dr B Nair and is not subject to copyright. Thanks

In this case you may restore the text, but you must indicate source and the fact that it is public domain. Otherwise someone else may remove it. Mikkalai 05:26, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

By the way, please do not interfere with votes for deletion. Please read wikipedia policies. You may be blocked from editing for destructive actions. Mikkalai 05:26, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"List of Nair Tharavadus" Link

Just recently, I created an article titled "List of Nair Tharavadus".

The article "List of Nair Tharavadus" is designed as a list for past and present nair tharavadus in Kerala. Assistance will be required by Wikipedia Users to help expand this list. The tharavadu listing is currently split in roughly district/ major city subheadings. In time, as the list grows, the sub-headings can be further refined, and new articles can be created for example "Nair tharavdus in Kasaragod". Furthermore, the links for articles of each tharavadu can be created in due course, providing information about the tharavadus history, origin, location, etc.

In this way Wikipedia can become a mine of information for individuals who seek to learn more about the nair heritage.

It must also be kept in mind that Wikipedia is a universal online encyclopedia, and as such, the material provided must be relevant and accurate.

NOTE: It would be much appreciated if the tharavadus listed are in fact nair tharavadus, as it has been known for families in the past to adopt the surname "Nair" even though they are not of nair caste.

Please help to update and add new tharavadus to the list.

Thankyou

Nambiarm 03:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Points on the main article

The current article could mislead readers to believe that historically there were the Namboodiris and then the rest of the caste-ranked Hindus in old Kerala were all in general Nairs. This is an erroneous representation of the complex caste system. There were/are many castes equivalent to the Kshatriyas and Vaishyas between the Namboodiris and the Nairs. The old royal families of Travancore and Tirukochi were/are Kshatriyas. Thampis are not Nairs. Thampis are a Kshatriya clan, although they did occasionally take Nair women as brides, as did the Namboodiris, through the practice of Sambandham.

In the old social hierarchy Nairs were the equivalent of Sudras, as Nairs were the borderline community at the low end of the four-fold social hierarchy, with Thiyas/Ezhavas coming immediately below Nairs, considered outside the caste systems and not allowed to freely practice Hindu rituals. Both Nairs and Ezhavas were considered untouchables though with varying degrees of ‘untouchability’ associated with each group. Although certain Nairs were active in the rank and file of regional warring groups (Nayar padas) led by the Kshatriya chieftains, the Nairs themselves were equivalent of Sudras and therefore referred to in old Malayalam in some parts of Kerala as “choodraru”.

RKT 29 Aug 2005

Nair Community's Role in Caste Emancipation

The Nair community played a frontal role in the area of the emancipation of lower castes, most notably for the policy allowing all Hindus access to temples. Could somebody please chip in with details on this? I don't think the material would be difficult to find. --Lettherebelight 14:01, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To an extent considering the role of Nairs in Communism movement and also the fact that one of the founding fathers of Dravidian movement was a Nair(T M Nair of Justice party?) Nairs did a play a major role in movement against caste/feudal hierarchy. However, so did some of the Namboothiris. And the people they fought against were feudal Nairs, Namboothiris and Iyers. So things are bit intermixed here. -Manjunatha ( 18 Sept 2005)

I beg you not to confuse the caste emancipation movement with the Communist and Dravidian movements. Communism's impact was felt much later in Kerala, and the Dravidian movement had very little impact in Kerala. Maybe, Namboothiris helped in caste emancipation too, but this page is about Nairs, not Namboothiris. There may have been (and there still may be) feudal Nairs opposed to caste emancipation. But that does not mean, the contributions of community stalwarts like Mannathu Padmanabhan should not be included. --Lettherebelight 05:46, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bhagat Singh was a proud atheist but he is the pride of religious/fundamentalist Sikhs too. A person rejects caste identities but he's the pride of that caste. Nobody sees the irony here. I'm not confused. If you are expecting somebody to write about Nairs role both in the regidity of caste system and the emancipation thereafter then you are just echoing my thougts. But if you want to show only the good side, well, I beg to differ. --Manjunatha (21 Sept 2005)

Nobody is preventing you from writing about the negative side. --Lettherebelight 10:34, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer the person who writes positive things also write about negative things. Atleast that way, the article would sound more NPOV. Don't you see some people indeed get frustrated with one-sided article and try to vandalize it with only the opposite side? Anyaway, I'm certainly not an expert when it comes to Nairs, however, I do know few things. --Manjunatha (28 Sept 2005)

Okay, I get your point. Though NPOV is a requirement, it may so happen that a person may have knowledge only about the positive aspects. As long as the article stays objective, a postive comment will not affect the NPOV of the article.

--Lettherebelight | പ്രകാശമുണ്ടാകട്ടെ | Talk 09:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mannadiars

Mannadiars of palghat follow patrilineal system of inheritance. Malabar manual by William Logan may be referred to

Are Nairs the Descendants or Ancestors of Newars?

I would be inclined to think that they are descendants, since the Newars settled the Kathmandu valley in the 3rd or 4th century AD. However, it could be possible that the Nairs or Newars had a common ancestral group, which split - one group remaining in the north, and the other moving south. I am inclined to think that architectural traditions would only happen once a group has settled in one area for a long time. In this case, Nairs can only be descendants since Nair architechture closely resembles Newar architecture, and could only have developed from already existing Newar architecture. These are just musings, if anyone can find concrete sources, it would be helpful. --Vivin 05:09, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It appears that no one has information on the above? :) -- Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

The better proof would be Y-chromosome test of Nair men(without Namboothiri ancestry). I don't have much data on this. But the one I have shows haplogroup H, a Dravidian stock. This haplogroup is mostly found in South India. I suppose Newars are Mongoloid or East Asian. -Manju

Interesting. Do you have more information? Better yet, is there any way I can get in touch with you? Are you a wikipedia user? --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

Of course you can contact me with my wikipedia user id. -Manjunatha Arpalmane

Nairs brought to Kerala from Orissa

I couldn't find any basis for this theory. The text also talks about a war between the "Northern" and "Southern" kingdoms in Kerala (as two separate kingdoms). There has never been such a classification. The kingdoms that ruled Kerala (around the sangam age) were the Ays, Cheras and Cholas. There has been no record of any kingdom "importing" people from Orissa. Also, it seems highly unlikely - why would they want to go all the way to Orissa? What connection did they have with Orissa? Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്) 23:19, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC) Well maybe they mean the Nairs migrated from Orissa. Bringing them from such a distant land as Orissa seems very unlikely as u pointed out. Maybe they just migrated. And there are theories they came from Bengal as well.Manu

Kalaripayattu

The page for that martial art has become embroiled in a major POV over whether it can be regarded as an ancestor to the various Chinese arts. However that controversy ends up being resolved, the tone taken in this article on this subject definitely takes a non-neutral POV. 165.247.175.182 03:18, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the current version is more NPOV. It says that "some people hold the view". --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്) 01:31, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thetruth/209.86.122.188

Please stop deleting information from this article and vandalizing it. If you have issues with the information listed in the article, please discuss it here. At the very least, please provide an explanation for your changes. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

Nairs were Sudras?

220.238.122.135 02:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)The only factor which indicates that Nairs are Sudras is the case of untouchability. However, Namboothiris were considered the most orthodox brahmins in India, and they seldom associated themselves with even other brahmins. They considered anyone who wasn't a Namboothiri to be subordinate to them in the Caste system, even other brahmins, who couldn't enter their illam (house). Furthermore, Nairs were the pioneers and practitioners of Kalaripayattu, a form of martial arts. It cannot be disputed. I repeat, it cannot be disputed, that Nairs were warriors, who served kings by controlling and protecting large areas of the kingdom. They ruled the towns and villages that were under the kings control, and fought invaders from abroad. This was the duty and profession of the Nairs. This was the duty and profession of Kshatriyas. Nairs also considered Ezhavars and Tiyas to be untouchable, since they had jobs as workers in those days, occupying a subordinate position to Nairs. The worker caste is considered to be the sudra caste in the North Indian caste system, whilst warriors were considered to be Kshatriyas. All in all, it is correct to say that Nairs were Kshatriyas, given their position in society as rulers and warriors. The fact that Nairs could not touch Namboothiris (although Nair women could wed Namboothiri males) is due to the strict and orthodox beliefs and values of Namboothiris, rather than as being a sign of Nair subordination.[reply]

Yes, it's even difficult to believe Tiyas were untouchables once. However, it's upto you to decide whether you are a shudra or some other caste. My wife thinks, a Nair herself, that Nairs are Vaishyas. The reason being there are distinct Kshatriya families. However, some of other Nairs and perhaps you too, consider themselves Kshatriya considering they were the soldiers(So were Ezhavas especially in northern Kerala). However, what about Brahmins? What did they think about Nairs? "Pure Shudras".

Let's see the technicalities. "Manu Smriti", the supreme authority over caste divisioins, declared that all Dravidians were Shudras(degraded from their Kshatriya position). In the initial days of caste system, the farmers were also considered as Vaishyas. However, as time passed only traders have remained part of Vaishyas. So you can see a proper division of castes along Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra(farmers, cowherds, artisans etc) in North-India. The division of castes in South India was entirely different. Keeping with the spirit of Manusmriti it was divided along "Pure Shudras" and "impure Shudras". In this way, Nairs were higher above other Malayali castes.(Mind you, many merchant castes of Kerala may not agree with it, so do Tiyas who have theoritical knowledge of castes and consider Nairs as their equals).

More over, Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya castes were called 'twice born' or 'dvija' castes. These three castes were required to undergo "sacred thread" ceremony. I'm not sure even the Kshatriyas of South India had this system.

--Manjunatha 4 Aug 2005 (16:16 IST)

I have added a section to the article, called "Kshatriyas or Sudras?", that highlights the issue. You are welcome to add to it, or change it. I've tried to keep it as NPOV as possible. One major thing that I've noticed is that it's nearly impossible to compare the caste system of Kerala to the rest of India, because it was so different. Nairs seem to have some elements of Sudra (Namboothiris considered being touched by a Nair to be polluting), and Kshatriya (they were a ruling and martial class) castes. I have added points supporting both views. Also, in future, please sign your posts with the tildes, since it helps to know who I'm responding to. Also, you can indent by using one or more colons. It makes it easier to followe the discussion. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

Yes, it's difficult to compare our caste system with that of North-India. Well, not only Kerala but whole South India. We don't come under the normal definition of caste system as in North-India. Of course, caste itself was never part of South Indian society until the arrival of Brahmins. However, it's possible that we had classes.

In Europe, any able bodied man could fight. However, the influence of caste is such that we are prejudiced to think that whoever fought in the past were Kshatriyas or only Kshatriyas could fight and nobody else. But there are many exceptions to these sacred rules. India's so-called golden age was 'Gupta Period' and Guptas were/are declared Vaishyas. Shivaji was actually part of Kunbi community(farmers and thus declared shudras) but declared a Maratha during coronation. I think there was a Nair who became king of some region in Kerala after undergoing 'HiranyaGarbha Kriya' to become a Kshatriya(I forgot the region and name of that king).

Considering these facts and hopefully understanding the absurdity of the caste system, I would expect the tone of the article should be dismissive of the caste identity. I would prefer to use the term 'declared'.

What I'm observing the favoured communities of the past(with 100% reservation in education or with 100% reservation in administration) taking pride and deprived communities taking pride in the victimization(by default, it makes them GOOD) and suitably appropriating loose historical findings to claim a past greatness. Well, it's possible these prejudices give these people a kind of superiority complex or positive outlook and help them to live with confidence. However, Wikipedia is not a place to achieve it.

Here we would like to see a more objective analysis. The issues of superiority and inferiority of any caste/race/sexes must be suitably weighed against the cultural prejudices and geographical boundaries. There is a beautiful anecdote in Hinduism, 'Koopa Mandooka' or 'Frog of a well', for narrow minded people or views. This should be applied to Hindu customs and society too.

Well, I'm not going to edit or add anything to the article. You should be able to do it. I've noticed that you have modified the origin of Kalaripayat. I really appreciate it. I apologize for not signing the previous post.

--Manjunatha (17 Aug 2005 11:57 IST)

I didn't come back to this article until a few days ago, and that's when I noticed the message about "Nairs are not sudras" and your response to it. That's why I went ahead and added that section, because I thought some sort of perspective is necessary. Also, I really would like you to add more information to this article. I also detest any sort of perceived caste/class superiority or arrogance. I've tried my best to make this article NPOV, but if you feel some parts are POV, you are welcome to edit them. In the article, I was merely trying to state that Nairs seem to have attributes of both classes, but ultimately, it is comparing apples and oranges since the south indian caste system was wholly different from the north indian one. And as you said, South india was a classless society until the arrival of the Brahmins. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)nairs were kshtriyas but to avoid untouchability certain serving class also got nair title that degraded all nairs. one another thing all the royals/naduvazis of kerala comes from nair clans except 3 namputhiri naduvazis(edappally,ambalapuzha,veganad nampidi).all the venad rajas doing "hiraniyagarpham" so namputhiries give them titles like sooryavamsha etc(ofcourse after receiving golden "gomathava" as fees).

Chuttran

68.192.203.65 insists on adding the following line:

"Nairs are Sudras ... they are known as Chuttran in the south". I couldn't find the term "Chuttran" anywhere. Plus, the "Kshatriyas or Sudras" question is being addressed later in the article. --71.104.193.32

Vegetarian

I couldn't find any documentation to prove/disprove that Nairs were originally Vegetarian. It's true that many Nair families were/are vegetarian, but some say that Nairs were originally non-vegetarian and became vegetarian after the arrival of Brahmins. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്) 02:53, 4 October 2005 (UTC)well nairs were nonvegitarians but they ate only fish and among the lower nairs ,fowl..but the statement they were beef eaters is very wrong as they also considered the cow sacred- Manavendra Varma[reply]

Are nairs related to NAYAR / NEWAR / NAIKs / Turkish Nair / Scottish McNair?

Are nairs related to NAYAR in punjab / NEWAR in nepal / NAIKs in Kanara / Nairs in Turkey / Scottish McNair?

Some examples if turkish nairs I found on the net are like this line: "Sara Nair was born in Edirne, Turkey, in approximately 1925. She moved to Istanbul when she was young. She is known as Madame Sara, the renowned spirit medium of Turkey"

Excess quotes, terrible formatting, etc. etc.

Someone (I haven't tracked) has added a bunch of excess quotes about Nairs, essentially making the article unreadable and of lower quality. I am going to try to consolidate that information in to the last "readable" version. Until then, I'm presenting an (older) readable version. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

Excessive quotes and personal marketing etc.

However, the sudras in the rest of India were never a martial class, since warfare was the profession of the Ksyathriyas. According to this interpretation, Nairs would seem to be more like Kshatriyas since they were a martial class as well. Similar to Kshatriyas, they were only second to the Brahmins (Namboothiris). Furthermore, many Nair families were aristocratic. They owned large feudal estates and in some cases, even took part in the ruling of Kerala. An example is the Paliam family from Chendamangalam. The oldest male of the family, the Paliath Achan, served as the Prime Minister to the Raja of Cochin.

Would be a service to our community's reputation if stuff such as the above is also removed, as I see it is, it is mostly hot air and personal family image projection. Not the stuff fit for an universal encylcopedia! This what prompts others to throw garbage into the article.

I agree. Also, those assertions are factually incorrect. Mauryas, Guptas, Shivaji, and all the South Indian royal families before the emergence of caste system in South India were not Kshatriyas.

You are welcome to edit, and please sign your comments. You are arguing with a one-sided burden of proof. You have presented one half of an argument that talks about whether Nairs are Sudras or Kshatriyas - it doesn't assert either one, but provides similarities to both - the main point being that the caste system in Kerala was rather different from the rest of India, and that no one can say that Nairs ARE Kshyatriyas, or that Nairs ARE sudras. That's the point being discussed. If you feel such information is not "encyclopaedic", either change it, offer suggestions to improve it, but do not delete it entirely. Also, please sign your comments - that helps us know who we are talking to. --Vivin Paliath (<font color="green">വിവിന് പാലിയത്</font>) 16:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

"List of Nair Tharavadus" Link

Just recently, I created an article titled "List of Nair Tharavadus".

The article "List of Nair Tharavadus" is designed as a list for past and present nair tharavadus in Kerala. Assistance will be required by Wikipedia Users to help expand this list. The tharavadu listing is currently split in roughly district/ major city subheadings. In time, as the list grows, the sub-headings can be further refined, and new articles can be created for example "Nair tharavdus in Kasaragod". Furthermore, the links for articles of each tharavadu can be created in due course, providing information about the tharavadus history, origin, location, etc.

In this way Wikipedia can become a mine of information for individuals who seek to learn more about the nair heritage.

It must also be kept in mind that Wikipedia is a universal online encyclopedia, and as such, the material provided must be relevant and accurate.

NOTE: It would be much appreciated if the tharavadus listed are in fact nair tharavadus, as it has been known for families in the past to adopt the surname "Nair" even though they are not of nair caste.

Please help to update and add new tharavadus to the list.

Thankyou

Nambiarm 03:42, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nambiarm, I really appreciate the additional information you have put into this article. Thanks a lot for improving the article! --Vivin Paliath (<span style="color:green" lang="ml">വിവിന് പാലിയത്</span>) 19:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Think Logically

Some one recently changed my article calling the Namboodiris "cheats" and the Nairs servants.To them I would like to say that this is an international site and donot play ur nonsense here.Historical sources tell us that the Nairs were indeed Lower than the Brahmins. No one is sure about calling them Sudras but let us assume that they were Sudras.Even in that case it is proved that they have been in the profession of warriors since the 7th century BC. So after these thousands of years calling them Sudras would be baseless. Secondly the Namboodiris are India's highest caste. It was these Namboodiris who made them warriors and also married their women folk.Although these Sambandhams were not considered marriage by them the so called lower blood of the Nairs would be enriched by the "high" Namboodiri blood.Thirdly even the kings of Kerala are Nairs. It is true that many of them were servants in the palaces and illoms and big tharavads but even in north India the poorer Kshatriyas do the same work. I feel that logically the Nairs are Kshatriyas and not Sudras. Upto you now. And those wanting to make it sound asthough the Namboodiris are cheats and Nairs untouchables clearly have no idea about history and therefore kindly enter ur comments in another paragraph rather than spoil this one. Thanks Manu

Kshatriyas and Shudras

Some have mentioned previously that Nairs may be of Shudra background. This fact seems to be false....since Namboothiris would never marry a Shudra. Indeed Nairs were Kshatriyas, being Naduvazhis and military commanders, the practitioners of Kalaripayattu. Those who claim that Nairs are shudras base their opinion on the fact that Namboothiris do not touch Nairs. However Namboothiris are considered to be the most orthodox brahmins in India, and indeed, they do not associate with even migrant brahmins like Iyers, who are also not allowed to enter into the illam of the Namboothiris. Furthermore, if Nairs are shudras, then who are the Kshatriyas in Kerala?? Varmas, and kings were in fact a type of Nair caste, and Nairs followed the occupation of the Kshatriyas, as warriors and rulers. Shudras were workers by caste, working on the lands of the lords (the Nairs). Nairs were not Shudras. Furthermore, there has also been some controversy about the origin of Nairs. Nambiars and Kurups from North Kerala, were considered to be the traditional protectors of the Namboothiris, and many believe that they were Aryans who came to Kerala along with the Namboothiris. They may or may not be of the same race as South Keralite Nairs, who are generally more darker than North Keralite Nairs. However Nambiars and Kurups are classed as Nairs because they follow the same profession as the Nairs, being warriors and naduvazhis.

Could someone please list some evidence (scientific or genetic if available) to prove that Nairs were either indigenous or migrant Aryans, or whether Nairs where a generic term used to describe people from a variety of races who pursued the same profession.

220.238.219.112 00:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The new genetic studies show(Sengupta et al. 2005 and Sahoo et al. 2006) light skin and dark skin mean nothing in Indian context. Most of the time it represented the migration of the people carrying the same Y-chromosomes at different points of history from Central Asia/West Asia/ North-West Indian subcontinent(By the way, even the dark skinned South Indians also took the same route to enter South India -Out of Africa). So if one finds light skinned South Indian then most probably it represents the migration at a later time but still could be pre-historic before any "Aryan" migration or invasion also could be much later too. So one should get over the stereotypical idea of darkskinned Malayalee = the original Malayalee, light skinned Malayalee = Namboothiri/European/Arab/Aryan contact(Aren't dark-skinned brahmins there in Kerala?). A Nair could be light skinned because there was a Namboothiri in his/her lineage also he/she could be light skinned because his/her lineage was light skinned since pre-historic times. Ideally, one should use Aryan and Dravidian terms strictly in linguistic context.

Manjunatha (24 Jan 2006)

I suppose not many genetic studies have been conducted on Kerala population. This study claims, three Kerala population groups(Nairs, Ezhavas and Muslims) form a single distinct cluster compared to two Marathi population(Konkanastha Brahmins and Marathas). http://muse.jhu.edu/cgi-bin/access.cgi?uri=/journals/human_biology/v074/74.3das.html

Manjunatha (25 Jan 2006)

Reverts/Deletes

I would appreciate it if the person(s) deleting and reverting the article would post a summary of their changes, and their reasons for reversion and deletions. This article is not here to spread a particular kind of opinion or point-of-view. We are trying to present facts. I find the sections about the origin of Nairs being constantly edited to present a more ostensibly "favourable" point-of-view. --62.68.75.2 14:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Caste system in Kerala

I wonder if anybody has given thought over or written about

1. The evolution of caste system in Kerala

As far as I know, the naduvazhi based caste system was imposed on Kerala around medieval times(13th century onwards). I wonder if that means people were free to marry anybody before that(of course, with exceptions of tribes/clans).

2. Few surnames are common between Tiyyas and Nairs. Does anybody have idea how old they are? If one considers that northern Tiyyas had Kalaris of their own, those surnames look belonging to pre-caste system Kerala.

3. In South-West Indian states except Kerala, the combined SC/ST population is around 20-25% and in North-East and Central India it's around 30-35%. However, in Kerala it's just around 11%(SC=10%, ST=1%). Does this mean late imposition of caste system in Kerala gave enough time for major chunk of population migrated at various points of history to assimilate? Or does that mean advent of Islam and Christianity absorbed most of these people(but that doesn't explain Punjab,UP and Bihar with around 20-30% of SC population but also a huge muslim population)?

4. I suppose being one of the oldest society there might have been many clans/tribes in Kerala. I wonder how much of these affinities diluted being part of the same caste. Were all Tiyyas and Nairs open to marry any person from their own caste in the past or were there exceptions? The groups though belonging to the same caste but never intermarried had any cultural differences?

Thanks for any inputs.

Manjunatha (24 Jan 2006)

Accept the TRUTH

Are you trying to Glorify Thiyyas as a Forward caste? Thiyyas were not even allowed to walk on the roads. User: NP Nair

I suppose I was talking about Malayalees before caste system. Do you have any idea how those two sentences of yours sound? Funnily, at Ezhava, people think I'm their biggest enemy.

Manjunatha (25 Jan 2006)

OTHER kind of Nair

Aren't we forgetting some dab page for the Nair hair removal product? Mike H. That's hot 05:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's funny.. (our visits were so close). I just came to the page looking for the exact same thing. drumguy⁸⁸⁰⁰ - speak? 06:29, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The rules of Manusmriti and the Nairs

The Manusmriti defines a Kshatriya as a warrior who always carries arms.The Nairs always carried a sword with them. Besides it says that if a Brahmin ever imparts any kind of knowledge to a Sudra he becomes equal to a Sudra.But the twenty one disciples of Parasurama from whom the Nairs learnt the Kalaripayattu were Brahmins.Then wouldn't they also become Sudras?And would Parasurama,the great, instruct them to teach the Nairs if they were indeed Sudras?Also the Manusmriti says that the Kshatriya brides must carry an arrow in their hand during the wedding.Nair women had Kettukalyanams before the age of 12 and during these they carried an arrow. Besides would Indias highest and most orthodox Brahmins have marital relations with them if they were Sudras? The Keralolpatti which calls them Sudras is full of contradictory statements and so we must understand that it is not very reliable.Manu

Manu Smriti also says all Dravidas are Shudras degraded from their Kshatriya position. Perhaps, that explains why there is so much controversy about any South Indian's caste position. Okay, not only Parashurama created Kerala, his disciples taught Malayalees to fight! I wonder if any non-brahmin Malayalees had read Keralolpatti until British arrived and brought Western education.

Anyway, you are contradicting brahmins by not accepting Keralolpatti. I completely support that. I'm sure, you understand that that also means you are completely rejecting caste system since theoritically caste doesn't exist if you don't agree what brahmins have to say about your position in the caste.

I'm really impressed with rational debates about validity of caste position here.

Manjunatha (4 Feb 2006) Thanks for ur comments. Anyways i donot believe the Keralolpati due to this basic reason. It contradicts its own statements. Besides, as someone mentioned before,the Namboodiris didnot touch Iyers and other brahmins.So its only natural that they call a non brahmin a sudra.Well call it reasoning of a seventeen year old, but the keralolpati is not entirely true. I am currently trying to obtain an english version of the book since i cant read malayalam and am also preparing a research paper on the Nairs.Any information,please send it to me at dark_voldemort2000@yahoo.com.Thanks Manu

Marumakkathayam

Some historians believe that the Marumakkathayam system started after the Chera-Chola wars during the second Chera empire, as Nairs lost most of their men during the war.

But this statement is not true because, then how come a brother look after his sister, when most of them died? The actual fact is that Namboothiries had sambandam with Nair ladies which produced "father less" children, gradually these children was looked after by there uncle.

Sambadams were marriages between Namboothiris and Nayar women, thus the children had a father who was a brahmin. The children of such marriages are considered to be of Nayanar caste, not specifically of Nayar (warrior, kshatriya) caste, since they also practised vegitarianism and non-violence like their paternal ancestors. Also please sign your comment. 58.105.39.43 07:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well i am not so sure about the Nayanar thing and i also agree that these Sambandhams were not proper marriages. In the poor families it was very much like concubinage. But in about 50% atleast it was a long term relation. I hate to give a personal example but my ancestor was actually taken to his Mana by her husband.This was not a Sambandham was it?Manu

Sambadams were marriages between Namboothiris and Nayar women????

As 58.105.39.43 was stating "Sambadams were marriages between Namboothiris and Nayar women", actually its not a marriage, If a Namboothiti likes a Nair girl he just give her a "Pudava" and make love with her, ironically this is called a "marriage" or "Sambandam". Usually most of the Namboothirs will have many Sambadams, and the Nair woman will have "father less children". If the woman is smart and the Namboothiri is rich she some how makes money or land out of it. and these children will get a good 'administrative post' if the namboothiri is a land lord or a king. Modern Nairs are forgeting these factors and just polishing the truth and considering ther are forward cast.

I however donot stand by this statement entirely.It is true that many of the Nair women had casual relations with the Namboodiris but if u notice,in the higher, aristocratic and more Aryanized and Kshatriya type families of the warlords and royals,this was more like a wedding.Sambandhams used to take place but they were long term relations in aristocratic families and the Namboodiri used to actually stay and father his children.Besides there was no such thing as "fatherless children".If a woman did not get the biological father to pay the delivery expenses, she would be expelled from her family.The kind of sambandhams you are talking of did exist but there were no children who didnot know their fathers.Manu

Hello mulavelil_cheriyanadu, but its true that "Marumakathayam" in Nair tharavadu was actually based on the fact above (Sambadams), but now a day Nairs wont admit it, now they are saying that marumakathayam came in existance because they lost there men in the chera-chola war, which realy is foolish and ill-logic, Chera-chola war was not in Nort Kerala! Regarding your statement "If a woman did not get the biological father to pay the delivery expenses, she would be expelled from her family". If that is the case around 80% of them get expelled.

The Chera kingdom was very much in north Kerala by the way. You say that the Nairs losing men in the war is totaly illogical.Kindly point out the so called lack of logic in that concern.The Marumakhatayam emerged to keep the wealth in the female line. Men among the Nairs ususaly didnot get much of the wealth in the family and anyways when they died it went to their maternal nieces.Their children used to get their share from their mother's house.The marumakhatayam didnot emerge because of Sambandhams. It was a part of the Nair matriarchy. And if indeed the Nairs were not a forward caste like the Ezhavas, how do you explain why the government has not placed them in reservation? On the other hand, the Ezhavas do have reservation. This is because the Nairs were rich on a general basis and were the only Savarnas other than the Namboodiris.The Ezhavas were untouchables. The only factor that could possibly call a Nair a Sudra is the Keralolpati. Other than that all their customs are seen in the Kshatriyas.This again brings us back to my point that they lost men, made their caste matriarchal, broke a major Manusmriti rule, and got called Sudra.Manu (and kindly refer to me as Manu.Thats my name)

Are you trying to Glorify Thiyyas as a Forward caste? Thiyyas were not even allowed to walk on the roads. User: NP Nair

Hello NP Nair?? (Who dont even like to display his name, thinking Nairs are great). My boy regading Nairs and Ezhavas both the cast are actually Sudras. Knowing or practicing martial arts does not mean that they were Kshatriya. Nair, Nambiar etc were only Sthana peru (Job title) which by time desended to ther offsprings.

Well the statement you have in the bracket was totally unecessary but anyways. Nairs are not Sudras sir and they were only called Sudra because they were non Brahmins.This is because the Namboodiris didnot even touch other Brahmins and considered them lowly.It is only natural that they would regard a non Brahmins as a Sudra. Besides if you read the Manusmriti you will find that there is not a single rule that the Nairs dont follow which was prescribed for Kshatriyas, except the thread ceremony.This thread ceremony is not followed by any south indian Kshatriyas.Anyways one is entitled to ones own opinion but the rational thought would be this Manu

Calling a Nayar a shudra would be like calling a military commander and ruler a menial servant. Such comments are not only absurd but a blatant disregard and even disrespect of their (the Nayar's) rich and illustrious history. I am not a Nayar myself, but I do not deny that they were Kshatriyas, and to say otherwise would be to ignore the truth. 58.105.39.43 07:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Role of uncle in matrilineal society

I was talking to my collegue otherday. He mentioned about an anthropology study based on structuralism on primitive populations. The anthropologists were trying to find out "invariants" in the societies all over the world. One of the findings of the study was that the role played by uncle in a family. Those primitive societies hardly changed since the dawn of the civilization. I think the greater role of uncle in those primitive societies perhaps gives us an interesting insight into the present matrilineal societies. Unfortunately, I don't have the full study and name of the anthropologists. I'll try to find out them. If somebody has heard about that study please share your thoughts.

In my opinion, seeing matrilineal societies in Kerala and coastal Karnataka as recent developments( only 1000 years old) is inaccurate.

Manjunatha (7 Feb 2006)

I think it's Claude Levi-Strauss. From the article;

A proper solution to the puzzle is to find a basic unit of kinship which can explain all the variations. It is a cluster of four roles--brother, sister, father, son. These are the roles that must be involved in any society that has an incest taboo requiring a man to obtain a wife from some man outside his own hereditary line. A brother can give away his sister, for example, whose son might reciprocate in the next generation by allowing his own sister to marry exogenously. The underlying demand is a continued circulation of women to keep various clans peacefully related.

Perhaps, the major role of 'uncle' might have been only during marriage of sister and then extended to many other spheres. I guess in matrilineal societies it's the uncle who plays a major role in the marriages of his niece and nephew.

Manjunatha (7 Feb 2006)

Manusmriti rules

The following rules of the Manusmriti clearly tell us that the Nairs are not Sudras. The Namboodiris who are the most orthodox Brahmins of India would have followed these rules had the Nairs been Sudras. They only called the Nairs Sudras because they were orthodox to the level that they didnt even touch other Brahmins, forget a non Brahmin. I – 91. "One occupation only the Lord prescribed to the shudra - to serve meekly even these other three castes." X – 129. "No collection of wealth must be made by a shudra even though he be able to do it; for a shudra who has acquired wealth gives pain to Brahmana."(then how do u explain the rich Nairs and the kings?)VIII – 270. "A shudra who insults a twice born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin."(In Kerala this was the punishment given to all below Nair, namely Ezhava, Thiya etc)XII. 4. "If the shudra intentionally listens for committing to memory the veda, then his ears should be filled with (molten) lead and lac; if he utters the veda, then his tongue should be cut off; if he has mastered the veda his body should be cut to pieces."(Nair women used to study the ancient scriptures and Sanskrit.) Well one can only assume that the highly orthodox Namboodiris only called Nairs Sudras because they were non Brahmins.However one more explanation is possible.This theory is mine and its only a probability.The Nairs,like all Kshatriyas fulfill the requirements of the Manusmriti except the sacred thread ceremony which none of the south Indian Kshatriyas right from the Marathas of Maharasthra follow.I believe they were indeed considered Kshatriyas but due to the continuous warfare between the Cheras and others, where many of their men died, they decided to make their caste matriarchal and female dominated.This is strictly prohibited by the Manusmriti which says that a man who gives power and independence to a woman is a Sudra himself. Maybe that is why the Namboodiris call the Nairs Sudra, because they broke a major rule and apparently degraded themselves.Manu

WE Hindus follow Vedas, not "Manusmriti". We all know that Manusmriti is made by a Brahnmin for Bhramins. If you realy know the subject you come to know that it is written in favor of Brahmins. Dont take Manusmriti as a basis to compare Nairs and other casts. Study Vedas and write here.

"II-32. (The second part of) a brahmin’s (name) shall be (a word) implying happiness, of a kshatriya’s (word) implying protection, of a Vaishya’s (a term) expressive of thriving, and of a shudra’s (an expression) denoting service."

from these quoting from Manusmrith, then Nairs should be Shudra!!

Very well. Can you kindly enlighten me with a Nair name that denotes service? As far as i know, they were the only people who were allowed the names of Gods other than the Namboodiris. Besides you seem to be forgetting the first part of that very statement very conviniently. It says "let the name of a Sudra express something contemptible. Kindly inform me about a contemtible name.Manu

The Manusmriti may profess certain unacceptable rules and also project Brahmins as the best but still the entire caste system is based on this Manusmriti and we are discussing the Nairs with relation to that. That is why I have mentioned everything with relation to the Manu's rules.The entire caste system being based on that I have but little option than to relate to that. And kindly sign ur statements.Manu

What I don't understand is why the Ezhava article shows Ezhavas as being "quite aristocratic and powerful", when in reality they were suppressed to undertake labour till recent times, whereas in the Nair article, one receives the impression that they were sudras, or somehow inpure or incomplete Kshatriyas, described as "untouchable" in the "Kshatriyas or Sudras?" subsection. The Ezhava article has little mention of Ezhava untouchability or historical subordination.

Why are people trying to degrade the Nair race? Speculation such as Nairs- "Kshatriyas or Sudras?" is just as farce as saying bananas-"fruit or vegetable?". The Nairs were rulers, Naduvazhis, upon whom the Varmas (a type of Nair!) and other kings were totally reliant on. They were military generals, commanders and valiant warriors. If they were not Kshatriyas, then the term Kshatriya has no meaning.

220.238.223.47 10:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that.True that many Ezhava families were aristocratic but on a general basis they were not and besides aristocratic or not,they were untouchables. Also i donot agree with the statement 'Nairs are Sudras' because it is highly illogical.One may say that the caste system in the recent past has never been logical.Even that way the Nair's cant have been Sudras because then they would not have been allowed to rule and govern by India's highest and most orthodox Brahmins, the Namboodiris. I feel,logically, that they are indeed like any other Kshatriyas in south India, excepting that they are matriarchal, and they were just called Sudras because they were non Brahmins. The Namboodiris didnt touch even other Brahmins, leave alone a Non Brahmin Manu