Talk:Bhumihar/Archive 1

Accuracy dispute

Is the Ranvir Sena a Bhumihar group? Is Mleccha commonly used for Bhumihar's? Traditionally it was just a derogatory term for foreigners.

Ranvir Sena is indeed a bhumihar militia Charvak 19:57, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Are the people listed Bhumihars ? Laloo Prasad Yadav, Mulayam Singh Yadav, and Rabri Devi are all Yadavs.

Arun 07:23, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

These three persons donot belong to Bhumihar caste, they are Yadav. Bhumihars were never called Mleccha - calling Bhumihars (or any other human being) as Mleccha is not fair. I being originally a native Bihar (before its bifurcation into Bihar and Jharkhand), I have several friends of different social groups, castes, and religions, including several ones belonging to Bhumihar caste, I just presented a brief clarification. Shortly, I will add more contents to the article. And, in an encyclopedic writing, "Sri" (equivalent to Mr. in English) is not required to be put before the name unless that is part of the full name. As such, in redlines in the article, "Sri" should be removed as may be required. --Bhadani 13:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To Editors

I would request the editors to please note that we are contributing to an encyclopedia and not writing a personal perspective of an issue. --Bhadani 16:13, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bhumihars have been classified as Bhumihar Brahmin in several references including this link: Bhumihar Brahmins. Over next few weeks, I will slowly contribute to this page to strengthen the contents. --Bhadani 16:24, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Dear editors, particularly anonymous – please refrain from doing vandalism. I will have to protect the page, if unverified information is pushed into the article. --Bhadani 16:07, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No personal views please

Recent edits containing personal views and opinions are being suitably modified. --Bhadani 14:45, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting page protection

In view of persistent vandalism of the page/ pushing of POVs/ unreferecned information, and so on, I am requesting for protection of the page. I would request the interested editors to discuss the contents, for inclusion in the article. As an administrator, I am no protecting the page myself, as I have remianed involved here as an editor. Thanks. --Bhadani 08:43, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As the article stands right now: really sad that people do not try to build consensus on contentious issues. And, several sentences in Hindi, without giving suitable translation, is an injustice to other users of wikipedia. Kindly, do not use the freedom which wikipedia provides you airing for your personal views. Thanks. --Bhadani 14:27, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

Bhumihar finds reference in modern times only .The theory is that some shudras were elevated to the rank of brahmins by a king in Bihar who had disputes with brahmins.The evidence which support it is that they have subcastes like domkatar(dom with weapon),dholbajja(drum beaters),Dugamia(literally meaning bastards).In indian context to know about the true status of castes one must dig into the subcastes which reveals more about their real origin.All claims of links with Parshuram and budhist returning to hindu fold is nothing but mere bullshit.

I rolled back the page, and restored above contents, as talk page should have most of the discussions. --Bhadani 15:08, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Plz don't edit or remove contents without reasons

What are the subcastes of Bhumihar

Ms Bhadani ,Charvak and neo who are engaged in editing on this page should better give list of subcastes of Bhumihar,because it is known to everyone in bihar that Domkatar,Dugmaiya and Dholbajja are subcastes of Bhumihars.Why should a brahmin identify theselves with Doms and Why not these facts lead to the logical conclusion that Bhumihars are derieved from Doms.Plz come out with reasons before editing - (comments by 202.177.144.131)

To Charvak

Dear Editor plz don't try to hide facts.It is a known fact that bhumihars indeed have these subcastes.With regard to your comments on Ranvir Sena they include Rajputs too whom you are trying to overlook by calling it Bhumihar militia.I think Charvak is trying to divert attention in what is called the Bhumihar Pench(Bhumihar Diversion tact or screw) by misleading the administrator and editors by feigning ignorance about existence of these subcastes (comments by 202.177.144.131)

Dear anonymous,
No need to call me names. I am not from bihar and I have no idea who bhumihars are. I merely ask you to give evidence. Now for ranvir sena, I thing its primarily bhumihar group but may have few person from other upper castes. Now, for your subcastes comment. I did search domkatar, dugmaiya in google and I didnt found any material that says they are bhumihar.
Now lay down your hookah and tell us what you know.Charvak 23:46, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nice Mr Charvak you have accepted that you don't know who bhumihars are. Let me tell you People of Bihar and Bhumihars anywhere on earth knows these are their subcastes. It is ridiculous that you tried to find it on google.Google is a search engine which includes information submitted on net and these informations Bhumihars want to hide to project their superfluous image. Sometimes they project one thing and another time another thing. I am putting it in the article again and you won't edit it without giving logic for it. (comments by 61.246.188.179 on 21.11.05)

Are bhai aap ko bujhata nahi hai. (Brother, cant you understand) Look at the history of this page. I have not edited once. You are saying that everyone knows domkatar are bhumihar then it should be piece of cake for you to prove. Instead of you giving evidence you are using Bhumihar pench tactics. And brother, let me assure you everyone uses google to do research. Charvak 16:37, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stepping aside for few weeks

To all editors – dear ones, I shall be stepping aside from edits and discussions pertaining to Bhumihar for few weeks. All other editors, including anonymous ones, should surely continue to inter-act and contribute. However, I would suggest this being an encyclopedia, everyone should strive to give factual edits. Moreover, decency in discussions and edits may kindly be maintained. Thanks. --Bhadani 13:27, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To anonymous

Are Bhai, tum bahut theeth ho. (Brother, you are very stubborn). I noticed you added external links which has nothing to do with bhumihars. Rantings of few bhumihars and anti-bhumihar on a discussion board does not belong in this article. I am going to delete it. Charvak 20:29, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Historical reference of domkatars

About this time, Mahatma Kabir, the well known poet and philosopher lived at Maghar in this district.

It is said that before the advent of the leading Rajput clans, there were the local Hindus and Hindu Rajas in the districts and they are said to have supplanted the aboriginal tribes like Bhars, Tharus, Domes and Domekatars, whom general tradition declares to have been the early rulers, atleast after the fall of ancient kingdoms and this appearance of the Buddhist faith. These Hindus included the Sarvariya Brahmans and Visen. This was the state of the Hindu society in the district before the arrival of the Rajputs from the west. In the middle of the 13th century the Srinetra was the newcomer to have first established in this reign. Their chief, Chandrasen, expel the Domkatar from the eastern Basti. The Kalhans Rajput of Gonda province established themselves in Pargana Basti. South of the Kalhans country lay Nagar, Ruled by a Gautam Raja. There was also an ailed clan in Mahuli known as Mahsuiyas are Rajputs of Mahso.

retrieved from history of basti http://basti.nic.in/profile.htm

(Above are comments by 61.246.188.179 on 22.11.05)

Notice to administrator

someone nicked neo1 is persistently removing contents from this page without giving any reason.please do take some step to avoid it.

When adding comment please dont add space before the first word of your comment. There is a bug in wikipedia which messes the formatting. And in the end of your comment add four tilde. This will add your username beside the commentCharvak 23:23, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pasted on discussion from History

There were several factors which made Magadh so special.From time immemorial Magadh has produced fierce warriors,mighty conquerors, outstanding thinkers and gifted intellectuals. When we look in the Indian context we find that states like Rajasthan which have a great military tradition but minimal intellectual development.Similarly a state like Bengal which has produced several great intellectuals but has no military legacy. But in the case of Magadh if it produced Parashuram it also produced Valmiki, Chandragupta and Chanakya,Ashok and Mahavir and so on not to mentionAjatshatru and Buddha.Secondly Magadh had a great seat of learning like Nalanda.Therefore it produced the best intellectual capital in the world. But the most important factor was the presence of a great caste known as Magadh Brahmins which is today called BHUMIHAR. The ancient Bhumihars lived by a code of conduct.They were not only brilliant scholars but also outstanding soldiers.The greatest amongst them was Parashuram.He was the one who started this tradition which lives on to this day. In ancient Magadh Bhumihars either became great scholars or pursued careers in the military and rose to powerful positions. During the reign of AshokaBuddhism became the state religion of India.Bhumihars who were holding high civil and military posts converted to Buddhism.This was only a tactical move.Pushyamitra,a Bhumihar went on to become the supreme commander of the Mauryan army. In a military coup the Mauryan rule was ended. Those Bhumihars which had earlier converted to Buddhism came back to the Vaishnav fold. The Bhumihars declared Buddha to be an incarnation of Vishnu.That was the beginning of the end of Buddhism in India. The next great dynasty which that ruled Magadh were the Guptas.In this era also Bhumihars excelled in every field. During the British rule Bhumihars tried to keep pace with the times. Even when our country was relieved of British rule the first Chief Minister of Bihar was a Bhumihar, Shri Krishna Sinha. Hence we have not only had an impact on our state but also our nation.We not only banished Buddhism but also championed the cause of Vaishnavism. During the Tretayug there lived a great scholar and a great warrior by the name of PARASHURAM. He is widely regarded as the greatest Brahmin of all time and the sixth incarnation of Vishnu. Parashuram lived in Magadh and he wanted to end the atrocities of the Kshatriyas[Rajputs]all over Aryavarta. Hence he initiated the high class Brahmins of Magadh to take up arms and defend the dignity and identity of Brahmins. After creating an elite military force Parashuram went on a rampage. He defeated one Kshatriya army after the other. Parashuram destroyed no fewer than 21 Kshatriya kingdoms. He became the ultimate scourge of the Kshatriyas. Parashuram and his followers became one of the greatest military forces to inhabit India. The areas controlled by Parashuram stretched from Avantidesh[PUNJAB] in the north to Andhradesh[ANDHRAPRADESH] in the south, from Marathwada[Maharashtra] in the west to Magadh[BIHAR] in the east. Hence Parashuram was the creator of the WARRIOR-BRAHMIN caste. Warrior Brahmins in PUNJAB are known as MOHYALS, in ANDHRAPRADESH as NEOGIS, in MAHARASHTRA as CHITPAVANS and in BIHAR as BHUMIHARS. Even after thousands of years the geographical location and the area of domination remains intact of the above mentioned castes. Parashuram was a holy warrior not an empire builder.He fought for the honour of Brahmins. He showed exemplary courage and great intellect and above all tremendous leadership qualities to champion the cause of Brahmins.

I have removed it from the main article and pasted it on discussion because it is nothing more than what is believed to be trumpetting by bhumihars for following reasons.

you have taken the name of rajputs as Kshatriya during that time-it is not proved yet.
Parshuram was Bhargav gotra brahmin,there is no proof that his progeny were excommunicated.
bhumihars have subcastes like Domkatar,dogmaiya,dholbajja,which you have tried to evade from discussing.
whenever you try to edit this page again do come with answers for all the questions and not merely keep on trumpetting your unilateral views. These views are enough on your caste sponsered sites plese keep it limited there alone..

Brother. Can you use show preview button before posting the comment. Thank you Charvak 00:06, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]