Talk:Nair/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

hiding and evading the sudra epithet (moved here from my talk page)

Every caste has a tendency to glorify itself and to project a better image however this should not be a reason to blind or prejudice oneself while critically examining facts.Before this Kindly refer to a) anthropological reasearch articles from Kathleen glough, praveena kodoth and others b) history of chera kingdom 3) religious heirarchy as explained by brahmanas and the older generation without an intention to twist it to suit ones imagery of nairs.

Socio-religious background: The keralolpathi describes and classifies nairs as sudras and clearly describes nair as sudras who accompanied the nambudiris in to kerala. It is only people of our generation who have a problem for this acceptance and try to get a kshatriya epithet. You may ask any learned nambudiri or anyone from any of the nair castes from an older generation and they will tell you nairs had been classified as sudras. Let us examine the background of this.

Brahmanas, kshatriyas and vaishyas are dwija or they have a yajnopaveetham or poonol and have shodasha samskaras (16 samskaras). Nairs donot have all the 16 samskaras, donot have the right to wear the yajnopaveetham and seved as servile classes to both brahmanas and kshatriyas. Therefore classified as sudras. Before trying to use the vernacular and glossary and argument with "dharma" manusmriti etc to support ones case, please remember that in the parashuramakshetra which includes kerala the smriti that is applicable is not manusmriti but shankarasmriti so lets leave the smriti out of it.

Strange Historical background:

During the Early chera period earlier to 3th century we donot see any record of nambudiris.There is no clear picture of the political history and administration in the Chera kingdom of Kongu during this period when they were subordinate to the Chaalookyaas. The earlier Sangham works and inscriptions would suggest that at least during the close of the Sangham age, some members of the Chera royal family lived in the capital, Karur (Salem district of Tamil Nadu) while others ruled in Tondi and Muziris.

However third and ninth centuries of the Christian era, i.e., the close of the early historical period in the history of South India, described by historians as the "Sangam Age", and establishment of a later Chera kingdom at Mahodayapuram. There is a solitary reference to the northernmost, and thus possibly the oldest, of these settlements, namely Chellur or Perumchellur or Taliparamba, in the Tamil "Sangam" literature with a Vedic sacrificial background and the Parasurama tradition; but the rest of them are clearly products of a later period.Sufficiently prosperous were present by the beginning of the ninth century, when the Chera kingdom was ruling over Kerala from Mahodayapuram.Inscription from this periods points that Gramam (village) was synonymous with the temple and vice-versa as so many agrarian corporations centered around the temples. In fact, much of the agrarian land in Kerala was under the control of thirty-two Gramams or the several Upagramams they had - at least that is the impression that we gather from the inscriptions of the period. With such Brahmanical control of land and the population dependent on that land, it is not surprising that Kerala came to be known as brahmakshatram or where Brahmanans wielded the power of Kshatriyas.Historians unanimously agree that under the Cheras of Mahodayapuram was in reality a Brahmanan oligarchy and that the Brahmanans constituted the real power behind the throne. And, there was indeed a council of Brahmanans in the Chera capital known as the Nalu Tali, the memory of which survives in four temples of Melttali, Keezhtali, Netiya Tali and Chingapuram Tali.

The cheras themselves did not have yajnopaveetham or poonol and were not considered "kashatriyas" unlike the kashatriyas in other parts of india.However the vedic culture and lifestyle of the nambudiri brahmanas were fast being absorbed in kerala. Kerala was thus a land of sudra kings. However later Kolathiri Raja, Udayavarman, wished to wear "Yajnopaveetham" ("Poonool" or sacred thread) by performing "Hiranyagarbham". Since the Namboothiris were not prepared, Udayavarman brought 237 ["Sagara" refers to this number according to "Paralpper" families of Illams from Gokarnam on Kalidinam "Pujyomara sree bhupena", i.e., 1422511, and settled them in five Desams, Cheruthazham, Kunniriyam, Arathil, Kulappuram and Vararuchimangalam of Perinchelloor Graamam. This was in 1617 AD (792 ME) corresponding to 3894 of Yugaabdam. They believe that they came to Gokarnam from Abhischathra in Paanchaala. All are Sivolly Tulu Braahmanans. They belonged to four Gothrams and 14 Grihams of Edukunchi, Vilakkoor and Gunavantham Graamams of Gokarnam. It is said that King Mahendravarman of Gokarnam requested to construct a "Chira" (embankment) at Chirakkal within 24 hours for the "Snanam" (bathing) of these 237 Braahmanans, and King Udayavarman did it. Later, the then Travancore Raja brought 185 of these Saagara families to Thiruvalla. They are generally called Thiruvalladesi Embraanthiris. All of them follow the customs of Namboothiris.

So the present day royal houses of kerala have themselves acquired a kashatriya status in a controversial manner through hiranyagarbham (the official ceremony to convert a sudra in to a Kshatriya within the context of the vedic culture)by non nambudir brahmanas.

The nair comunity represented people who were soldiers,agrarians (mostly) as well as servants. They acquired long term tenancy (kanams) to agrarian lands from nambudiris.However sexual favours were being forced within the sambandham system by nambudiri landlords and to prevent misdemeneaour the one of the later chera kings even had to issue a proclamation prevent nambudiris from having sambandham with nair women under their tenancy. However over a period of time long term tenancy turned in to ownership and many nairs also acquired ownership of vast tracts of lands and became landlord and janmis. (One such recorded example is in south malabar during the time of tipu´s invasion when long term nair tenants payed tax in the absence of janmis and hence got the land in their names and became janmis themselves)

I am a nair myself however one has to keep the tendency of over projecting ourselves (nairs) as kshatriyas just because they were many nairs in military services of the king or a few families in royal ministries in the last 300-400 years. We have neither the religious sanction nor do we have concrete historical backing for anything other than being called agrarians or a servile class of which a few have wielded soci-political influence from the past till present day. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sandeep1978 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC).

Rite now i cant really ans to all that...nevertheless i wud like to correct the statement that many nairs were in the military service etc....read the old history books....nairs were the primary military caste and the armies themselves were called nair patalams etc....n speaking of the kshatriya sudra thing we have discussed it many times and i believe a consensus has been agreed upon...so nobody is actually bothered with the sudra kshatriya status....its getting quite monotonous now.,...the same old things being repeated....so lets leave that out...and sambandham enabled brahmins to several sexual escapades but it had other more important intentions behind it as well....one of the quotes towards the end in the articlw will give u the idea....neways thanks for posting....but sign ur posts the next time....Manu

Lets get some facts straight. Yes Sambandhams allowed Brahmins to have "sexual escapades" but it was also a form of strengthening alliances between Janmimar Nayars and aristocratic Nambuthri families through a marital bond, no matter how informal the marriage ceremony might have been. The "informal marriage" of Sambandham was the mainstay for Nayars, even if a Nayar man was wedding a Nayar lady. Kshatriyan 08:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Tell me why such "strengthening of alliances" and marital bonds was not achieved by Janmimar Nayar Men having Sambandham with Namboothiri women? Why did not Sambandham allow Nayars to have "Sexual Escapades" with Namboothiri women?59.93.222.166 05:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

For two simple reasons. 1) Brahmins were considered a "higher caste" than Nairs and only a "higher" caste man was able to marry a "lower" caste woman, not the other way around. Not this was the case all around India, not only Kerala, as various Kshatriya princesses in Northern India could be wedded to Brahmins. This is from Varna in Hinduism article: "While intermarriage between Brahmana bridegrooms and Kshatriya princesses was extremely common (even sanctioned by the later Manu Smriti), in many instances, marriages between Kshatriya princes and Brahmana brides was also observed (severely condemned by Manu Smriti). One of such instances is marriage of Yayati, a Kshatriya King, with Devayani, a daughter of the sage Shukracharya." 2) Nairs were matrilinear, therefore even if the husband of a Nair was Brahmin, the children would become Nairs. If a Nair man wedded a Brahmin lady, the children would not belong in either caste, since Brahmins are patrilinear.

Of course these barriers have been broken down today.

Kshatriyan 07:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Barriers broken???? Then why do you prefer not to marry from outside your community? Why your general secretary endorse brahmin priests and not priests from non-brahmin communities? The barrier is still strong and getting stronger. The above eg quoted is about a Brahmin marrying a kshatriya and not a sudra. The Sambandham (Nambuthiri-Nair) custom is unique and not found anywhere else in India - Malayali —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.80.95.171 (talk) 18:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

Why should the barriers be broken? Matrilinear relations with the brahmins modified the genetic structure of the Nairs. The y-chromosome of both the communities would be almost identical. The race of nairs-or brahminised nairs- that was produced thus would be fairer and with many other "desirable attributes" such as scholastic aptitude etc. (I would even go to the extent of saying that the "martial" nature of the nair caste was systematically neutralised/diluted with such cross-fertilisation.) In either case , "Sambandham" was of advantage to the Nairs, in comparison with the modern day "love marriages" , which, in many cases involves matrimony with Ezhavas and other lower castes. The genetic gains for the Nairs, in these latter cases, will be negative when measured against the Brahminical standards. The offsprings will not be as good-looking, intelligent and attractive as in the cases of the men and women born of Sambandham.( In addition, they may even inherit the inferirity complex and other attitudes that the lower castes may have accummulated over the many centuries of ostracism.) Scientific studies have confirmed the tendency of species to improve the quality of offspring through selective mating practices..(The concept may be hilarious, but "genetic auditing" seems to be part of the procreational behaviour of all living things!) "Sambandham" may have been one of such social strategies to find the right mate.( Going by the same logic, an Ezhava or any other lower caste man/woman wanting a spouse from the upper castes, may be displaying similiar tendencies!)If the barriers are advantageous, there's nothing wrong in retaining them.Placedream 05:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Placedream, the so-called "lower" and "higher" castes that you mention was an unfortunate result of oppression and segregation in the past. According to the Manusmriti which mentions the idea of "caste", it is determined by one's actions and nature, not by birth or lineage. There is absolutely no scientific evidence to prove that Brahmins are more studious, better looking, attractive and less "martial" and that so-called "lower" castes are less intelligent, attractive. Malayali, there are some barriers of caste remaining in society, but everyone would agree that times have certainly changed over the past 200 years when untouchability and discrimination was the norm. A lot of Nairs and Ezhavas are intermarrying today, something which was unheard of in the past, however these last "barriers" are all that remain. As I mentioned, it is allowed for a Brahmin man to marry a Kshatriya woman (or a woman who belongs to royalty/aristocracy). The debate about Kshatriya/Sudra debate is insignificant in this instance. Hence it was allowed for Nambuthris to marry the Nair ladies but not vice versa.

Kshatriyan 11:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

"MAANUSHAN SAMEEPICHAAL MAANUSHANASHUDHIYO ?

MAANIKALUDE MIDHYA GRANDHANGAL CHEENTHI THALLOOO.."

The lines quoted above are from a poem by the late Vallathol Narayana Menon, based on a theme from the Jataka Tales, and are said to have been pronounced by The Buddha at a Banquet.Translation:"How can the touch of one human be polluting to another? Who says so? Tear off your sacred texts (Manusmriti?) that urge you such.". (The Lord had just witnessed a caste ritual.) Kshatra-Thiyyan 00:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

It should be noted that the Manusmriti, although defining what type of person belongs to a caste (e.g. studious person being a Brahmin, etc.) does not advocate caste discrimination. As it has been mentioned, "caste" was supposed to be based on one's actions, not one's ancestry, therefore the hereditary caste system and untouchability were products of society and was not advocated by sacred texts.Kshatriyan 10:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

My dear friend, have n't you heard of Shambukan, the sudran who was performing "Tapas"? The sudran was stopped on his tracks by "maryada Purushothaman" Sri Raman himself!Apparently, a sudran, who is not a "Dwija" or twice-born does n't have a right to perform austrities!(You can imagine the plight of Sri Narayanan, Chattambi Swamikal, Chinmayananda etc if Sri Raman had applied the same yardstick!)Scriptures also prohibit a "chandala" or an outcaste from aspiring for "Swarga" or paradise. You have certainly heard of "Trishanku Swarga".As an aside, a number of people who defined what's called modern day hinduism hailed from the deowntrodden communities. Valmiki, for instance , was a hunter or "Nishada" by caste. Veda Vyasan was the son of a fisherwoman or "Dheevara". So, the authors of both Ramayana and Mahabharata were SC/ST by modern standards!What else do you have? What opinions do our "genetic auditors" have on this? Valmiki /Vyasa lacked in "scholastic aptitude"? Truly so, perhaps, if the term refers to muugging up nonsense from the "sacred" texts! Kshatra-Thiyyan 04:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Regret the digression from the central theme. Nevertheless, the posers above need be addressed. "Genetic Auditing" was there; an illustrating case would be the birth of Pandu and Dhritarashtra.

Ambika, Princess of Kashi could n't stand the reviling sight of Veda Vyasan who was brought in by Bhishma to copulate with her. She covered her face in disgust, while mutely succumbing to the sage's sexual advances.As a result , it's said, the mighty Dhritarashtra was born blind!Princess Ambalika, on the other hand turned so pale at the loathsome sight of her prospective bedmate- Sage Vyasa,again- that her son Pandu was born with a severe affliction of leukoderma!

At least the Mahabharatha says so. Now, were n't the Kshatriya princesses exercising their preference (or the lack of it!) for a mate? Pandu did n't have any offsprings, whereas his half-brother did procreate prolifically (One hundred sons and a daughter off his Queen Gandhari, to start with). Thus Vyasan's genes found expression in Duryodhana & co, whose entire brood was wiped out in the great battle at Kurukshetra. The fisherwoman's son, i.e Veda Vyasan, did ,however,influence the genetics of the long lineage of Kings in the Aryavarta, through Yuyutsu,-progeny of Dhritarashtra through a Sudra woman- who was to inherit the Kingdom once the Pandavas gave it up.(That speaks volumes about the racial purity of the royales!)

But the basic questions remain.

1.Was casteism so rampant during the epic periods?(as it is today, in modern Kerala!) If so, how could anyone even conceive the very idea that a royal lady could be officially impregnated by a low caste man, notwithstanding that he was a genius?

2.Vyasa was a sage, a man of learning, proficient in the Vedas and Upanishads; in other words it was possible for a low caste (or half caste, as in this case) to study and interpret the scriptures. The same applies to Valmiki of the Treta Yuga, a Nishada by birth.(It was an irony that the Nishada offered refuge to the Kshatriya Princess Sita, who was in an advanced stage of pregnancy and who had been abandoned by her husband, Maryada Purushothaman Sri Raman!) Does n't this contradict the dictum that a Sudra could n't perform austerities, aspire for a heavenly abode etc etc. (All those things came about much much later, i.e. when our Kuttappan Namboothiripadu and Thankappan Iyengar started re-writing the sacred texts to suit their own purposes.Valmiki Ramayana and Vyasa Bharata, which might have been pure poetry in its original form, were adulterated to such an extent that the original themes were embellished and modified to beyond recognition except perhaps by the most careful and discerning reader. But that's natural. As someone had stated here. all things disintegrate and decay in accordance with the second law of Thermodynamics!)

Similiary, while the guardians are justified in their concern that their boy/girl must n't be led astray by miscreants proffering "love beyond barriers", it might be counter productive to dissuade ,say,a Nair/Namboothiri girl from going ahead with the man of her choice,irrespective of whether he is a low caste pulaya or a high caste Varma.(One should n't bring in a Veda Vyasan whom she dislikes!)The couple completed the "genetic auditing" when they fell in love- granted it's true love and not a craving born of dubious intentions such as designs to set right the world!(Oru Jaati, Oru Matham...stuff, for example)Let nature take its own course.

Also, problems arise when there's demand for egalitarianism in matters of the heart. Stuff like "Oru Jaati, Oru Matham, Oru Daivam" etc should n't be strutted about.All said and done,X's decision to choose Y as her/his partner,applies to X and Y alone, on the first place.Everything else is secondary.And, of course,questions such as "Why do n't you marry outside your community?" do not deserve a response beyond the contempt that the questioner begs for. Awayanode 08:44, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Awayanode. I don't expect any response from you. I was just responding to Kshathriyan saying the caste barriers still exist. It's not only with your community but exists all over India, and I am not concerned whether you marry within or outside the community - User: Malayali

You're right Mr.'Malayali'. The caste syndrome still exists, nevertheless, it is not just one-way anymore. I mean, it is a fallacy that the caste factor is driven ONLY by the so called higher castes. With the onset of dalit and OBC empowerment, the reverse 'utouchability' has also surfaced. Will any OBC (who is supposed to be a follower of 'oru jathi..oru daivam') will marry from a poor higher caste family. No way! Then why this hypocrisy. It is better to say that you follow caste system and keep your ideology in your pocket.

Nairs, as a community, have contributed maximum for the subsistence of the small piece of land called Keralam. There wouldn’t have been a title called Malayali (your beautiful user name) but for the century war fought by the Nair (chavers), to save the chera kingdom from annihilation at the hands of a mighty chola empire. Losing most of their men folk in the war would have lead to practices like ‘Sambandham’. - User: Keraleeyan

Hello Keraleeyan, A malayali is the native of Kerala who speaks Malayalam language. If you are not aware, Malayalam is derived from Tamil with Sanskrit influence contributed by Nambuthiris. I am proud to be a Malayali and use that as my 'username'. It has nothing to do with any wars you are talking about. Kerala was protected by it's geography and the hill tribes and not by your chavers. Kunjali Marakkar and his muslim soldiers had to help the weak samuthiris to defeat portugese. Where were these chavers? There is no clear evidence on the Chera empire and those centuries. You can tell these stories to school kids.

Keralam means the land of Kera (coconuts) and it's believed that Ezhavas brought coconuts from Srilanka and planted here. It's a story which I don't believe and have no problem in you using the username Keraleeyan :)

I never said caste system is driven only Savarna castes. It exists even with Adivasis. It's not mandatory that only Ezhavas or thiyyas should follow the teachings to SNG. It's open for everyone. Majority don't follow this. Ezhavas don't follow because it's not easy. Nairs don't follow because SNG is not from your caste.. (there are people who think beyond caste and had become his followers including Nairs)

The user Kshathiyan always states that the Varna is determined by an individual's action and not by his ancestory. I agree 100% to it.. And I also guess he is into military or police force.

Malayali, a proud malayali.

Thanks for giving me the definition of ‘malayali’ and ‘keraleeyan’. I salute your knowledge! I am not a chaver or even a Nair. Being a ‘Malayali’, I am an enthusiast of Kerala history that’s all. If you haven’t heard about the century long war between the cheras and cholas, you have none but yourself to blame. That brings out the fact that how profound your knowledge is in Kerala history. If Kerala was protected by the hill tribes, do you have any references to substantiate this. Who were those great tribals who protected kerala ?(must be Janus’s great grand father:-)) Regarding Kunjali Makikkar, he was not a protector of the people, he waged a war with the Portuguese for regaining the lost supremacy in the Arabian sea. This was basically for the monopoly over spice trade. As a community, it is Nairs and Thiyas (of n.malabar) who have contributed and sacrificed maximum for the people of Kerala. The Ezhavas of south kerala were a servile community whose occupation was mainly toddy tapping. SNG has not invented any new ideas to the world, he was just reciting what was already told in the Upanishads and Vedas. The ezhavas today has made him nothing but a Poster ‘Guru’. They do floral tributes to him and do everything which he has told not to do. Conceptually and in practice, the ezhavas have crucified him. P.S. It is not ezhavas who brought coconut to Kerala. Since coconut trees were in abundance in Kerala, they migrated from srilanka to climb on that and tap toddy.. :-) User:Keraleeyan

Why should the Nairs follow Sree Narayanan? Or, for that matter , why should anyone follow anyone else? Do n't you have your five senses, and , what's more important, don't you have what's called the rational faculty? While one assents to the notion that reasoning has little place in understanding of what's beyond reason, most of the rot that mendicants like Sri Narayanan churned out have little to do with "what's beyond" so that one's reasoning power is enough to see through the gamut. A rational man can, with a little familiarity with Sanskrit literature, figure out that the "great teachings" are little more than translations of what 's given in the Vedas and Upanishads.So, where's the originality? Sree Narayanan was little more than a social worker who was indeed touched by the abysmal conditions to which casteism had reduced people. He has certainly resuscitated the Ezhava community, and that's about all. Let's not make a great "Guru" or "God" out of a very ordinary man who was compassionate,audacious and had a love for learning.

Having five senses is not enough. You should be able to understand. When you talk about Sri Narayana Guru you should also consider the social situation of those times. He was able to install God Shiva (Shiva Prathista) which none (non-brahmin) dared to do. It's not a simple thing. God is love, compassion, blah blah.. He possessed all these. I don't know your understanding about god.. God is within us. Thathwamasi. He (SNG) could understand that and hence did "Kannadi Prathista" later. His influence had not only revived Ezhavars, but also other communities, which you will never agree. Anyway no point discussion all these here.

Hi Keraleeyan.. calling Ezhavars "Toddy tappers" is just like calling Nairs "Sudra" and abusing them with Sambadham talks.. Toddy tapping was done only by Thiyyas and Ezhavas in Kerala. It's NOT that they did only Toddy tapping. They were Farmers, Landlords, Ayurvedic Physicians, Warriors, Businnes men.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.80.95.171 (talk) 21:15, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

Attribution

The origins section is sorely in need of references. My access to Kerala sources are rather limited. Anyone in India or in Kerala have access to better sources? If you are able to get some, please add as many as you can to the article. Also, there is the issue with Kshatriya Dharma. While in principle I agree that Nairs performed the duties of Kshatriyas, we cannot add it to the article without proper citation. --vi5in^[talk] 15:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello there,

http://www.education.kerala.gov.in/englishmedium/historyeng/chapter8.pdf#search=%22pulappedi%22

You can reference the official version from the govt of kerala, where it’s clear nairs are not kshatriyas. But majority of the troops under the medieval Hindu kingdoms were called Nayar.

It also says 'With an increase in the number of Naduvazhis and with the growing importance of militarism, a major section of the soldiers turned Nayars. Different professional groups like Ambalavasis, Kammalas became Nayars when they joined the troops'

You will be able to further reconfirm this if you look for kshatriyas at the matrimonial adverts in http://www.bharatmatrimony.com/.

Hope this helps --Anirud1 13:29, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

How does it help? What 's 'official' need not always be true.89.240.62.169 18:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)