Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Caste. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. erc talk/contribs 06:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
A clarification to the word "Caste"
Dear ERC, I would like to highlight some clarification on the meaning of Caste in Hindu context. This is just a clarification of the word and should not lead to any controversies as this is not against any particular person or religion nor affecting sentiments. You may like to add this under the definitions.
The original Sanskrit word for Caste is "Jati" which actually means Categorisation. This categorisation is applicable not only to the human beings but also to animals, plants, metals, lands.. and so on, physical as well as abstract elements. Unfortunately, this word has been treated associated with religion only. This was basically a socio-economic concept, developed around 1000 BC (?), later on distorted into wrong practices of discrimination by the then social and political leaders. The generations of people which failed to understand the real application of this, used this logic to divide the society. This is an excellent example of how a genuine scientific concept could be ruined. Definition of "Brahmin" in the Puranas is "Yaha Brahmam janati, saha Brahmanaha" meaning, the one who is knowledgeable is a Brahmin. This is irrespective of the birth, origin, profession...
Categorisation of society evolved through the economic & political studies undergoing in the ancient days. The purpose of social categorisation was to study the society on economic and social fronts whereby similar demographic, behavioural, cultural and economic matching could be done in order to either govern them or systematise the social relationship system like marriages. Jati were primarily categorised on the basis of professions more prominently, then by the languages, regions, origins etc.
NSKulkarni 12 Apr 08
- Hi. Wikipedia does not accept any contributions to articles that are original research or that do not have reliable sources. The edits you made seemed to be your own thoughts on the matter. Additionally, they seem to be disparaging and attacking some people when you say, "This is an excellent example of how a genuine scientific concept could be ruined." The grammar of your edits are also not standard English which makes it hard to read. While it is preferred that you make edits in good English, other editors can fix grammar; however, your edits in substance should still follow the wikipedia guidelines and it did not seem like your edits followed those guidelines. erc talk/contribs 18:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)