Talk:Nambudiri

message: Consider the following section in the main article:
"Only a Nambudiri can become the Rawal, Head Priest, at Badrinath in Uttarakhand,[3]and the Chief Priest at Mookambika Temple in Kollur, Karnataka, Pashupatinath Temple in Kathmandu, Nepal and other Mahakshetras around India."
The priests in the Pashupatinath Temple in Kathmandu, Nepal are from Shivalli Brahmin community from Dakshina Kannada / Udupi districts of Karnataka and not Nambudiri brahmins. I know this fact, since, a couple of my relatives have been / are the Rawal at the Pashupatinath temple.
Kindly change the section accordingly.
Halambi (talk) 11:35, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Some are asking about  the ultra-orthodox nature of Namboodiri brahmins.well my friends,you must be a Malayalee to know it.the Namboodiris made the caste system enforced.as we call "ayittham"(അയിത്തം) which means any untouchable including Nairs,iyers,tulu brahmins cannot come infront of Namboodiri.If a Namboodiri passes through a road ,there will be assistants(kshatriyas) who  makes sound to keep away the other caste people.consider this to any brahmin in India or World.History of Namboodiri is different.
Next ,What happened to all Namboodiri's?They are less in number due to single marriage(moossadu) practice in families.Most Nairs finds pride in identifying as the product of Sambhandham of particular Namboodiri to Nair Lady.The Nair Husband have to leave the lady for Namboodiri as it was the practice ,also considering the matri-lineal Nair Society.(Bunts are not nairs).
as a independent point of view ,Syrian Christians of Kerala may be where the majority Namboodiri population merged due to the doubting thomas ,jesus's apostle who supposedly converted Namboodiri's in 71/2 places in Kerala.(It is RELIGIOUSLY HATED BY Nairs/Namboodiri's -the syrian christians due to they left for "maargam koodal".)
http://www.orkut.co.in/Main#CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=3509349&tid=2564646861490885160
http://www.merinews.com/clogarticle.jsp?articleID=131699&catID=1&category=World&month=4&year=2008  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.14.144 (talk) 18:00, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  NOTES 

message: I have removed a part dealing with Nambooothiri's contribution to literature. It was insufferably biased and the claims were unsupported. Most notably the part didn't mention people like V.T. Bhattathiri or poets like Akkitham or Vishnu Narayanan Namboothiri. Kuntan 03:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Literature 

message: The article states that Namboothiri brahmins are the most orthodox. The Maithil brahmins make the same claim. In fact, several brahmin communities claim that theirs is the most orthodox, just as all language communities claim that their tongue is the most sonorous. The phrase on the Namboothiris being the most orthodoxy should be made less declarative. I'll edit it. Sarayuparin 22:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Degree of Orthodoxy 

message: Hey...a book i have, called the Travancore State Manual, makes mention of verious subcastes of Namboodiris which are very different from what are mentioned here...they include Sapagrasthas, Sadharnas, Adhyans, Jatimatrams etc.... kindly check that out...Manu
There is a tale that goes from father to son among some of the highest caste brahmins of Garhwal, that disciples of Adi Sankaracharya were settled in the Garhwal region to run Badrinath. Indeed, Garhwali Dimris (a Brahmin surname) do have a stake in running and receiving substantial shares from the offerings made at the Badrinath temple. This information was formalized in a book "Garhwal ka Itihas" written by Pt. Harikrishna Raturi in 1928.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.182.102.235 (talk) 22:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subcastes 

message: It is stated here that "The unique thing about Namboothiris is that they follow the poorva mimamsa school of Hindu philosophy unlike uttara mimamsa or vedanta school followed by most of the South Indians."
According to Mimamsa
To a certain extent, Mimamsa is atheist, placing all importance in proper practice as opposed to belief, rejecting a creator God as well as any scriptures on dharma outside of the Vedic tradition, yet accepting svarga or heaven awaiting the person who has acted righteously in his or her life. In its rejection of belief in a God, it is related to the nastika Carvaka school.
A community of temple priests who do not believe in God? The Tantrik practices as per the Tantra Samucchaya which the community follows does not fall under Mimamsa.
IMHO this general statement about the community following poorva mimamsa does not reflect reality.
--Sankarrukku 05:39, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: the article is completely unsourced. It should be drastically reduced, keeping only material that can be traced to reliable sources. dab (𒁳) 11:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Religion

message: :Image:Sankara.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Sankara.jpg

message: It is stated that they are the most orthodox Brahmins in India - but the encyclo. link provided does not state that(though it does mention that they are rigidly orthodox). "Most orthodox" seems like an  OR to me. Any opinion? Suigeneris (talk) 20:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro

message: According to the 1931 Census, out of the 50,000 Malayala Brahmins, less than half were Nambuthiri. So that will be 0.5% / 2 ==> 0.25%. Considering that the Hindu population got reduced from 70% in 1931 to 55% in 2001, I don't see any reason for their current population to rise above the 0.25% level. Chandrakantha.Mannadiar (talk) 03:37, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population 

message: The following was in the Classes section but has remained uncited since at least 2007. It cannot stay there like this, so I have cut and pasted it to here. Can anyone find some citations please.
Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 20:44, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: "There is no fully reliable source to support it" is a good enough reason. We cannot rely on your "that's a fact". See WP:RS for info about reliable sources. Your comment that some books refer to them as a separate community further confirms the point. - Sitush (talk) 16:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

text: I may be misunderstanding you here but I think that what you are suggesting would fall foul of the policies regarding original research and synthesis. We are not allowed to draw conclusions based on inferences of what is said in sources etc. I do realise that this can be frustrating and, indeed, it has frustrated me sometimes ... but those are the rules. - Sitush (talk) 15:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved out of article 

message: I think a few lines regarding them being fishermen, who abondoned their original shudra duties to enter into priestly affairs, lured by the temporary advantage of material benefits, deserves mention in this article. Ikon No-Blast 20:40, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A book of literary criticism is not a particularly great source for a statement of communal origins, but my bigger concern is that in both instances these items are only available (here, at least) in snippet view. The problems of snippet view have been explained to you previously & so I would hope that on this occasion you could provide us with a copy of the relevant pages - not just the paragraph, but the surrounding text for, say, one or two pages either side of the bit which you refer to. I am aware the the origins of Nambudiris are somewhat controversial and largely unproveable. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 03:47, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Namboothiri Shudras 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 14 December 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Vazhakunnamnamboothiri.gif Nominated for Deletion

message: We do not seem to be making much progress here. The sourcing is still very poor and there are still items listed in references which are not actually being used per WP:CITE. Can we improve on this situation? If not, then I am inclined to start pruning the thing. - Sitush (talk) 21:48, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Please go ahead! There doesn't seem to be any active contributor to this article, apart from yourself. :-) Joyson Prabhu Holla at me! 21:55, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't remember how this ended up on my watchlist, but after seeing an edit this morning I looked at it and was just about to give a "warning of impending removal". It looks like everything after "overview" has been tagged as unsourced since June of last year, and who knows how long it was in before that.  That's enough time for me to be comfortable hacking and slashing.  Qwyrxian (talk) 23:30, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: . - Sitush (talk) 23:39, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Progress 

message: I have fully protected the article for 24 hours to stop the edit warring. However, both Sitush and Ashley thomas80 broke 3rr (Sitush hit 4, Ashley thomas80 hit 5). While I feel uninvolved enough to protect the article (the edit warring had to stop), I'm right on the borderline regarding blocking. I will ask Boing said Zebedee and Salvio giuliano, two admins who regularly help manage caste issues, whether or not they feel blocks are appropriate. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:52, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Does removal of copyvios count towards 3RR? That is what I was doing, as well as explaining on the other contributor's talk page. - Sitush (talk) 16:41, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full protection 

message: It is fairly common practice for us to identify the prior names of the state now known as Kerala in articles that deal with the history of that region. This is because many of the sources refer to the former names rather than the current one (which has existed only since the 1950s), and if we quote those sources then references to Travancore etc may needlessly send the reader off to another article. A simple statement is justified for reasons of clarity and has never been challenged elsewhere.For reasons that make absolutely no sense to me,  has been removing such a statement, most recently here. The edit summary for the last removal is "steriotyping not a practice in Wikipedia", and I simply do not see how "steriotyping" comes into this. The academic sources commonly do just as this article did, ie: explain the former names. My suspicion is that these may be point-y removals in response to my prior removals of copyvios inserted by that contributor but, if not, then it really needs a better explanation. - Sitush (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I should add that WP:MOSQUOTE deprecates the use of links inside quotations, so having the statement of prior names independent of any possible quotation etc is a neat way of resolving the issue. - Sitush (talk) 17:57, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, since there has been no objection raised, it is my intention to reinstate the statements today. - Sitush (talk) 09:03, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an unnecessary information. An internal link to Kerala will suffice. --AshLey Msg 07:59, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have explained why an internal link to Kerala does not suffice. Now drop it, please. - Sitush (talk) 08:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If we are moving in your line, we would have to mention all the regions of India where ever the name India is introduced in Wikipedia. Don't think that I have bent to your copyvio allegation: in my talk page I have established your manipulations already. --AshLey Msg 08:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old regional names for Kerala 

message: The last clause in the following sentence is a case of WP:SYN and WP:OR,
User talk:Sitush has reinstated(diff: the clause, citing p.29 of the source which I had removed. But, I'm unable to find anything supporting the clause- "thus undermining the ability of the Buddhists to propagate their beliefs"-in p.29. --AshLey Msg 07:59, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps there is an issue with comprehension. Pullapilly says, inter alia, "the Brahmins effectively destroyed the leadership of the new religion by abolishing Buddhist monasteries and learning centres". No leadership, no monasteries, no learning centres, temples either converted to Hindu use or to the worship of pre-Aryan deities  --> undermining of the opportunities for propagation of the new religion. He also says - p. 28. - that at the time of the Nambudiri arrival, the Ezhava etc population had become Buddhist through the influence of missionaries; there is other stuff on p. 30 and even p. 31, but I would hope that you could use your common sense here. Do you dispute this conclusion? Should we quote the entire chapter? And can you explain how the statement breaches WP:SYN, given that it only uses one source?- Sitush (talk) 08:52, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a case of synthesis with your OR(you call it as common sense). Temples, learning centres, monasteries etc may not help a religion to "influence" the "civilized people" towards it. If so, millions of people could have been influenced to Islam, influenced with their enhanced infrastructure facilities. It's a case of ideological influence and intellectual and spiritual debate, which may attract a civilized person to one particular faith. Destroying the temple might not undermine the spiritual and ideological attraction towards Buddhism. Need much more "comprehension" to see this. --AshLey Msg 08:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not arguing with you about this any further because your linguistic pedantry is known to me, and we both know that you are mainly targeting me because you bear a grudge. Let's see if others support you. - Sitush (talk) 08:47, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ashely_thomas80, maybe you're misusing the word, but [{WP:SYN]] only applies to combining two sources and drawing a conclusion that neither of them explicitly state. Now, perhaps you simply mean to call Sitush's claim plain original research. I think that's actually what you're trying to assert. I have no opinion on that claim itself (though perhaps I'll try and work through the wording tomorrow and see if there's a problem there. If you want faster action or action from someone completely uninvolved, start a thread on the original research noticeboard; give both the original quote and Sitush's proposed wording, and see what totally independent editors think. If you do that, just leave a note here so that Sitush and others will see there's a noticeboard discussion going on. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: We could include the quote I refer to above - "the Brahmins effectively destroyed ..." etc, - if that would resolve the concerns. As far as I can recall, this was one of the many India-related community articles that had developed into a conflict between being a quotefarm and a repository of completely unsourced original research. However, if the quote is not necessary then we should not use it: one of the most useful situations where quotes are justified is when paraphrasing is problematic, but if we quote then we must be sure that the quote fully encompasses the intent and is not a selective representation. - Sitush (talk) 12:17, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I plan to post it on the original research noticeboard, probably on Monday. There is no case of grudge or anything like that. Apologies, if I misused the term SYN. --AshLey Msg 16:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Why go to NORN and waste everyone's time there? Are you not content to replace the statement with the quotation? - Sitush (talk) 08:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate your suggestion. Better you could try some rewording like: ...."thus replaced the Buddhism with Brahmanic Hinduism in Kerala." (p.29)--AshLey Msg 15:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That is what you did first time round. It is not appropriate and is in fact a misrepresentation of what the source says (some Buddhists remained). - Sitush (talk) 15:09, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Or, ".Thus the the Brahmanic Hinduism took over the dominance and Buddhism was marginalized" --AshLey Msg 15:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That is very poorly phrased. I suggest that you read the entire chapter, and/or that we stick with the quote. I do not understand why the quote should be such an issue but you seem to be unwilling to accept it. - Sitush (talk) 18:56, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Phrasing not an issue here, you could improve it, but the role of Nambudiris in the introduction of Brahmanic Hinduism in Kerala along with the marginalization of Buddhism needs to be mentioned in the article. Sitush, our confrontations have really started with such simple issue. Here, you agree with the content, but instead of suggesting a better "phrasing", you tries something else. You have accused me of pedantry! Why don't you think of the view from other side? --AshLey Msg 07:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Issues with recent additions

message: Please see User talk:Jeff G./Archives/2015/October#on_editing_Nambudiri_page.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 07:34, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  More deletions 

message: Both the minimal unsourced Moothath and the much longer, sourced, Nambudiri state that "Namboothiri" is an alternative name. If so, then these two are equivalent. PamD 20:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: But :Moothath is indeed unsourced and Namboothiri isn't even remotely a transliteration or alternate spelling. It might still be valid as a redirect but that needs some WP:BEFORE and I suspect the outcome would be a deletion. - Sitush (talk) 10:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Moothath]] 

message: For a recent example of discussions concerning the use of genetic studies in caste articles, please see Talk:Ezhava#Genetic_studies. The outcome there follows precedent. - Sitush (talk) 14:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetic studies 

message: While reams have been written on the Nambudri Brahmins of Kerala, it would be worthwhile to read Nambudri community participant observer Jayaprakash Mallay's book MALAYALA BRAHMIN AUTOCHTHON THEORY published in the print media from Manjeri in 1995. It is uploaded in the electronic media in 2009 as Malayala Brahmins. You may kindly visit him mallayj@blogslogspot.com  Jayaprakash Mallay (talk) 05:23, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mallay Theory 

message: The text in this article mostly relies on the observations by Cyriac who is a self-proclaimed Christian missionary. His observations are not  corroborated by neutral sources. There is little evidence that the Kings and invaders joined hands together with the Brahmin community in Kerala and have emerged as the land usurpers. 
Noting the current economy of kerala and also the literacy penetration in the state, it doesn't actually sit that the Nambudri Brahmins have had a reigning hand in the socio-political matters that governed the state.
More information from contemporary sources is needed to support this fact or it would be tantamount to a biased view of the community.
The tone of the article mostly suggests that the article is not neutral and factual. Hypergamy is practiced in most of the communities in Kerala  and not exclusively by the Brahmin and Nair communities in Kerala. The article seems to suggest that Brahmins are the instrumental community that have given rise to this custom.
Moreover, Polygamy is practiced internally by the Nair community as well which was more matrilineal.
The attire prescribed to the so-called higher castes in Kerala is Mundu and is again not exclusive to Nambudri community. Mundu was also the attire worn by the ruling classes in Kerala and some southern parts of Karnataka. Hnaluru (talk) 07:03, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: So find some other reliable sources. As it stands, your comments are original research. - Sitush (talk) 16:31, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

text: , and please can you try to remember to sign your posts here, thanks. - Sitush (talk) 17:30, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you explain your issue with the article? I dont really understand whats wrong with it, but to be fair I haven't comprehensively read much into it. BreadBuddy (talk) 20:31, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I did. In the initial justification I provided for tagging this article for factual bias. The Brahmin community of Kerala has long been accused of unwarranted hegemony over the other caste groups. Moreover, my contention is that the source being attributed to cannot be considered as someone who can provide a neutral point of view. Cyriac is a Christian missionary and various Christian denominations have long been trying to produce a biased notion of the Brahminic community in the coastal areas of India to foster more Christianity. Hence, unless historically verifiable, the claims of a Christian missionary cannot be considered as an authentic source. I am trying to gather more contemporary evidence to counter or support the statements been made. Will revert on this shortly with more credible sources. Hnaluru (talk) 06:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

text: Well I'm not sure if I can agree with you or not there, but what I can say is that the Cyriac Pullapilly source counts as WP:FRINGE. If discussed in an article about a mainstream idea, a theory that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be added, unless there are other reliable sources saying the same exact theory (i.e the views of a small minority should not find a place in Wikipedia). Not to mention, this obscure origin theory is put in the history section, which is certainly WP:UNDUE. BreadBuddy (talk) 15:50, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: However, I am a bit concerned with your given criterion for removing Pullapilly, and I would strongly suggest that you  please use reliable sources and use neutral wording in your addition. Note: I think the Fringe thing was brought up earlier if you scroll up, but was kept due to lack of finding a suitable replacement.BreadBuddy (talk) 19:32, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Pullapilly is a historian, too. Where is the evidence that he is distorting things to suit some evangelical agenda? It is well documented that the Brahmins did exactly that in South India when they acted as go-betweens/translators etc for British Raj ethnographers such as Edgar Thurston, attempting to boost their own position and concept of the caste system etc, but do we have similar documentation for Pullapilly? I don't have a problem with qualifying his position, eg: , although I suspect some people might think even mentioning his religion is undue unless that is known to have been a significant influence on his scholarship. - Sitush (talk) 19:54, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

text:  I think there is two different discussions going on here, I assume that in your response you were adressing Hnaluru? I never mentioned that he is distorting things to suit any evangelical agenda.BreadBuddy (talk) 19:59, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I was replying to both of you but feel free to adjust my indenting to make things more clear. Hnaluru had mentioned the evangelical thing, you were suggesting that he is FRINGE. For what it is worth, I am unsure how Pullapilly can be considered fringe when he is saying that other people have made the point. Christopher Fuller is one of those in his studies of the :Nair community. - Sitush (talk) 20:03, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

text: A quick example from Fuller here, towards the bottom of the page. He says more but I'll have to dig out my hard copies of his book, papers etc. - Sitush (talk) 20:06, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

text: For the record, I have no problem with the text from Christopher Fuller in the article. In addition, I did take a look at the link you have sent and I believe the portion you are referring to in that text is where it says "There too, at various times, the Nambudiris have wielded considerable political influence.."; This area however doesn't mention anything to what Pullapilly described, besides the fact that the Brahmins were dominant in influence. BreadBuddy (talk) 00:49, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Fuller continues "...given to the caste system an extra rigour which it lacked elsewhere". I'm not sure how familiar you are with the Caste system in Kerala but you need to be to understand this. - Sitush (talk) 16:08, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual accuracy, Bias and Tone 

message: There is a lot that can be done and a lot of info that can be added to raise this article from the current quality to at least the level of an A-class article. For example, the famous 32 grAmams established by Parashurama tradition is something found in any source dealing with the Nambudiri right from the semi-mythical Keralamahatmya Purana. The same with the Nambudiris' unique Purvashikha hair style and their observance of orthodox srauta rituals to this day. I am really interested in contributing to the article as part of my ongoing task of expanding content related to Indian history and ethnic groups. I am planning to add some of this info over the next week. Before that I would be interested in hearing if any of this info was part of the article in a previous version, and if so, what were the reasons for their removal. (Chetan vit (talk) 20:05, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose I'll have some time to help as well, though I think I might be busy in the next couple weeks.BreadBuddy (talk) 20:34, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please help me in expanding the article 

message: For us, Nairs, it's very painful to think about the past of our caste that many Nair men had lost their lives the Chola-Chera war and the Karanavars had to fix Sambandhams and accept matrilineality for their family. Nair Women painfully agreed to become the wives of Nambuthiri men. Our ancestors were very rich and wealthy. Nair men never gave wives to Brahmins. They were well trained warriors. If someone dared to misbehave with the women of their family or the women of their village, they would cut-off his head with sword or Nāgapāsham(Urumi). Yes! Nair men not only protected their family, they also protected their village.
Nair women too loved their husbands very sincerely. Every year Nair women took 'Thiruvathira Vratham'and prayed for good health and long lives of their husbands. 
From my research what I have got is that Sambandham actually existed in Ambalavasi(Devadasi) community. But as many Nair men lost ther lives in Chola-Chera war, Sambandhams began in Nair community too. I think Kings of Kerala too had lost their lives in Chola-Chera war. Nambuthiri men also had Sambandhams in Kovilakams. As Kiriyathil-Illathu Nair women and Kovilakam women never sang and danced in front of public and never did the Temple duties, they were accepted as women of their caste only and were not seen equal to Devadasis.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.216.87.132 (talk) 20:01, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Your comments appear not to be relevant to improvement of this article. This talk page exists only for that purpose. - Sitush (talk) 04:58, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genuine Nairs don't feel proud in having Nambuthiri, Empranthiri and Iyer ancestry 

message: 157.51.88.207 (talk) 16:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NiciVampireHeart 17:30, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2018 

message: The image used for the migration of Nambudiris into Kerala is actually that of Saraswat Brahmins. While it's true there were late migrations of Tulu and other Canarese coast Brahmins (of the Saraswat stock) into Kerala, the earliest Nambudiris cannot be said to have formed from this community. As Mahadevan (2007)  has shown, the early Nambudiri community had an active Śrauta tradition (unlike the Saraswat Brahmins) and share Vedic recensions with Tamil groups like the Sozhiya, along with the wearing of forelock (purvasikha). Therefore the core of the Nambudiri community must be seen as a Sangam era purvashikha group, not the Saraswats who migrated south much later. (gnanvit (talk) 12:12, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image of Saraswat Brahmins for Nambudiris? 

message: There is a revised and enlarged edition on the Nambudries of South India published on the internet since 2009 with occasional inputs till date. It is called MALAYALA BRAHMIN AUTOCHTHON THEORY.  This richly textured and meticulously researched account presents a fascinating account when viewed from an alternative perspective of the fishermen dimension.
Awestruck by the nature and content of the sahyadri khanda version of the skanda purana narrative Nambudri Documentalist Advocate Jayaprakash Mallay took up residence at Puthan Mana Pulikkathodi Illam Moothedath Palasseri Mana and Poonkutil Narayanamangalath Illam, all in the Nambudri traditional village in Karikkad. As a participant observer he was Registration Officer during Nambudri social gatherings called swajana sangamam consequently from 1997 till 2001. Thus emboldened by Nambudiries well versed in the Scriptures with whom he always interacted, they briefed him up with pin point precision and stunning accuracy on Material Culture and Life Cycle Ritual of the Nambudries which spiralled in him the unquenchable thirst to know the unknown. His two decade long interest and insight in Malayalam and Sanskrit semantics asserted itself in the need to re - define Nambudri ancestral habitats on the basis of fish and aquatic pattern. His protracted endeavour is no sheer wild wizardry of words that spill a beguiling spell of terminology suggestive of sea and sea creatures viz. Narwhal, turtle, prawns and spawns. When sustained by an equally rich texture of empirical data, it is what makes Jayaprakash Mallay's seminal findings about Nambudries through a glaring study of Ethno - semantics Marathon, monumental and unique. 
Not only do deliberations and the conclusion of MALAYALA BRAHMIN AUTOCHTHON THEORY espouse an alternative set of argument, but the fish related issue is also elaborated in dispiriting detail. It is the reason why Mallay has every reason to insist that his views be heard. visit him at
http://www.mallayj@blogspot.com.in
http://www.facebook.com/jayaprakash.mallay
http://www.wordpres.com/jayaprakash.mallay Jayaprakash Mallay (talk) 11:20, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  NAMBUDRIES OF SOUTH INDIA 

message: Very long lead , need to structure it. Bilgiljilll (talk) 07:55, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The lead is too long .  

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Namboothiri (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 12:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress