Talk:Nair/Archive 5

message: Discovery of Nairs Discovery of Kerala :-))))
Let us first examine non –historical texts. Both grama padhati and keralolpathi states that Parashurama reclaimed land from the sea and donated the land to brahmanas. Why did the poor thing do that ? He had killed the entire clan of Kartavirya Arjuna (Sahasrarjuna) and had offered his dead father's soul tarpana with the blood of the kings and warriors he slew. Like a smart boy, he then conducted the Ashvamedha sacrifice, done only by sovereign kings, and gave the entire land he owned to the priests who performed at the yagya, viz. Kashyapa. These texts go on and say that  BUNTS  AND NAYARS are descendants of the sudras who accompanied brahmanas from AHICHATRA in PANCHALA. So lets not get violent at this point ok . So calm down. So where the hell is Ahichatra ? This city is an archeological ruin in  modern times near Ramnagar in Uttarakhand. It lies to the north of Hastinapura and Pramanakoti. For a moment let us examine the word Ahichatra (alias Ahi-Kshetra) , the capital of Northern Panchala, itself. The word Ahi means snake or NAGA in Sanskrit !!!. The word khsetra means region in Sanskrit. This implies that Ahi-kshetra was a region of Nagas. So could this mean that the region was populated by Nagas ?. So was it ? So what does other non historical literary work say about this place. Mahabharatha describes that it was while sporting at pramankoti that bhima was poisoned and drowned in the Ganges and was rescued by nagas living in the vicinity !!!. The region obviously had brahmanas (as mahabharatha refers to brahmanas in panchala Eg. Drona who later become the king of ahichatra ) Now who are these Nagas ? Nagas were a non vedic race who were spread throughout India very much before and during the epic Mahabharata until of course the entire Naga race was almost exterminated by Janamejaya, the Kuru king in Arjuna's line, who conducted the massacre of Nagas at Takshasila (now in pakistan). But why ? According to the 'Adi Parva' of the Mahabharata , before the Pandavas, "Khandoban" or "Khandavprastha" (Indraprastha or Delhi), was the capital of the Takshak rulers (of the line of the snake takshaka). They created obstacles in the way of construction of the new capital by Pandavas. Finally, these people were defeated, rendered homeless and driven out.They went and settled down in Taxila (Takshashila). In the Kurukshetra War, they joined the Kauravas and later assassinated king Parikshit (said to have been killed by the bite of the Naga king.Takshak). What were the other naga kingdoms before the pro-vedic – Kuru and puru lines ? A) Kingdom of Ananta-Anantnag(J&K) B) Kingdom of Vasuki-Kailasa (Tibet ) C) kingdoms of karkota (in punjab area) . So essentially the smart kuru dynasty annhilated major naga political power .Of course in subsequent period of time nagas became shudras when the non vedic nagas came in to the fold of vedic brahminic religion. This is the smartness of the vedic culture , it annhilates another culture by absorbing its practices and then giving it a lower grade within its heirarchial system within it. .Sorry for the detour ,so now our dear nagas, became followers of vedic religion and within its structure became threadless and of course the original proponents and custodians of the vedic religion - the brahmins refered to them as shudras because thats the category they will fit due to the "samskara" logic.  Centuries passed........the naga cult and culture beautifully integrated with the vedic religion............. ………………………………………………………………………………
Now let us examine Bhargava Rama or Parashurama. He was the son of sage jamadagni and was from kanykubja. This kingdom is identified to be the modern day Kannauj district of Uttar Pradesh. This territory formed a part of the southern Panchala !!! . So our Parashu hero committed a genocide  and then came down south took some territory and donated it to brahmins from back home. The poor brahmin guys obviously came along with their “shudras helps” who were still ardent snake worshippers due to their background. And then these poor fellows settled down in the malabar coast along with their “charnavar” (adherents) in tulu and malayala nadu. Don´t be overwhelmed by the parashuraman fellow because there are multiple parashuramas !!!!!  Don´t worry its easy to explain it. Parasurama, in Indian mythology is depicted as immortal. The epic Ramayana mentions about a Parasurama who encountered Ramachandra or Raghava Rama of Kosala. In Mahabharata we finds mention of Parasurama fighting with Bhishma; teaching military science to Drona as well as Karna. In Bhagavata Purana we find Parasurama encountering Krishna and Balarama. All these figures could be different personalities but having common traits. All of them could be members of Bhrigu family ie Bhargavas, and proficient in the use of battle-axe.Many ancient figures like Vyasa, Vasistha,Gautama,Narada etc have this phenomenon of fusion of many people of the same name or family name, combining together into one personality. Well our neighbouring state tamilnadu has done it as well. Historians now agree that grand lady avvaiyyar was actually many in number. So let me not detour again, our genocide Parashu fellow basically gave his land to priests from back home as repentence and we the palaquin bearers, servants, Z category protection guys who were good in fighting, the barber etc etc came down.  Well, we were slowly being made less and less of us, saying we are being upgraded in blood. Just what the english ( under Edward I) did with the scotts. The first brahmin settlement inside present day kerala was Chellur or Perumchellur gramam (old name)  a village identifiable with the present-day Taliparamba in Kannur district. It is one of the northernmost of the traditional Brahmin settlements of Kerala. It lies on the banks of the river Parassini, near Ezhimala. For instance, from the Vadagaon-Madhavpur inscription, discovered from a site associated with ancient brick structures and Satavahana coins, speaks of a Vajapeya Yajnam performed by a person of the Kasyapa Gothram and hence the earliest evidence of brahmins in the area. This reference, attributed to the 2nd or 1st century B.C.,has its counterpart in the mention of a sacrifice in literature in a village further south. This is further endorsed by another song by poet, Madurai Marutan Illanakanar, in which Chellur is described as a place where gods receive sacrifice. The Parasuraman legend, was firmly established at Chellur as early as the Sangam period and that it was actually part of a long chain of migration trickling along the west coast. Well our sangam period kings like the descendents of the escorts, impressed by the sophistication of the vedic culture became soon “vedicized”. Our escorts and the local royals intermarried as well as got upgraded by the brahmins as well. Some nairs even become cheiftains, huge landlords owing to long term tenancy appropriation from nambudiri in exchange of sexual favours using the system of sambandham (a mutually beneficial arrangement for all parties involved). The nambudiris retained their blood because they had these concepts of anuloma and pratiloma marriages. However none of the non brahmin castes inspite of acceptance of vedic religion or improved economic status, received no upgradation of religious status within the varna systems. Finally  our kovilakams kept asking the brahmanas to give them a kshatriya status (the first was kolathiri raja expressing his desire for the yajnopaveetham to the nambudiris). When the namboothiri Brahmins refused to do, the frustrated kolathiri as late as in 16th century got tulu brahmanas to make them kshatriyas by hiranyagarbham.A "chira" was constructed for this tulu brahmins at chirakkal , for their bath and they adopted malayala brahmana practices and came to be called embranthiris and kolathiri became the first kshatriya.One should realize that until this point there was no “caste status difference” between the royal houses and the descendants of escorts but only soci-political status difference. However the clever royal houses manged to become kshatriya within the definition of the vedic religion and the nairs did not. As for the matrilinial inheritance, its the product of chera chola conflict .That’s the sad story. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.99.165.173 (talk) 11:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Drab details" indeed. They're interesting from an anthropological perspective. The above information can be added, if cited properly. There are many things on the talk page that are "interesting". Unfortunately, very little is properly sourced and most of it is original research. I'm trying to get the time to get back to this article, to update it. --vi5in[talk] 21:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discovery of Nairs :-))) 

message: For those of you who wish to countercheck points in my earlier discussion, I have listed points and the references you can read. Enjoy .
A	 Incorporation of Nagas in to Vedic Society : There were inter-marriages between the Brahmans and the forest-dwelling Naga tribe. It is significant that Naga genealogies and myths are accorded a prominent place in the opening canto of the Mahabharata. Ref 1
B	Early Vedic society was internally differentiated and pluralistic, rather than monolithic and homogeneous. It was an amalgam or synthesis of Aryan and non-Aryan, including tribal elements. In other words, since its very inception Hinduism appears to be a "mosaic of distinct cults, deities, sects and ideas", Ref 2
C	For early chera period in kerala , perumals rule and Brahmin ascendancy and migration (Ref 3 and 4)
D	For extermination of the naga race by Janamejaya, and the famous Naga empires initial chapters in the first book (Adi Parva) of Mahabharatha (Ref 5, 6)
E	Parashuramas paternal ancestry (heheya kingdom) maternal  ancestry kanyakubj  slaying kshatriyas (Ref 5)
F	References
1.	D.D. Kosambi. The Culture and Civilization of Ancient India, p. 94; Romila Thapar, "Social Mobility in Ancient India", In Ancient Indian Social History, pp. 122-51.
2.	Romila Thapar. Interpreting Early India, p. 68; Romila Thapar. "The Study of Society in Ancient India", In Ancient Indian Social History, pp. 211-39.
3.	P.J.Cherian ( Ed ) PERSPECTIVES ON KERALA HISTORY- The Second Millennium Chapter III Consolidation of Agrarian Society - Political Processes -Dr.M. G. S. Narayanan
4.	"Brahman Settlements in Kerala" by Dr.Kesavan Veluthat Dept. of History, Mangalore University, Mangalagangothri-574 199, Karnataka.
5.	Mahabharata of Krishna Dwaipayana Vyasa, translated to English by Kisari Mohan Ganguli
6.	Nagas : The tribe and the cult by Sharma RK 2006 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.99.165.173 (talk • contribs).
:Can you point out which pieces of text correspond to the references? A lot of what you posted reads like an essay or an editorial (not that it's a bad thing :), just that it'd not suited for an encyclopedia). I appreciate you coming forward with all these references. To be more specific, what I would need is cited info linking Nairs and Nagas (from here we can talk about what happened to the Nagas using your other references). --vi5in[talk] 20:06, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discovery of Nairs – Part II 

message: The nairs have been linked with naga culture and has been done by several historians in their discussions due to the strong similarities in the two cultures. for discussion see "Use Of Sex By Brahmins To Gain Supremacy By Dr. K.Jamanadas" (http://www.ambedkar.org/books/dob10.htm) and of course there are umpteen others.However to state as an authentic source we need it quoted in a research article or an anthroplogical documentary. The only decent one that can be found in this regard is below. 
Some Aspects of Nayar Life. 
K. M. Panikkar
The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Vol. 48, Jul. - Dec., 1918 (Jul. - Dec., 1918), pp. 254-293 
It states "blah blah ........the Nayars were a community with a Naga or serpent totem"
The same article also states that "There are many reasons to believe that the term Nayar is a corrupted form of the word Nagar or "serpent-men" 
I would like to read the whole original article though, but i donot have this journal access. However Fawcett´s article on "nayars of malabar" i have read in its entirety, its very nice and if u can read it please do so so that u can really clean up the mess on the customs part especially vivaha etc.  Fawcett has described the customs very nicely and it is an authentic source to quote. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.99.165.173 (talk) 12:39, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The customs as far as Vivaham is concerned has been taken from O. Chandumenon's Indulekha. I would consider it to be pretty good.  The first article "Use Of Sex By Brahmins To Gain Supremacy"; the only reference I could find was a crackpot hate site. I don't think it's a good reference (it was posted here before). So we're still stuck with not having a link between the Nagas and Nairs :(. But then again, are there any good references talking about who the Nagas are exactly? --vi5in[talk] 15:26, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Another thing, where can I get Fawcett's article? --vi5in[talk] 15:26, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Naga link 

message: For the information provided above. Does anyone have any citations to back them up? I agree that Nairs were never really part of the varna system. But we need a reference/citation. Second, "avarna" and "savarna" do exist. The terms were coined by the Namboothiris, I believe. --vi5in[talk] 15:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations for the information 

message: Viv, we cannot say that "Nairs were not part of the varna system" it would be false and inaccurate. Too many documents support that nayars were part of the varna system. We are just trying to see what we "want to see". It would be difficult for me to cite the umpteen number of articles that nayars were part of the varna system. However i will cite just one for convenience. 
Varna Schemes and Ideological Integration in Indian Society 
Richard G. Fox
Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 11, No. 1 (Jan., 1969), pp. 27-45
:I would disagree only in the sense that initially Nairs weren't part of the varna system. They were then shoehorned in there by the Namboothiris; which is why Kerala has such a bizarre caste system. --vi5in[talk] 21:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  seeing what we want to see !!! 

message: Janmam - ownership
Kanam- Lease / lease tenure and fees
The explanation of terms is below:
Janmapparappu is the property inherited from ancestors. 
Janmam is hereditary proprietorship, freehold property, and is viewed as hardly alienable. 
Janmanir is parting with all the rights of a landlord, as done by pouring water into the hands of the purchaser.
Janma nir/ janma veetu is transfer of property rights and change of the ownership of property by way of udakapoorvam. 
Attipper is a documentary proof (karanam). In the Tellichery records it is known as karanappetti and there are chiefly six tenures. 
Kuzhik-kanam or kaanam (1/8), Otti (1/2), ottikumpuram (3/4), janmappanayam (7/8), Janmam. The figure in brackets indicates the loss of right of the janmi on his land in succession, his gradual decline and fall from his property.
Note :- As i i have cited with appropriate references before, We nairs did not have the Janmam for land until 16th century only Kanam from Nambudiris thats is the reason we were not Janmis and only from 16 th century onwards (when long term Kanams) turned to Janmam we were becoming Janmis.
As for the Chera issue I qoute "The Dravidian people have been divided, from ancient times, into Cheras, Cholas and Pandyas. Chera, or Sera (in old Tamil Sarai) is the Dravidian equivalent for Naga; Cheramandala, Nagadwipa, or the Naga country". So what we have proof is only that chera refered to a Naga culture. Nayar corruption from "Nagar" also means snake men. So both these are snake worshipping cultures but are not the same. Because "Naga" Kingdoms existed all over ancient india "the naga kingdom" in "dravida" is chera so they are cheras. Nayars also "Nagas in origin" came from the northern part of India (panchala) in to Kerala. You must see the fine difference here. Nayars are not descendants of cheras but both represent people of Naga culture from two different places who happen to meet in Kerala after the Nambudiris migrated in kerala along with the Nairs. 
The commonality is that both the cheras and the nayars accepted vedic culture and both these groups got "inseminated" by the nambudiris. However chera descendants were rulers even before 16th century but the Nayars were under Kanam at this time. 
Nayars who migrated to central and south kerala along with the nambudiris also mixed with vellalas (later pillais) bought in by cheras from chola and pandiya kingdoms by the chera kings.Therefore along with the nambudiri and chera "blood" they were also getting "vellala" blood. However the Nayars of malabar mixed with "nambudiris" and cheras only and hence the superiority complex developed by the nayars of malabar in terms of their birth.
The vedic culture and its classicism, systematicism , mode of life was impressing non-vedic cultures and was giving the idea of "sophisticated/cultured". This led to both the nayars and cheras willingly accepting the vedic culture and religion and becoming part of this. So we nairs, have got "blood" from them, "land" from them and "accepted their superiority and their religion and accepted a position within the varna system" and thus became one with the vedic-system. Now we canot make hue and cry that we are not part of this or being anti-brahminical/vedic culture. Its done. And one need have no regrets for this, as we have always only benefitted with the Nambudiri association.
Another valuable contribution. In fact the discussions have brought together some keen, erudite individuals. Hope the trend 'll persist. "Chera" literally means the rat-snake (non-poisonous). "Chera"==naga or serpent could have been the totem or gotra-symbol worshipped by the Nagas. (see DD Kosambi's book for more details on totem worship.)All said and done, why at all the Nairs "accepted their(Vedic) superiority and their religion and accepted a position within the varna system"? Who initiated and who endorsed such acceptance?Can someone explain this?"Vedic cultures impressing non-vedic" does not bring out the motives clearly.122.164.82.218 05:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kanam-Nayar-Chera 

message: Please sign your posts with four tildes, and indent with colons. Otherwise, the discussion is extremely hard to follow. --vi5in[talk] 16:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signing and Indenting 

message: Thankyou for your input. Therefore the section on Nairs being "Savarna Sudra" is not required, only that they were referred to as "Sudra". It has been mentioned in this article that the Samoothiri Raja was the first "Kshatriya" of Kerala after receiving the "Poonul", however it was not done by the Namboothiris, but by Tulu Brahmins, since Namboothiris considered everyone in Kerala apart from themselves to be "Sudra" or "Avarna". The matter of "Samanta Kshatriya" also arises, since they too were considered "Sudra" by the Namboothiris, and their origins, and customs are non-Vedic and the same as Nairs (they did not have Poonul). Having said this however, it is known that there are some aristocratic Nair/Varma families who do have the Poonul.
Also, in North India, apart from Rajputs and a few other Kshatriya clans, many do not have the Poonul (e.g. Jats, Marathas, Kambojas, etc.) however they are mentioned as Kshatriyas. Many of the Kshatriyas of North do not practice vegetarianism, which would be required once they wear Poonul.
Kshatriyan 23:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Varna

message: Why is so much of the article deleted??? Manu
: Deletion without discussion is in bad taste. Please report the users concerned as perpetrating vandalism. Thampran 17:17, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted the deletions and left a message on the anon user's page. --vi5in[talk] 17:39, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Vivin, I think there is still substantial sections missing. Thampran 23:10, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and restored them. --vi5in[talk] 23:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion 

message: Summary: They had a matrilineal culture, men went to wars, had child marriage, there were women priests, they had a village structure similar to Kuutukudumbum, Called their villages "Siraya" similar to the "Karaya" or "Kara" among Nair culture, had communal property, houses had a series of ring structures similar to Nair houses.
::Quoted From the article on Taiwanese aborigins in Wikipedia. "Many of the plains peoples were matrilineal/matrifocal societies. Men married into a woman's family after a courtship period where the woman was free to reject as many men as she wished before marriage. In the age-grade communities, couples entered into marriage in their mid-30s when a man would no longer be required to perform military service or hunt heads on the battle-field. In the matriarchal system of the Siraya, it was also necessary for couples to abstain from marriage until their mid-thirties, when the bride's father would be in his declining years and would not pose a challenge to the new male member of the household. It was not until the arrival of the Dutch Reformed Church in the 17th Century, that the marriage and child-birth taboos were abolished. There is some indication that many of the younger members of Sirayan society embraced the Dutch marriage customs as a means to circumvent the age-grade system in a push for greater village power (Shepherd 1995:61–65). Almost all indigenous peoples in Taiwan have traditionally had a custom of sexual division of labor. Women did the sewing, cooking and farming, while the men hunted and prepared for military activity and securing enemy heads in headhunting raids, which was a common practice in early Taiwan. Women were also often found in the office of priestess or medium to the gods.
::These Aborigines mainly lived in stationary village sites surrounded by defensive walls of bamboo. The village sites in southern Taiwan were more populated than other locations. Some villages supported a population of more than 1500 people, surrounded by smaller satellite villages (Kang 2003:111–117). Siraya villages were constructed of dwellings made of thatch and bamboo, raised 2 meters from the ground on stilts, with each household having a barn for livestock. A watchtower was located in the village to look out for headhunting parties from the highland tribes. The concept of property was often communal, with a series of conceptualized concentric rings around each village. The innermost ring was used for gardens and orchards that followed a fallowing cycle around the ring. The second ring was used to cultivate plants and natural fibers for the exclusive use of the tribe. The third ring was for exclusive hunting and deer fields for tribal use. The plains people hunted herds of spotted deer and muntjak as well as conducting light millet farming. Sugar and rice were grown as well, but mostly for use in preparing wine (Shepherd 1993:29–34)."
:::Please sign your comments with 4 tildes. Thanks. - Thampran 17:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taiwanese Aborigines had customs similar to Nairs 

message: This talk page (as mentioned in the beginning) is about the article. As such, please confine your discussion to points regarding the improvement of the article. Specifically, more information for the article, citations, references, and ideas for article improvement. This is not a place to discuss the Nair community, or what can be done for the Nair community. Also, we should refrain from drawing our own conclusions. Wikipedia articles cannot have Original Research in them. If we don't stay on topic, the page becomes filled with cruft, and most of it not pertaining to the article or its improvement. --vi5in[talk] 16:39, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am removing certain sections from this talk page that have no bearing on the article. --vi5in[talk] 16:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's stay on topic