Talk:Caste system in India/Archive 2

message: Archives: 1 | 2
----
How are foreigners (or Americans in particular) integrated into the caste system?  Who are they allowed to marry (if that's even possible, without exiling the Indian from their parents)?  And as an American, what is acceptable treatment of a lower or higher caste (if you even have one)? 216.212.102.185 00:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both David Frawley and Stephen Knapp are Americans and were incorporated as Brahmins.Hkelkar 00:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Plus, here is an example of an South African National who converted to Hinduism and became a priest (also high caste) Hkelkar 00:40, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe I'm confused, but, your examples are of people who converted to Hinduism.  As long as you don't convert, is the caste not an issue for Americans?  Are they allowed to associate with any caste?  If Brahmin is the popular choice for Americans, according to the Wikipedia, Brahmin only make up 2-5% of the population, so it seems like it'd be a problem if you're in the wrong area. Please forgive my ignorance on the issue. Indians I come in contact with don't seem to want to elaborate on the caste system. Maybe there should be a section called "Foreigners and the Caste System".  216.212.102.185 15:49, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Agree with you, I suppose that was what Lord Krishna meant by 'Janmat Varnah' in Geeta. Aupmanyav 11:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

message: As far as I know, such a thing does not exist. The information given at present in the article doesn't even belong there. Sure, there are Dalit converts. But that doesn't automatically imply that there is a caste system prevalent among the Christians. What exists today, are different denominations and not castes. Could somebody provide any references to substantiate the claim of a caste system among Christians in India?-- thunderboltza.k.a.Deepu Joseph |TALK 15:53, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Depends on the definition of Caste. The article defines it as a rigid social order based on birthright, which Indian Christians do have. I believe citations have been provided in the article to that effect.Shiva's Trident 14:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are taking it out of context. Saivites do not think they are superior to Vaishnavites or Smartas or Shakti-ites. There is at least, caste discrimination among Christians, because only 2% of bishops are lower-caste. And many churches have separate doors for high caste and low caste Christians.Bakaman Bakatalk 16:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Caste is not a Hindu phenomenon, it is an Indian phenomenon. Therefore it should be wrtten as such. People of all religions have been sucked into the black hole of caste, those that exploited it (Missionairies, Muslims) seem to have been hiding something as the facts show. Heres one ref (I will try to find the root source later) ,  Bakaman Bakatalk 16:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caste System among Indian Christians? 

message: The section looks higly dubious.Editors are inserting many castes into Ruling/Military section according to their POV.If you wish take this section out completely ; I don't see any logic regarding its existence and plz don't blame on 1891 census 'it clearly is not from there.Thanx. HW  09:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you are right. It should be removed alltogether.nids(♂) 09:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have removed the section as ppl failed to adress its importance. Ikon |no-blast 08:53, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Caste Groups 

message: Removing OR and Ambedkarite cruft.Bakaman Bakatalk 02:30, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert

message: In addition, Muslims in South Asia have Caste Systems based on Fatwas and a social stratification unique to Muslims as a result of various Islamic laws on Hygiene.  I have removed this statement since it lacked citation and is rather dubious, with many mistakes.  Are there many caste systems, or only one?  Which Islamic laws on hygiene?  Where else in the article does it mention fatwas? These concerns are why I removed this sentence from the article. Mar de Sin Talk to me! 04:37, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Islamic Fatwa used to stratify the Caste System is the Fatwa-i-Jahandari written by Ziauddin al-Barani (see the Muslim Caste System section in the article).The hygiene thing was added by BhaiSaab and probably a fib.Hkelkar 05:00, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence in intro 

message: The statistics state that OBC's contribute 52% of present population. There is no evidence to confirm this. Section marked with disputed and citation needed. Someone please look into the matter.
LostTemplar
::Thanks for pointing it out. the 52% was quoted by the Mandal commission. The NSS debunks the figure as bogus and puts the figure at around 30%. Even that figure is regarded as exaggerated by partisan politics. I have made additions to that effect.Hkelkar 03:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  OBC Figures 

message: All the sources for this seem to be partisan, and the section seems to overstress the importance of caste for Indian Muslims.  The section's sources are not reputable enough, and the article glosses over the fact that caste is rejected by Islam.  Mar de Sin Speak up! 20:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Partisan? what rubbish!Many of the sources are written by MUSLIMS themselves.Plus, Smartic Hinduism also rejects Caste but no mention of that either. Looks like the ji(had)g is up.Hkelkar 21:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please don't make up nonsense.All the sources are excellenet references available in library, are from reputable publishers and by scholars in teh field.If you try to promulgate more bias there will be consequences.Hkelkar 22:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm sorry, but when have I promulgated violence bias ? I'll look into more sources and then I'll decided if a POV tag is worth posting. Mar de Sin Speak up! 22:08, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Violence??Maybe you should promulgate the art reading other people's posts.Go ahead and look into as many sources as you want.Remove MY sourced edits and I will do whatever I can to get you blocked for vandalism and extrelmely bad faith editing.Such an act is long pending I think.Hkelkar 22:10, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  My careless mistake, sorry. Once again, you are assuming really bad faith on my part.  I would never remove legitimate edits. Mar de Sin Speak up! 22:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I never intended my attitude to be anything less than patient and civil.  I have never removed legitimate edits on any article unless it was unsourced and seemingly preposterous to me- and even if it is unsourced, I don't remove edits.  Mar de Sin Speak up! 22:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caste among Muslims 

message: My edit added the source back again. Any removal of the sourced fact is vandalism.Bakaman Bakatalk 22:07, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: DMK

message: This is what a British Member of Parliament has to say about the Indian Cast System in the UK:
:I first became truly aware of the extent of caste discrimination in India, and of the resistance to it, when I attended the World
:Social Forum in Mumbai in January 2004. I had been aware that there was such a system, and that it did affect many poor people, but the reality of it struck home in that experience.
:There were several thousand Dalits at the World Social Forum protesting about the vicious effects of the caste system in India and other countries of South Asia. Hundreds of them marched, dancing and beating their drums, objecting to being regarded as the polluted outcastes of society. I then learnt more about the problem when I met a group of Dalit activists on a second visit to Mumbai in February 2006.
:I was therefore horrified to realise that caste discrimination has actually been exported to the UK through the Indian Diaspora.
:The same attitudes of superiority, pollution and separateness appear to be present in South Asian communities now settled in the UK. This is an issue the Government and all those concerned about good community relations must address. Any discrimination, of whatever kind, is unacceptable and must be both legislated against and challenged by all appropriate means.
:Jeremy Corbyn MP, Source: No scape - Caste Discrimination in the UK
::While this "Dalit Solidarity" source is quotable of course bear in mind that it is partisan so per WP:RS multiple sources are needed to qualify this situation.Hkelkar 15:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, let me modify. It is not qutable here as we are talking about Castes in India only. Please put it in the relevant article. Not here.15:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is on the caste system among Indians. If Indians in the UK have retained the caste system, that topic is appropriate to this article. — goethean ॐ 15:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Indians are not an ethnic group. South Asians are an ethnic group. There are at least seven distinct races in South Asia.By your logic I can also put Castes in Pakistan and Bangladesh in the article. Please understand.Hkelkar 15:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exporting the caste system to the UK 

message: I came to this page from the Village Pump.  Looks like emotions are running high and some of the talk page discussion is drifting away from the article topic.  That's a good time to request outside comments.  Please summarize the dispute for visitors and have a look at this essay.  Regards, Durova 14:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommend [[WP:RFC|RfC]] 

message: Na kulam vrittahinasya
Pramanamiti me matihi /
Anteshwapij jatanam
Vrittameva vishishyate //
– Mahabharata, Udyoga Parva, Ch 34, v 41.
Rucham no dhehi brahmaneshu
Rucham rajasu naskridhi |
Rucham vishveshu shudreshu
Mayi dhehi rucha rucham ||
–Taittiriya Samhita V 7.6 3-4
I'm leaving those up there to see what the Hinduism bashers have in response.Bakaman Bakatalk 18:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotes

message: This is an important topic. I note that it has been edited to insert specific views and in the process hard facts about the subject have been deleted.
The caste system is present among the Christians and Muslims, perhaps a separate article is needed to treat them in detail, while keeping the basec information here.
The term caste and varna are not interchangable. There is a separate page for the varna system. This page should focus on caste.
--Vikramsingh 17:58, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bad idea.It creates a potential for POV forks.Best to keep everything in one place only.Besides, what "views" are you talking about exactly? I mean, what are "hard facts" and what are "views"?As long as the wikipedia policy of WP:Verifiability is maintained the distinctions between the two are irrelevant.Hkelkar 08:41, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hkelkar FACTS are necessary. especially articles related to Hindu and Hinduism. There are not FACTS given. Dhammafriend 18:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: This article should be based on facts and not views

message: Hkelkar, please provide a source that states the fatwas established various Muslim castes. You cannot use the text of the fatwas themselves to make such a claim. BhaiSaab talk 00:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I said, let the mediators decide. Hkelkar 00:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I will file an RfC on this Hkelkar 00:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the need for an RfC? This is a pretty simple request. BhaiSaab talk 01:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I have made my case above. I will not repeat the same thing again and again for your benefit.Just wait for comments.Hkelkar 01:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Notice that the upper caste Muslims have names that are entirely Arabic, not connected to Sanskrit or any aspect of Hindu society. The upper castes have no connection to Hinduism at all.
*Will add more quotes from these books:
Arthashastra of Kautilya and Fatawa-i-Jahandari of Ziauddin Barani : an analysis / by Arbind Das.
Ideology, Modernization and Politics of India by V.R. Mehta
===Comments===
Hkelkar, would you like to specifically comment on any of the quotes that I provided? BhaiSaab talk 01:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I already have. Let the mediators/commentators decide now.Hkelkar 01:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd actually like us to go through this again. Our discussion above is quite messy. If you don't want to comment on my quotes, I certainly have a few comments about yours. BhaiSaab talk 01:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm sure you do. However, wikipedia is not the place for ululating. Get a blog for that.Hkelkar 02:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:CIVIL. Does that mean you don't want me to comment? BhaiSaab talk 02:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: No, the talk page is big enough as it is.Comment on the commentators' responses.Hkelkar 02:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Plus, I'm not done gathering quotes.I have tons more refs to peruse. Here in the US of A nobody can behead me for it, or even cop my hands off. Hkelkar 02:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: It refutes the (typically) anti-Hindu comment by MerryJ-Ho/TerryJ-Ho/lkadvani/whateverhecallshimselfnow that Caste is unique to Hindus.Hkelkar 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not concerned with that here. I'm concerned with the origins of the caste system among Muslims in India. BhaiSaab talk 02:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I'd like to add to my initial statement here. Britannica states "India and Pakistan" in the quote above, so I guess there's no need to assume in this case. BhaiSaab talk 03:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: It supports the claim that Caste is not unique to Hindus.Hkelkar 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not concerned with that here. I'm concerned with the origins of the caste system among Muslims in India. BhaiSaab talk 02:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Well the Manusmriti cannot be used in the same way either but that doesn;t stop the Muslims from doing it.Hkelkar 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Manusmriti can be used in such a way because secondary sources like Brittanica confirm a religious link between Hinduism and Hindu castes. BhaiSaab talk 02:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Sikand et al do the exact same thing for a link between Islam and Islamic castes.Hkelkar 02:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You've failed to prove that. BhaiSaab talk 03:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Read his article. He clearly says that the Muslim Caste System was based on Barrani's reading of the Koran. I have said so multiple times.If you don't want to listen, then congrats, the Mullahs have done a good job. Hkelkar 03:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Bah! Semantics. And they call ME a wikilawyer. The usage of tenses in the entire text clearly indicates that there was no caste system prior to the fatwa (among Muslims), then lo and behold, good old al-barrani jumps up, ululates "teh w00T, let's oppress the Ajlaf" and the story begins.Hence his fatwa suggested the Ashraf/Ajlaf caste system to Tughlaq and thus established it. Hkelkar 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So what you're saying is that you're using your interpretation of word tenses to directly contradict sources like the Encyclopedia of Islam and Britannica? Interesting. BhaiSaab talk 02:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: No, I'm using the standard meaning of the word tense to arrive at the conclusion regarding the paper that a ten-year old who didn't go to a Deobandi Madrassa would figure out rather quickly.Again, let the commentators decide on this one.Hkelkar 02:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, now that you've got your argument out, it's perfectly fine to let them decide. BhaiSaab talk 03:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Just providing context, is all. I didn;t put this little tidbit into the article for precisely this reason.Hkelkar 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Understandable. No comment on this then as you confirm it cannot be used in the article. BhaiSaab talk 02:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Muslim Castes 

message: *"Islamic caste - any of the units of social stratification that developed among Muslims in India and Pakistan as a result of the proximity of Hindu culture. Most of the South Asian Muslims were recruited from the Hindu population; despite the egalitarian tenets of Islam, the Muslim converts persisted in their Hindu social habits. Hindus, in turn, accommodated the Muslim ruling class by giving it a status of its own." "Islamic caste." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2006. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 18 Oct. 2006 http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9042918
*"One of these was the place given to caste, with converts clinging to some memory of their former status in a hierarchical society, while what may be called Muslim castes developed as Indian Muslims classified themselves as Sayyid, Shaikh, Mughal, or Pathan. This structure was never very rigid; as Bernier commented, anyone who put on a white turban called himself a Mughal. An old saying makes the same point: "Last year I was a Julaha (weaver); this year a Shaikh; and next year if the harvest be good, I shall be a Sayyid." And in the mosque the Islamic ideals of brotherhood and equality remained triumphant." Muslim Civilization in India S. M. Ikram, New York: Columbia University Press, 1964
*"The Muslim caste system is a result of Hindu influence; the Indian Muslims have acquired the system, …, from the Hindus through constant and continuous culture contact; the system of caste groupings itself resulted in the concept of social distance between the two communities, the Hindus and the Muslims." Muslim Caste in Uttar Pradesh (A Study of Culture Contact), Ghaus Ansari, Lucknow, 1960, Page 66
*"Following from this, the existence of caste-like features among non-Hindu, including Muslim, communities in India is thus generally seen as a result of the cultural influence on these communities of their Hindu neighbours or of Hinduism itself." (Sikand source)
*"There do, however, seems to have been some Hindū influences on Muslims in social rather than in religious practices. The Hindū conception of caste (d̲j̲āt, d̲j̲āti), a pre-Āryan social division of society which, by being grafted on to the Āryan concept of social order (varṇa), has acquired Brāhmanical sanction and consequent sanctification, has certainly spread to Muslim minority communities in some of the remoter districts of India. Caste is, for example, usually endogamous, and some Muslim communities have adopted similar restrictive endogamic patterns to those of their Hindū neighbours; in some cases even community of worship has ceased to be observed, and commensality has been replaced by mutually restricted eating groups. This is particularly noticeable among recent converts from Hinduism, especially from the lower caste Hindūs or from the so-called “untouchables”; it applies also to converts to Christianity in districts where a competent ministry is only rarely available." Burton-Page, J. "Hindū ." Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzeland W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2006. Brill Online. <http://www.brillonline.nl/subscriber/entry?entry=islam_SIM-2884>
BhaiSaab talk 01:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotes provided by BhaiSaab

message: Hkelkar, would you like to specifically comment on any of the quotes that I provided? BhaiSaab talk 01:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I already have. Let the mediators/commentators decide now.Hkelkar 01:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd actually like us to go through this again. Our discussion above is quite messy. If you don't want to comment on my quotes, I certainly have a few comments about yours. BhaiSaab talk 01:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure you do. However, wikipedia is not the place for ululating. Get a blog for that.Hkelkar 02:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:CIVIL. Does that mean you don't want me to comment? BhaiSaab talk 02:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: No, the talk page is big enough as it is.Comment on the commentators' responses.Hkelkar 02:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Plus, I'm not done gathering quotes.I have tons more refs to peruse. Here in the US of A nobody can behead me for it, or even cop my hands off. Hkelkar 02:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: It refutes the (typically) anti-Hindu comment by MerryJ-Ho/TerryJ-Ho/lkadvani/whateverhecallshimselfnow that Caste is unique to Hindus.Hkelkar 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not concerned with that here. I'm concerned with the origins of the caste system among Muslims in India. BhaiSaab talk 02:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I'd like to add to my initial statement here. Britannica states "India and Pakistan" in the quote above, so I guess there's no need to assume in this case. BhaiSaab talk 03:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: It supports the claim that Caste is not unique to Hindus.Hkelkar 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not concerned with that here. I'm concerned with the origins of the caste system among Muslims in India. BhaiSaab talk 02:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Well the Manusmriti cannot be used in the same way either but that doesn;t stop the Muslims from doing it.Hkelkar 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Manusmriti can be used in such a way because secondary sources like Brittanica confirm a religious link between Hinduism and Hindu castes. BhaiSaab talk 02:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Sikand et al do the exact same thing for a link between Islam and Islamic castes.Hkelkar 02:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You've failed to prove that. BhaiSaab talk 03:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Read his article. He clearly says that the Muslim Caste System was based on Barrani's reading of the Koran. I have said so multiple times.If you don't want to listen, then congrats, the Mullahs have done a good job. Hkelkar 03:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Bah! Semantics. And they call ME a wikilawyer. The usage of tenses in the entire text clearly indicates that there was no caste system prior to the fatwa (among Muslims), then lo and behold, good old al-barrani jumps up, ululates "teh w00T, let's oppress the Ajlaf" and the story begins.Hence his fatwa suggested the Ashraf/Ajlaf caste system to Tughlaq and thus established it. Hkelkar 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So what you're saying is that you're using your interpretation of word tenses to directly contradict sources like the Encyclopedia of Islam and Britannica? Interesting. BhaiSaab talk 02:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: No, I'm using the standard meaning of the word tense to arrive at the conclusion regarding the paper that a ten-year old who didn't go to a Deobandi Madrassa would figure out rather quickly.Again, let the commentators decide on this one.Hkelkar 02:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, now that you've got your argument out, it's perfectly fine to let them decide. BhaiSaab talk 03:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Just providing context, is all. I didn;t put this little tidbit into the article for precisely this reason.Hkelkar 02:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Understandable. No comment on this then as you confirm it cannot be used in the article. BhaiSaab talk 02:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: *"Our results revealed that the Pathan and the Sheikh form one cluster, the Syed and the Hindu Bania form another cluster, and the two clusters join together (the so-called higher caste); also, the Saifi and the Ansari form a separate cluster (lower caste)." - Genetic proof.Bakaman Bakatalk 05:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What does this have to do with anything my friend? BhaiSaab talk 05:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Proves there is a genetic difference between Sheikh/Pathan/Syed (higher caste) and lower caste Moslems.Bakaman Bakatalk 18:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but who's denying their existence on this talk page? BhaiSaab talk 01:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Genetics

message: The article should be separated in different sections on Caste System.
1. Muslim Caste System
2. Hindu Caste System
3. Christen Caste System
Hindus converted to Islam has carried the Hindu Caste System to Islam. Islam don't have any religious sanctions  for Caste Division. Hindus have Veda and other religious books to preach and justify social division. It is better to have separate artilces for Hindu Caste System Iqbal123 15:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Any sources? Seems to me you may want to try and actually read the Rgveda, Mahabharat, BG, etc.Bakaman Bakatalk 04:30, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Separate article in different sections Hindu Caste System, Muslim Caste System and Christen Caste System

message: Despite whatever sanctions the Manusmirti makes, most sources I have read indicate that there was little or no mobility among Hindu castes. The examples in the section right now seem to be some of the very few exceptions to this general rule. I will be revising that section. BhaiSaab talk 22:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No sources as usual. Hkelkar 22:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll add them, of course. It's not like I intend to add the statements without sources. BhaiSaab talk 22:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also I think I found a few more instances of mobility. I'll try to add those as well if they're not already mentioned. BhaiSaab talk 22:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I have cited papers that explicitly indicate that there was general mobility (particularly the Damle paper). If you remove those, that would be vandalism.Hkelkar 22:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes of course...vandalism. What's with this, though? Removing an entire sourced paragraph that compares the castes? BhaiSaab talk 22:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Er, no. It was moved into the criticism section because it balanced the criticism.Hkelkar 23:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ambedkar does not address mobility among Muslim castes; he addresses how "evil" the castes are. As you present it right now, it implies that Ambedkar is arguing against social mobility, whereas he does not mention mobility at all. And you removed the information about the rates of endogamous marriage completely. BhaiSaab talk 23:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Please don't bluff. Ambedkar's statements are in the right context. There is no mobility argument given by Ambedkar at all, the the edits do not reflect that. The endogamous marriage nonsense is not in the citation given.Hkelkar 23:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's just what I said - "there is no mobility given by Ambedkar at all" so why are you moving information about mobility right before his sentence? The endogamous marriage information is indeed in the citation given; I will pull it from a book review, which I would trust over your statements. BhaiSaab talk 23:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: "As is now becoming more and more evident from the study of South Asian Muslims, 'caste' boundaries seem to be weak compared to Hindus...From the Hindu perspective, Muslim occupational groups are castes...yet the rate of endogamy of these groups is a little under two-thirds (p. 114)" . BhaiSaab talk 23:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Regarding Smelster et al, a search shows that no occurrence of the word "minimal" exists in correlation 
with caste mobility. If you have another edition please provide edition #, page # & quote.Hkelkar 01:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you've actually read the source, which I doubt you have, please quote the sentence on the page that has the word "minimal" in it. BhaiSaab talk 01:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually, I have. 
P167 says that mobility "AT THE LEVEL ABOVE THE PARTICULAR SUBSET OF JATIS" is minimal. Mobility within sub-castes is NOT minimal. Please don't misrepresent sources. I'll chalk this up to another of your taqiyyas. Hkelkar 01:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where did I say sub-castes? Seems like you're misrepresenting what I stated instead of me misrepresenting sources. Taqiyyas? That seems to be an Islamophobic "canard" against me, as you would say. BhaiSaab talk 01:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I think you should remain, bhaisaab.  You get very emotional in these sorts of issues.  It keeps you from being neutral.  That's not good for your mental health.--D-Boy 19:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: perhaps you should refrain from inflammatory personal remarks. ITAQALLAH 23:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you should try and add something to the page instead of lecturing us.Bakaman Bakatalk 01:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mobility among the Castes" 

message: This discussion should be curtailed as it has turned in to a slanging match--Darrendeng 10:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slanging Match