Talk:Nair/Archive 7

message: Ok, so I went through the list. It's good that most of them have wikipedia articles. Here is what I suggest though. We should see if we can re-create the article. But it will need to be actively maintained because it's often the subject of vandalism. Vandals like to add their own names to the list. I've moved the page to Talk:Nair/List of Notable Nairs. Leaving it in the article makes it extremely long. --vi5in[talk] 16:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Notable Nairs

message: I have re-created the article List of Nairs and added pictures of Nairs to the Nair article. Please help in making this article better. Malayaliyan 10:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work, Malayalian. The article looks more colorful now. However, there is still more space for improvisation. I think the pictures of  Mannam and Kelappan are very much required. Also there are many big names missing in the List of Nairs.Keraleeyan  —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 06:41, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous Nairs

message: The addition of some of the new pictures like for the kalari and chattambi swamigal makes sense. (1)However it will be very nice to add the picture of male attire. Because the Dalawa´s dress is not representative of general male dress of medieval nayars. (2) Moreover i donot undersatnd why Vasco Da gama in zamorin´s court is presented as a picture in a nayar page ? (3) Can´t we shorten the vivaham section with old and new to a more concise one paragraph each ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.99.165.173 (talk) 10:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Samoothiris are Samanthans. But anyhow, cant we add the picture of the Paliath Achan? He is wearing the typical attire Manu  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.38.211 (talk) 07:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: I noted that earlier somebody had refuted the claim that Hiranyagarbha was not a ritual of converting a sudra to Kshatriya and that it is only a gift (dana) to brahmanas performed by kings. I therefore thought of providing a more comprehensive information I had. Huge Danas were done in the past to either show piety or even as a means of a sophisticated bribe to appease brahmans so as to get something in return. Brahmins on the other hand performed these either for financial benefit or preservation of their culture from budhism or for political benefits. Of the danas- Tulapurusha dana (donating weight in gold) and Hiranyagarbha dana were commonly used as bribes for either purgating sins of kings or ascending to Kashtriya state. Among Rajputs - Pawars (Paramaras), the Pariharas (Pratiharas), Chauhans and the Solankis /Chalukyas had used bribes packed in the form of dakshina to fire sacrifices at Mt Abu in 6th-7th century to attain Agnikula kshatriya status and the brahmanas in return were protected from budhism. The cholas had used hiraynyagarbha as early in Parantaka Chola´s time as 907-953 A.D or both  later in 1014  A.D. at the ThiruVisaluur temple, Tanjore  for purgation of sins as well as for attaiing Kshatriya status and the Brahmanas had gained financial benefit and propagation of vedic religion, Kolathiri used Hiranyagarbha dana in 1617 for attaining Kshatriya status. Travancore had used tula purusha danam. Many times these the dana was preceed by a yajna and the dana was a dakshina. In case of Hiranyagarbha dana, hiranya sooktham from rigveda was chanted and the ritual involved a smbolic travel through the womb of a cow as purification and then followed by the dana to the preists. For instance lets see what three historians/sociologist have to say about the Rajput incident.
Dutt R. C., 'Later Hindu Civilization', p.38 about the Rajputs "Everywhere they favoured Puranic Hinduism, and the Brahmans rewarded them for their toil, and reorganized the new race as the Kshatriyas of modern time." 
Prof. Mukherji makes a note, which is now more or less an accepted view that "The fact seems to be that when a foreign clan or a tribe became Hinduised that ruling families were recognized as Kshatriyas while the rank and file lost their tribal character and developed into an Indian caste of inferior rank." 
Dr. Ambedkar has observed: "One view is that they are foreigners, remnants of the Huns who invaded India and established themselves in Rajputana and whom the Brahmins raised to the status of kshatriyas with the object of using them as means to suppress Budhisms in Central India by a special Ceremony before the sacred fire and who were therefore known as Agnikula kshatriyas...."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.99.165.173 (talk) 15:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misconception of Hiranyagarbha and dana 

message: I feel that the Quotes section is unnecessary. It seems to only glorify Nairs and as a result, is rather POV. It doesn't add much to the article by way of information either. --vi5in[talk] 17:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It obviously does glorify the Nairs but isn't really POV as quotes themselves are genuine and informs the reader of which outsiders actually witnessed and commented on the Nairs. Perhaps to make it less POV, I suggest adding all quotes concerning Nairs from people of prominence i.e including the ones which don't show Nairs in a good light. But I'd like the section to stay as removing these quotes because of glorification is not reason enough to cut the section out as they do have some informative value such as the castes image to foreigners for example, which justifies its inclusion in an encyclopedia.B Nambiar 17:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about this? We can leave the ones that are cited. Let's take out the ones which aren't. We can add them back as soon as we are able to find citations for them. --vi5in[talk] 02:33, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Quotes section 

message: Due to the refusal of the rather irrelevant and misleading statement ". "As per the Census in 1931 of Travancore, number rich business people among the community was better compared to Malayali Sudra(Nairs) and Nanchinattu Sudras(Vellalas), even after being denied government jobs." to be removed from the Ezhava article there should be cited Nair/Ezhava comparisons also included in this article. B Nambiar 12:23, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well unfortunately when Nairs make Nair-Ezhava comparisons even from the most objective stand point-it tends to be classified as casteism or as statements that fuel cast conflict- though it somehow does not seem to apply the otherway round.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.99.165.173 (talk) 14:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Comparisons (objective or not) are unnecessary in this context because they really don't belong in this article. In addition it is sure to cause all sorts of trouble from overzealous types from both sides. Believe me I've had to deal with my fair share in this article before when all I was trying to do was to make it more objective. Now I'm having the same problem in the Ezhava article. --vi5in[talk] 02:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cited Nair-Ezhava comparisons should be included in the article. 

message: Viv, the vivaham section is too elaborate and is killing our article. Could you please condense the whole thing (the old form and new form) in to one para each please. Probably you can also add about difference between pudamuri, uzhamporukkal and veedaram kairal if u want.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.99.165.173 (talk) 15:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it does seem rather long doesn't it? I think I got carried away (I have been accused of being hyperlexic and hypergraphic writing way too much). I got the information from Indulekha and it seemed really good. I'll try and condense it while leaving the essential parts in. --vi5in[talk] 02:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Perhaps we can create a whole new article for it? But the term "Vivaham" is so general as to mean any marriage right? How about Nair Vivaham or Nair Marriage? Then we can link it to the main article. --vi5in[talk] 02:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vivaham - condense it please....