Talk:Khatri
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
|
More information about this article...
|
|
[edit] This is getting ridiculous, SERIOUSLY
"In Hinduism, the Asura (Sanskrit: असुर) are a group of power-seeking deities, sometimes misleadingly referred to as demons. They were opposed to the devas. "
Khatri's and Asura's? Get real. The fact is that this article is now no longer being disputed, there is enough evidence here to conclude Ksatriya/Khatri equivalence. None of the evidence provided has been successfully refuted or counter-citated. Put this dispute to rest; lock the article for a while and BAN vandals. Seriously - I'm getting sick and tired of all these people that change the article without providing any evidence whatsoever. Seriousy..
-
- I agree the article has been victim of disruptive activities.All of us must analyse facts only.Bad faith editors,who seek propaganda through wikipedia articles should be banned.Holy -- + -- Warrior 09:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] In Desperate Need of Help
I have not committed any act of vandalism yet i was banned by user:Can't sleep, clown will eat me for "repeated acts of vandalism". I have not gotten back my right to edit, and I would like some explanation/justice (i tried to appeal but it was futile). user:Ragib also banned me for vandalism (only 1 act, admittedly, i commited (out of frustration). Both bans were without warning.
[edit] Please PROVIDE EVIDENCE OR REFUTE BEFORE MAKING CHANGES
No one has refuted or provided other evidence AGAINST the evidence that supports ksatriya/khatri linkage. PLEASE do not blatently make changes without any evidence/refutation - this is vandalism and i encourage any honest person to refer vandal usernames to admins.
[edit] Moderator is no Special Admin
While you guys are having a revert war, I wish to get one thing perfectly straight. Why do you expect Moderator to do everything for you? Is it because of his username. You need to get one thing very clear, as far as I know, Moderator3000 is not an admin, he has no powers the rest of us don't have and he may not have full knowledge of Wikipedia policies. I suggest you ask User:Nichalp, or User:Gurubrahma, who are respected admins. Here's a list of Indian Admins. Nobleeagle (Talk) 08:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- It has shown what a name can achieve.I am thinking of having Administrator2000 as my ID.surely people will respect me.Holywarrior 09:37, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Prominent historical figures
Article on Bedi clan has been created.
The following text regarding has been restored. It is quite significant.
- Many prominent historical figures have emerged from the Khatri. All ten Sikh Gurus were Khatri, belonging to the Bedi, Trehan, Bhalla and Sodhi subcastes. Raja Todar Mal was a Tandon Khatri who codified the revenue collection system as Revenue Minister for Akbar. Haqiqat Rai was a Puri Khatri whose martyrdom was celebrated on Basant Panchami in Lahore until independence. Hari Singh Nalwa, an Uppal Khatri, was a prominent general under Maharaja Ranjit Singh. The father and son pair of the Diwans Sawan Mal and Mul Raj Chopra were successive governors of Multan under Ranjit Singh. The former instituted vast improvement in agriculture, while the latter was instrumental in leading the revolt against the British to prevent the annexation of the Sikh kingdom into the East India Company territory.
--ISKapoor 22:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Please be civil
Please be civil. In a discussion people will have differing views. Please respect that and try and potray your viewpoint in a cogent and mature manner. All articles should conform to the neutral point of view, and not have a pro- or anti- bias. Please also do not indulge in name calling. See Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Wikipedia policy states that articles contributed should not be original research. To include material here, please cite credible sources. Thank you, =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Please stop messing with this page....
MODERATOR AND SYSTEM ADMIN........PLEASE UNDERSTAND, THERE HAVE BEEN PEOPLE OF NON-KHATRI ORIGIN MAKING EDITS AND COMMENTING OUT FACTUAL INFORMATION ABOUT KHATRIS..........WHICH WE WILL NOT APPROVE OF..........THESE PEOPLE NEED TO BE BANNED FROM COMING TO THIS PAGE AND MAKING EDITS.....I WILL PROVIDE YOU IP ADDRESSES IF YOU NEED THEM...
THANKS, JAY3 (A TRUE KHATRI/KSHATRIYA)
[edit] Administrators
Hello, there seems to have been some confusion over who is and who is not an administrator here. To check whether or not someone is an admin, type their username in Special:Listusers. If "sysop" appears next to their username, then they are an admin. If it does not, they are not. (example) Prodego talk 00:41, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I CAN DO THIS ALL DAY....
I CAN KEEP CHANGING THE PAGE BACK TO THE WAY IT SHOULD BE ALL DAY ALL NIGHT....NO PROBLEM
.......YOU HEAR ME """ONESTONE"""....QUIT MESSING WITH THE PAGE
-JAY3
You belong in a mental institution. Onestone.
ACTUALLY ONESTONE, I AM IN A MENTAL INSTITUTION.........HAHAHAH!.....I WRITE ALL MY INFORMATION FROM MY ASYLUM CELL....
-JAY3
[edit] Problem with edits by 156.80.102.158
The aryan invasion theory etc. belongs elsewhere. This article is about the Khatris, based on well-known documented facts.
I have seem claims of people claiming to be superior because they came from elsewhere or have a lighter colored skin. These views have no place in this article. The following are not appropriate.
- were scattered in the northern areas of Afghanistan and southern Tajikistan (in ancient times these areas were known as Bactria and Sogdiana.
- All Kshatriya/Khatris and Brahmins are descendants of Aryan people originating in Central Asia (related to Iranian Aryan tribes of Persia/Iran). They migrated/invaded the Indian subcontinent around the year 3000-1500 B.C., often referred to as the Aryan Invasion).
This article is about Khatris, but it not about claiming that they have exclusive authority to rule.
- Khatris were for many centuries the only group that made up the government administration roles including the rulers, kings, landlords, and governors, as well as the civil administration officials.
Aroras and other similar communities are brothers and friends of Khatris. Aroras are a distinct group, with their own unique history. There is a separate article on Aroras.
Finally Brother 156.80.102.158 - why did you insert the POV tag?
--Vikramsingh 21:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
VIKRAM SINGH, WHICH POV TAG ARE YOU REFERRING TOO?.......I AGREE, I WILL TAKE OUT THE STATEMENTS ABOVE, SINCE THIS IS SOLELY ABOUT KHATRIS, BUT THE FACTS REMAIN TRUE ABOUT THOSE STATEMENTS ABOVE....LOOK AT THE ROLES OF KHATRIS, AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO BRAHMINS....WHY DOES NO OTHER CASTE/GROUP HAVE THAT RELATIONSHIP TO BRAHMINS? OBVIOUSLY THERE MUST BE SOME DEEP SEEDED HISTORY WITH THESE TWO GROUPS, CORRECT?
-JAY3
Yes, the relationship between Khatris and the Saraswat Brahmins is well documented. It is also referred to in the article. --Vikramsingh 20:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The tag: "The factual accuracy of this article is disputed"
Please let us know which specific facts are disputed. Please note that there is a list of references at the end.--Vikramsingh 21:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Have you read the talk page archive, when there is a revert war like what's going on now, the article is considered disputed. Nobleeagle (Talk) 01:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I think there is a good list of references. Is there something you question and want referenced? --Vikramsingh 20:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- I looked at Nobleeagle's recent version. It looks like the appropriate one, I have restored it. It seems that there is some feeling of rivalry that is behind the revert war. I think for India, and for the Hindus, it is time for people to respect each other regardless of the caste we may belong. The article should be factual and based on hard information. That is what I and several of the other contributors have worked for. --Vikramsingh 20:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reversion
You guys revert everyone without even thinking about what you're reverting. Read WP:LEAD at least, read WP:3RR. The article needs a lead section and you guys are removing it. I inserted the Caste Infobox onto the article and was reverted...this is a pointless waste of time if you guys maintain this attitude. Nobleeagle (Talk) 01:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Khatri....Kshatriya
I do not actually believe in caste and my interest is only from an anthropological point of view, but the continuous editing and re--editing of this page is quite ridiculous and the continous vandalism quite pathetic, one version actually says "khatris are an actor caste" for God's sake come on...
Khatris throughout the middle ages were always considered as Kshatriyas and the difference in the spelling is simply the Prakrit/early punjabi spelling, just as just as Raksha becomes Rakha. Take away the s and y from Kshatriya and you have Khatriya. At some point in the post-Gupta era they took to commerce.
I am from a saraswat Brahmin family and there is indeed a close relationship between the two communities, i HAVE TRIED TO ADD TO THE ARTICLE but it has been changed. Hence my discussion here as i will no longer bother taking "the bate". Regards Sarsut -( punjabi way of saying Saraswati, as in Sarsut Brahman)
[edit] AND STILL..........
NO ONE HAS ANSWERED MY QUESTIONS ABOVE, AND ARE STILL EAGER TO CHANGE THE PAGE...........
FOR THOSE WHO DENY THE KHATRI/KSHATRIYA RELATIONSHIP, ARE ANY OF YOU GOING TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS ABOVE OR WHAT? OR ARE YOU STILL DOING YOUR RESEARCH?
JAY3
- Please don't use capital letters to make a point, it's pretty much the online equivalent of shouting at people! Please stay cool when discussing articles. It's much easier to get your ideas across when others don't think you're being hostile. Have a great day, — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • 04:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Khatri/Ksatriya Citings + Refutation Against Manushmritis Citings
Firstly, the admin "Ragib" has banned me for apparently vandalism. I admit, I got frustrated with the revert war and wrote quite blatently in the main article (only that the Khatri's are indeed Ksatriya). I don't believe that the family one is lucky/unlucky enough to be born in defines much at all about their character, it is action that does. All men (and of course, women) are equal unless their character is perturbed by their action - regardless their rights are always equal.
Secondly, I must say it is quite ridiculous how everybody bought into the Manushmritis citings. Here is a nice and quick way to put them to death (re-post):
The nepalise warriors are called 'Chetri' (in fact, Chetri redirects to Ksatriya in Wikipedia) which is linguistically just as close as 'Ksshatri'. Hence there is a contradiction in the logic behind the citation (Manushmritis citation) that is heavily based on the linguistics of "Ksshatri", rendering it invalid. Let alone, a whole community being spawned by a very vague and RARE occurance of events; probabilistically and statistically approximately 0, as this event would have to occur over thousands of times. Here 'event' refers to the event that results in a Ksshatri, as defined previously to be a situation where a Ksatriya female mates with a Sudra male, their child becoming a 'Ksshatri'. Can anyone here provide any solid historical evidence of these events occurring thousands and thousands of times? Thus although it may or may not be valid to refer to Khatri as Ksatriya, it is certainly not valid to refer to them as Sudra.
Here is an arguement posted by someone else that actually favours Khatri/Ksatriya linkage linguistically:
"Khatris throughout the middle ages were always considered as Kshatriyas and the difference in the spelling is simply the Prakrit/early punjabi spelling, just as just as Raksha becomes Rakha. Take away the s and y from Kshatriya and you have Khatriya. At some point in the post-Gupta era they took to commerce."
Thirdly, breif mentions of citings which one VikramSingh has also referred to, please check the articles listed in "References". Also check articles via clicking the names available in the list of Khatri surnames. One in particular has references to the history of Burdwan, where Kapoor ruled for a long time period. Although Burdwan is part of Bangladesh, the ruling Kapoor family undoubtedly trace their origins to Khatri - and hence the HISTORY OF BURDWAN MUST BE REFUTED if anyone is to say otherwise to Khatri = Ksatriya.
Jay3, I don't argue against your Khatri origins, but to call yourself a Khatri is to call yourself a warrior - are you?
Also, there was a very nice section on this article a long time back on Muslim Khatri's. Does anyone know why that was removed?
Also althought Khatri and Ksatriya are one and the same, citation is definately needed when whoever wrote "The Khatris are the original members of the Kshatriya caste" must citate this... that they are indeed the ORIGINALS.
Enough said.
All men have equal rights, all men are equal until their character is perturbed by their actions.
IP: wateva, go check
-
- Restoring this after vandalism got it blanked. Nobleeagle (Talk) 08:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
NOBLEEAGLE, YES I AGREE, TO CALL MYSELF A KHATRI, IS TO CALL MYSELF A WARRIOR......BUT IT IS ALSO RIGHT TO CALL A KHATRI/KSHATRIYA A LEADER, AN ADMINISTRATOR, GOVERNOR, MILITARY OFFICIAL, LANDLORD, KING, RULER, CIVIL ADMINISTRATOR, GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATOR, ETC.ETC....BASCIALLY, ANY ROLE IN AN ARISTOCRATIC POSITION......AND THIS WHAT THE MAJORITY OF KHATRIS ARE IN.... -JAY3
[edit] Maharajas of Burdwan
Actually Burdwan fortunately remained a part of India. Yes, It's Maharajas are Khatri. See the article Kapoor.
The ruling family of Burdwan was responsible for numerous contributions to what is now known as the Bengali culture, many of them in turn, influenced all of India.
--Vikramsingh 23:36, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] AND STILL.........AS OF 6/29/06
NO ONE HAS ANSWERED MY QUESTIONS ABOVE, AND ARE STILL EAGER TO CHANGE THE PAGE...........
FOR THOSE WHO DENY THE KHATRI/KSHATRIYA RELATIONSHIP, ARE ANY OF YOU GOING TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS ABOVE OR WHAT? OR ARE YOU STILL DOING YOUR RESEARCH?
JAY3 JAY3 infact it was I who had written citation from manusmriti which you persistently removed.You are encouraged to write about your refutations of Mnaushmriti even on my talk page if you prefer.I just wonder what makes people hate the word Shudra.Holywarrior 08:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for those citings Holywarrior, but they were easily refuted if you read above. No need to refute any more.
I DON'T HATE THE WORD SHUDRA, INFACT, I ONLY HATE WHEN PEOPLE FABRICATE AND MISINFORM PEOPLE ABOU HISTORY AND FACTUAL INFORMATION about KHATRIS, OR ANYONE FOR THAT MATTER.....ALSO, SHUDRAS PLAYED AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE ANCIENT SOCIAL STRUCTURE OF INDIA, NO ONE CAN DENY THIS....BUT I WILL SAY, BECAUSE OF PEOPLES NATURE, THE HIGHER CASTES WOULD OFTEN CORRUPT OR TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEIR POSITIONS AND EXPLOIT LOWER CASTES....WHICH WE ALL KNOW, WAS TOTALLY WRONG THING TO DO! -JAY3
- Hi Jay I read your refutations which are actually countercharge on nepal kings.Yes they are called chettri but actually they are from Mewar Guhilot dynasty whose Kshatriya status is also challenged by Gen.Todd linking them with sasanian sakas /Guebras .This is not the way to refute something.Holywarrior 14:44, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- It should be noted that James Tod wrote in 1829-1832 when most of the archaeological information was not available, and many manuscripts had not come to light. The Kings of Nepal are certainly Rajput, and are thus not immediately related with the Khatris. It should be kept in kind that in ancient times, India was a very large country, with different clans of Kshatriyas ruling different kingdoms in various parts of India. Thus it cannot be claimed that only a certain set of clans from a specific region are the only descendants of the ancient Kshatriyas.--Vikramsingh 16:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- Later findings and works have attested James Todd's work with seal of trust.Holywarrior 10:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- It should be noted that James Tod wrote in 1829-1832 when most of the archaeological information was not available, and many manuscripts had not come to light. The Kings of Nepal are certainly Rajput, and are thus not immediately related with the Khatris. It should be kept in kind that in ancient times, India was a very large country, with different clans of Kshatriyas ruling different kingdoms in various parts of India. Thus it cannot be claimed that only a certain set of clans from a specific region are the only descendants of the ancient Kshatriyas.--Vikramsingh 16:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
....
Hey Holywarrior. Those citings and the refutation against your citings wasn't done by Jay, it was done by none other than I (no username). The fact remains that the implications you wish to draw from your citings can only be true under the heavy assumption of a linguistic connection between 'Khatri' and "Kshatri". "Kshatri" is also just as close to "Ksatriya". Also your citings are still refuted regardless of the assumption.
Infact, "Khatri" and "Ksatriya" linguistic connection has been well cited already above. You have also not counter-citated or refuted any of the other citings of ksatriya/khatri linkage posted above.
Can we stop refuting on refutation now?
[edit] disambiguation
Kindly stop reverting to versions where the links point to Punjab, as opposed to a specific usage of the term. It's really bloody annoying, cuz I've busted my chops trying to remove disambiguation links to Punjab. — riana_dzasta • t • c 14:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Kshatri
Kshatri was also the name of the famous character from the mahabharat "Vidura" who was half brother of Dhritarashtra and cousin of Pandu. "Please check mahabharata." Kshatri also denotes one who is intelligent just fair and strong; qualities that were possessed by Vidura ( supposed incarnation of lord yamaraja, whose son was yuddisthira. )—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alokbagga (talk • contribs)..
[edit] I would suggest.....
that you a-holes stop messing with the page, and putting bogus information up that Khatris are not Kshatriya.....
No one can deny that Khatris/Kshatriya are the same people, so get over it!
KHATRI = KSHATRIYA........simple as that!
will you answer Kshattri=?,I am going to start an article Kshatri.Holy -- + -- Warrior 15:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
........HOLY COWARD, stop being such a loser with that whole 'Kshattri' idea!.....I mean come on, does it not go to prove that you are trying so hard to prove the Khatri/Kshatriya relationship is not true, that you are desparate and looking for anything you can find? And it just goes to show how much you want to dissociate Khatris from Kshatriya. No one can deny or change the fact that Khatri/Kshatriya are the same!.....I bid you good luck on your research! -JAY3
[edit] Khatri ==> Kshatriya
Khatris are the foremost kshatriya race, descended from Luv And Kusha the sons of Lord Rama as narrated by Guru Gobind Singh In bachitar Natak.
Rajputs originated around 700AD. Bappa Rawal first leader who was blessed by Guru Gorakhnath. Rajputs were created by Guru Gorakhnath much the same way as Khalsa was created to protect Hindu ANd INdia from the Islamic Invasion Starting In makran( modern day Balochistan) around the same time.
Rajputs actions of yore were of Khsatriya heritage whether they were originally Kshatriya is debatable.
Khalsa can be anyone his actions have to conform to Kshatriya duties..
similarly earlier rajput could be anyone his actions should conform to kshatriya standards.
Rajputs and Khalsa both adore and worship the sword.
Sword is the symbol of Dharma as narrated By bhisma pitmah in the Santi/Anusansa Parva(I'll give the details of exact section by check in the online text for NAkula, BHISMA, KHADGA)
Also Divine Mother( God in the form of mother) descended on earth with the sword to wipe out adharma and protect her children. Guru Gorakhnath was a worshipper of Mother, get it confirmed from Kanphata yoga's ( Also refer to Swami Rama's works) and Guru Gobing Singh called the sword BHagoti or the Mother or the Sword( as claimed by SIkhs though I doubt it??).
Singh is the Middle name adopted by rajputs and Khalsa. Both suppose to be upholders of dharma. Many texts of Hinduism say that man is known by his deeds. i.e you are a kshatriya if your actions are such. Khalsa gurus were khatris.
IMO muslim rajput is an oxymoron.
So khatris are one of the most ancient kshatriya race by birth/lineage thought they make conform to other duties of different orders as regards to their deeds.
ALok PS ( I have a bunch of reference if someone needs let me know) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alokbagga (talk • contribs). But,that is all your opinions,it will be better to discuss Khatri/Kshatri only here.Holy|Warrior 13:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Holycoward, why would anyone discuss only khatri/kshattri on this page, only because you say so??......Don't you get it, there is nothing in the Khatri's history that shows them to be of Kshattri (Shudra) origin as you so cleverly try to make accusations of based on false and misleading information. I really don't understand your deal man, how long can you go on with this nonsense you post?? You see, even after you and I are dead, nothing will change about the Khatri/Kshatriya history....
[edit] Added
I have added a reference and a few links to articles on specific clans. The Sodhi article has been started.--Vikramsingh 00:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vandals User:IPKapoor, User:SanjayMohan, User:MSKhanna
These three are frequent vandals:
- User:IPKapoor inserts "The Khatris are an Asura community"
- User:SanjayMohan: inserts "Punjabi Khatris are a community of the Asuras"
- User:MSKhanna inserts "The Khatris are Sudra community" or "The Khatris are a despised community"
As you can guess User:IPKapoor and User:MSKhanna are not really Kapoor or Khanna, User:SanjayMohan is same as User:IPKapoor.
If you encounter vandalism by these, I suggest restoring a good version before making any edits.
--Vikramsingh 22:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Notethat User:IPKapoor is not me. Apparently the vandal User:IPKapoor whoever he really is, wants people to think that he is me.--ISKapoor 01:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vandal User:156.80.102.187
This person 156.80.102.187 has been inserting the tags:
unsourced}}
POV}}
disputed}}
and also this ridiculus text (with no historical support) :
All Kshatriya/Khatris and Brahmins are descendants of Aryan people originating in Central Asia (related to Iranian Aryan tribes of Persia/Iran). They migrated/invaded the Indian subcontinent around the year 3000-1500 B.C., often referred to as the Aryan Invasion).
--Vikramsingh 01:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
VikramSingh, what is your caste background? I'm guessing you are an Arora, correct? JAY3
[edit] Vandalism by "IPKapoor"
The vandal "IPKapoor" had inserted a number of Jat family names in the list (see below). Perhaps he is a Jat.
I think people from the same region should specially respect each other, since they share a cultural heritage.
List with non-Khatri names inserted by IPKapoor:
- Some Khatri family names include Anand, Ahlawat,Alpials, Awal, Badhwar,Bahl, Bagga, Baijal, Bajwa (=Baswaal) ,Bakshi, Bangyaal,Bedi, Bhalla, Bhasin, Bhandari, Bindra, Chadha, Chandok, Chatta, Cheema, Chona, Chopra, Choudhary, Dahiya, Dalal, Deswal, Dhawan, Dhillon, Dhuhra, Dua, Duggal, Dhupar, Dumra, Gadhiok,Gatwallas, Ghai, Gill, Gandhi, Golia , Gondal, Gosain, Gujral, Gulla, Handa,Her, Jerath, Jairath, Jaggi, Jakhar,Joura, Kadian,Kakkar, Kapoor (Kapur), Kahlon, Kang, Khar (= Kher, Kharral) ,Khanna, Khosla, Khullar, Kochhar, Kohli, Koshal, Lajwa, Langah (= Langriwal), Lal, Lala, Lamba, Loomba, Madhok, Mahendru, Maini, Malhotra, Malik, Mankhand, Manraj, Mehra, Mehrotra, Mehta, Monga, Nair(Nayyar), Nayer, Nijhawan, Nikhanj, Oberoi, Ohri, Parwanda, Phull, Phul, Phool, Puri, Rai, Randhawa (= Ranjha), Rathi, Roshan, Sabharwal, Sablok, Saggar, Sahni, Sami, Sarin, Saroya,.Sehota, Sochi, Sukhera,Sehgal (Sahgal), Sekhri, Sethi, Seth, Sahrawat,Sial (Syal), Sibal, Sikka, Sobti, Sodhi, Sondhi, Soni, Suri, Talwar, Tandan (Tandon), Taror (= Tarraar and Tharthaal), Tehim, Thapar, Trehan, Uppal, Vadehra, Vig. Vij, Vinaik, Vohra, Wadhawan, Wahi (Wahie), Walia and Waraich (= Virk, Varya or Brar,).
I am sad to see this vandalism.--Vikramsingh 22:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism of this Talk page
Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AKhatri&diff=71427701&oldid=70550862
How IPKapoor is vandalizing this talk page itself.--Vikramsingh 22:36, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism by [BMehra]of this Talk page
Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AKhatri&diff=71972812&oldid=71843488
Apparently BMehra is same as IPKapoor (and is neither a Mehra or a Kapoor or from any other Khatri clan).--Vikramsingh 23:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Article started
I have started.
You are requested to kindly contribute. --ISKapoor 00:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ok....This is not a page about ARORAS!
I would suggest we remove the long section about Aroras, since this is strictly a Khatri page!...Let me know what you think moderator
[edit] Arora article
There is one alredy. Please see Arora.
--Vikramsingh 22:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Aroras, Lohanas, Soods and Bhatias ARE NOT KHATRIS/KSHATRIYA
Sorry to inform you, but Aroras, Lohanas, Soods and Bhatias are not Khatris or Kshatriya. The original and true people of the Kshatriya caste are Khatris. Some Khatris have expanded into the mercantile/business man field, and work along with the Aroras, Lohanas, Soods, and Bhatias, who are considered part of the Vaishya caste... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jvegas3 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC).
- In Wikipedia we do things by sources and there are ample sources proving that Aroras, Lohanas, Soods and Bhatias are Kshatriya.Religion and CasteAncestry.com. Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 21:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Ok Nobleeagle, no where in that link you sent to me above does it say Lohanas, Soods, Bhatias, or Aroras are considered Khatri/Kshatriya. It only says, for example, that Aroras THEMSELVES claim to be Khatri/Kshatriya, but no one else other then their own community recognizes this. So I think you really need to remove the piece from the article:
"The Khatris, along with the Aroras, Lohanas, Soods, Bahris and Bhatias, are the Kshatriya communities of Punjab."
[edit] Nobleeagle, are you a Khatri even?
Just curious, are you a Khatri or Arora? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.110.28.119 (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Leave Bhatias, Soods and Lohanas out of this this Khatri-Arora spat
Whoever says that Bhatias are not Kshatriyas are ignorant. The Bhatias, like the Khatris are of Kshatriya stock. The wikipedia entry Bhatia notes that the Bhatia community, like many Jat and Rajput clans, claim descent from one of the greatest Rajput clans of the subcontinent, the Bhatti Rajputs. You do not need more evidence than that, do you?
Next, the Soods claim descent from the Parmar Rajput clan, which is one of the four Agnikula Rajput clans, the other three being Chauhan, Gurjar-Pratihar and Solanki. Again, this is noted in the wikipedia entry on Soods.
Lastly, the Lohana community claims descent from Lav or Loh, one of the twin sons of Sri Rama, and are thus Suryavanshis. May I also put on record here that though the Lohanas are believed to have evolved in the Punjab region (Lav or Loh founded Lahore and his twin Kush founded the town of Kasur on the left bank of the Satluj from Ferozepur), I have yet to come across a Punjabi Lohana. Today, the bulk of the community is domiciled due to centuries of migration, in Sindh and Gujarat. Conversion of Lohanas to Islam gave rise to some of the prominent Muslim communities in western South Asia: the Memons, the Bohras and the Khojas.
And finally, I would say this to the casteist Khatris who have belting out vitriol about Aroras: We do not need your sanction to claim Kshatriya descent. As it is, everybody else who knows Old Punjab, considers both Khatris and Aroras to be just tight-fisted, petty and small-time shopkeepers and moneylenders, a task akin to that performed by Banias, rather than as 'noble warrior Kshatriyas.' —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.212.129.66 (talk) 13:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC).
Uhhhhh yea, nice try there buddy!....Look at history for proof, and it will show how Khatris have been the noble, educated, ruling, and aristrocratic high caste for centuries and centuries (EVERYONE KNOWS THIS). The only groups who are considered petty shop keepers are Bhatias, Soods, and Aroras, Banias. If Khatris were petty shop keepers according to you, would they have been able to start a new religion (Sikhism), and have millions of followers (including, Ramgharias, Soods, Jatts, Bhatias, Kambojs, Rajputs, Aroras, Lohanas, Tarkhans, Gujjars, Ahirs, etc.) follow it during its beginning??? If, according to you, that Soods, Aroras, and Bhatias were Kshatriyas, then why would they allow Khatris to start Sikhism? I'll tell you why....it's because they had no control over this, they were not of the same caste or level as Khatris. In fact, the only group at the start of Sikhism that could infact of the power to oppose the Sikh faith were the Mughal rulers or other Khatri groups, who feared they would lose their high caste ranking because of the equality Sikhism promoted. So please "UNSIGNED".....don't even try to come to this discussion board and bring facts about a topic you have no knowledge of!! -JAY3
My dear chap, I know you are a "defender of the community". But it is not me, but you who do not look beyond your backyard. I am not one of your bete noires, "Holy Warrior" or "Sanjay Mohan" or "Rajesh Chauhan" with whom you have had some very nice loud mouthed exchanges. I am justr an ordinary Arora man, who has been just plain annoyed to notice the bilethat folks like you try to belch out against my community. Like you said, look at history itself. And you will find Aroras at every place where the "noble Khatris" are mentioned. And do not give me the "duhai of Sikhism". Orthodox Sikhs do not even consider caste to be an important factor. And even if you look at Sikh military history, you will find most of the Sikh martyrs and warriors to be the rural and militant Jats, than the pusillanimous, urbsne, shop-keepers, the Khatris and their counterparts, the Aroras. If you are so well-versed in Khatri history, just cite me some of the major wars involving Khatris and some of the major states they ruled. That is the true hallmark of being royal and warlike.
And lastly, this site does not belong to you. So do not give me 'naseehats' about not coming on this discussion board. "Ae tere pyo di Chaudhar nahi hai."
[edit] My daddy strongest
Ever so often this imbecile discussion breaks out . and comments like ..jat best or jat beast ,khatri ...best.. or .shopkeeper ...moneylender ...khatri worst ....malhotra elite ....dhai ghar at the top of the pyrimid ....sareen at the lowest ....arora this arora that . Sikh Jat better that Sikh Khatri ..... Hindu bania !....seems to me that posters making both peacock references to them selves and derogatory references to others are only venting their own insecurities from the real world . Intothefire 05:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] How can you keep saying Aroras, Lohanas, Soods, and Bhatias are Khatri/Kshatriya????
If these groups were Khatri/Kshatriya, don't you think they would be called that, and not Sood or Bhatia. This is such b.s. to being that these groups are classified along with Khatris. They might share comment professions at time or live in the same geographic region, but that does not make them part of the Kshatriya caste. Answer me this then, why is that certain families or groups are even called Khatri then? I mean, you would think, if Bhatias or Soods were Kshatriya, they would also be Khatri, right??? This just goes to show that they are NOT Kshatriya, they are business people and merchant class (Vaishya)
Aroras are Khatris .Intothefire 18:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] In-line citations
I have started inserting in-line citations.
Note that citatations are inserted in the text using the ref tags. They are automatically listed at the end of the article.
If you would like to add citations, please check the code during editing and use examples there.
--Vikramsingh 01:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
