Talk:Kayastha
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette. |
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on April 4, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
 |
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. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments) |
|
More information about this article...
|
|
 Archives |
Contents |
[edit] Logic
The article, written by a brother Kayastha, is very appealing to the intellect.
Since the thing has come to pure logic, let me use a little bit of it.
We all understand that caste is linked to our genes and upbringing, the two vital factors that makes us what we are.
I very well understand that most people today wouldn’t believe what the Vedas have to say, yet that is wherein the castes have there roots. So, even if you don’t believe them- To solve a matter of caste, you got to take their help. Their authority in this matter can’t be challenged, it overrides everything else.
चित्र इद राजा राजका इदन्यके यके सरस्वतीमनु ।
पर्जन्य इव ततनद धि वर्ष्ट्या सहस्रमयुता ददत ॥ RIG VEDA 8/21/18
Let’s look what can logic bring us to, if we go to the past.
Kayastha by profession were into the profession of writing. Now, in ancient India, Sanskrit was the state language so a knowledge of Sanskrit was must for them. Also, in the initial stages, writing was a whole lot bound to governance and religion, both of which needed a person to be of noble birth.
Also the Kayastha were granted land by then Hindu Kings, a privilege enjoyed by Brahmins. Historical proofs in form of plates written to mark such occasions have been found.
Kayastha Kings are found in ancient history(what many call mythology) and historically noted times. They being preffered as ministers can not be disputed (again, you know these can be enjoyed only by a man of noble birth). In fact, this led to bad blood between the Kayasthas and Kashmiri pandits, as described by Kshemendra in Rajtarangini. In this book, many an insults were inflicted on the Kayasthas but never was a question raised on thier being of high birth, for Kshemendra was doing his duty of taking the part of his fellows but never committed the sin of insulting the Gods.
Now, let me see what is the social position of the Kayasthas today:
They are the hardest hit because of government policies of reservation in educational institutes and government offices. The Indian government considers them an UPPER CASTE[citation needed]. At least that’s something more credible to on than a stray anonymous wikipedia ID questioning and maligning the Kayasthas.
The Kayasthas are the only caste other than the Brahmins(if they are not considered one) to perform religious rites and sacrifices (thanks to ‘the God of Justice’ connection.)
Now, comes the question of their being Brahmins or not.
Learned Brahmins all over India consider the Kayasthas as Brahmins. (Except, it seems, in Bengal- thanks to the ‘Divide and Rule’ policy of the new rulers of India then, whose strongest hold was Calcutta and Bengal saw some of the finest applications of Machiavelli’s principles and experiments on spreading of an Empire)
Caste, what’s their?
A good example to illustarte this is Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (founder and developer of the Transcendental Meditation technique and related programs and initiatives, including schools and a university with campuses in the United States and China). He was the secretary of Swami Brahmananda Saraswati,the Shankaracharya (from 1941 to 1953) of Jyotir Math, located in the Indian Himalayas. Maharishi is a Kayastha and his real name is Mahesh Prasad Varma. Atleast the Shankaracharya can be assumed to have enough knowledge of caste and not to let a non-brahmin to be his secretary.<br />
Also, a few links to some Brahmanic sites will be helpful to prove these facts.
- Vedah.net, which presents a list of the main sub-divisions of Brahmins, lists the Kayasthas as one of the 31 main sub-divisions of Brahmins. Vedah.net
- Kamat.com puts forward a comprehensive list of more than 50 Brahmin Communities in India, the Kayasthas are also listed. Kamat.com
- The Sanskrit dictionary at Hindunet.org defines ‘Kayastha’ as follows:
ka_yastha, ka_yata a man belonging to the writer-caste; a tribe of bra_hman.as whose employment is writing (Ka.)(Ka.lex.) Sanskrit Dictionary at Hindunet.org
There is also a marked similarity between the life styles of Brahmins and Kayasthas of North India (especially of the Gangatic planes). These two have many a surnames in common and also inter-marry.
30 Nov., 2007 Nikhil Srivastava (talk) 20:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Status of Kayastha
Brahmin or Not. But Kayastha definitely do not seem to be Shudras in this modern world.
Some of the discussion given in these pages is difficult to rationalize with realities of today. Most of it is based on quoting ancient Indian text which might give reference and evidence which is contradictory. What is required is to analyze this issue in today’s context, and with reference to what is acceptable or prevalent today.
Caste in India definitely has a strong relationship to color - if you look at high castes' people of India. The word varna (caste) itself means color. If not most, many Brahmin and other high castes are lighter color than the other castes. Now consider some of the well known Kayasthas as a sample - Sonu Nigam, Shatrugan Sinha, Amitabh Bachchan, Nutan, Jaya Prakash Narayan, Gary Saxena, Bipasha Basu, Moon Moon Sen, Mini Mathur, Deepti Bhatnagar to name a few - it is difficult to categorize these people as Shudras. Either all these folks are very badly mixed with high castes somehow or their caste is being placed wrongly as Shudra. This is not to say that all Kayasthas are similar in looks and color!
Another factor worth considering is DNA analysis evidence. Sometime back reading an article in National Geographic about the Genographic project I got my DNA analysis done. I am a Kayastha and I belong to R1a1 Haplogroup of Indo-European race. R1a1 group of people are found in Norway (35+%), Iceland, England, Germany, Ukraine, Russia, and other eastern european countries. So it is a group that came into India from Europe - a group of Indo Aryan which most high caste of India fall in. I find that most of the folks from India who belong to R1a1 database (ysearch.com and look for R1a and R1a1 groups) are Brahmins like Iyers, Iyengars, Gokhale, Mishra; many Punjabis; and other Kayasthas from Bengal and UP. Either Kayasthas are lost cousins (who got categorized differently) of these other folks, or belong to the same categorization as other high castes at least genetically. Again this is not to say that all Kayasthas are R1a1, but if a study is done majority will be. In fact one the study of DNA analysis done finds majority of Bihar Kayastha in R1a1.
Other familial evidence I see around me is that most family members of mine look more like Brahmins & other high caste, have been traditionally very well educated (from big name places for last 100 years at least), reasonably wealthy, and living in the best part of some of the best towns of the indo gangetic plains. Another quirky thing has been - our kitchens were always typically run by Brahmins of UP (maharajs and maharajins) mainly but definitely high caste even today, and just like other high castes some folks in our family discriminate against ... whatever high castes discriminate against. Definite similarities with high castes! These are not traits of Shudras who have been put down for ages!
Many of the points mentioned in this discussion end of quoting ancient texts which are being translated - somewhere something might be getting lost. Their validity and authenticity is debatable probably. The points I mention are more easily discussed or debated in today's context. Social evidence around does indicates that Kayastha belong to high caste rather than Shudra! In everyday life, Kayasthas have been treated like high castes. For years Brahmins have been coming and doing puja at Kayastha homes, and in temples for Kayasthas. Probably Shudras do not really have these traditions. From experience I can say that at Kashi Vishwanath, Puri, Bhanke Bihari, Trichur temples I have seen my accompanying escorts (drivers) being stopped because of their caste. But Kayasthas do not face this problem in modern India today. You see pictures of famous Kayastha stars being taken Trupathi. Or the problem exists and the Brahmins of these most famous temples just fold up under the Kayastha money!
The debate on the caste status is not just limited to Kayasthas, but exists with many others groups and is all prevalent. Namboodris Brahmins of Kerela have known to discriminate against other Brahmins of India specially the Tamil Brahmins who probably rubbed shoulder for superiority with them in their own backyard. Namboodris have known to term other Brahmins as Shudras. So the concept of terming any high caste or other caste as Shudra to subjugate and prevail over them is not new (and limited to this page), but a definite construct and devise used for ages. Even Brahmins or for that matter Kayasthas are not one homogeneous group - there are differentiations, distinctions and discriminations based on regions, and even within regions. Many Brahmin castes of UP and Bihar are typically maharajs who cook in the kitchens, and others work on the gaths. Surely, even in modern India it is not possible that the sacred temples of India are going to allow these Brahmins to do puja even if they could and wanted to.
Being a vegetarian is not a definite requirement of being a Brahmin. Most Kashmiri Brahmins eat meat on regular basis. All Bengali Brahmins eat fish, whereas all south Indian and UP Brahmins will not. Variations exist and are accepted in India not just today but for many years. Just like Brahmins fall in both categories of vegetarian and non-vegetarian. Kayastha also among them have vegetarian who will discriminate against you if you are a non-vegetarian. So you cannot really divide or assign caste on this one single basis. It is inconceivable that ancestors of Brahmin or the vegetarian Kayasthas where always vegetarian. Before cultivation (Kurgan Culture of Indo European) and agriculture, probably man was really surviving on hunting and eating meat. Surely educated folks cannot take recourse in ancient texts and start quoting that some Hindu god created their race or caste, Brahminical or otherwise!
Knowledge and literacy has been a definite factor in caste. Brahmins and other high castes have been typically literate and read scriptures. Kayasthas in this regard also have not been behind. They have a very strong tradition of education going back to over 1000 years at least, or maybe longer. One finds reference of literate Kayasthas running local governments and courts when first Muslim conquerors came to India in ~1000 AD. Kayastha families of UP have had women in 1930-40s who were college graduates, when most other UP high caste women (or their families) did not really pay equal attention to education.
Lastly taking about contribution, one cannot deny the Brahmins what they have contributed to advancement of knowledge in the various fields like scientific discoveries, literature, politics, government etc. But you will find that Kayasthas are not really far behind! List of famous Kayasthas gives a glimpse of their contributions. So if Kayasthas are not Brahmins they have been probably one of the biggest challengers to their supremacy.
Nov 20th, 2007
[edit] Not my view. Rolly
I moved it to avoid fighting on main page. This is not my view. I am a true Kayastha.
Shudra Status and Non-Shudra Claim
Since late 19th century AD, officials, anthropologists, and Indologists who took interest in caste aspect of Indian society had/have studied Kayastha community and its agitation for raising its caste/Varna status (in addition to similar study of other communities). Result is that there is enough information available on present and past of Kayastha along with those of other castes in their works.
See the discussion page discussion and old wiki page rise of kayastha regarding some of factual inaccuracies in this page. Kayasth appears to be a caste under Shudra category, and Chitragupta himself a Shudra, in Hindu scriptures.
For not initiated readers, Shudra is the status assigned in Hindu scriptures to a large number of communities. These scriptures and hence such assignments reflected views of Brahman community (who are of highest caste/Varna according to Hindu scriptures created by them). These views are world outlook, not confined to believers in Hinduism. In fact, anyone who is not one of three higher Varnas - irrespective of his religion, color, nationality and so on- is a Shudra. See page 24 of [Asok Mitra,11]
For a community that follows Hindu religion but is considered Shudra, it is a dilemma whether to accept this assigned status. Since there is enough abusive preaching/sermon in Hindu scriptures that denigrates an individual of Shudra status, these communities make conscious effort to shed off their Shudra status. This denigration includes everything: from judicial treatment, manners, sex to food. page 22 of [Asok Mitra, 11]
While living inside Hindu society, practical way of avoiding denigration by people believing in Hinduism is avoiding detection of oneself or the community as Shudra. This leads to impersonation and aping of Hindu Varnas which are assigned higher status in these scriptures. This process of impersonation and aping is what Mr M.N. Srinivas has called Sanskritization. Many of Shudra communities do everything, often in an organized manner, in this process of impersonation and aping which leads to change in their customs, eating habits, and so on. This is done in order to make claim of higher Hindu Varna origin. [1]
Calling a community a Shudra under Hindu caste system cannot be morally or otherwise wrong. Shudra status is just the view given in Hindu scriptures about all who do not belong to certain communities. Even if a community is not a Shudra, calling it Shudra may be a mistake but cannot be an offence: note that almost every foreigner is a Shudra in view of Hindu scriptures. page 24 of [Asok Mitra, 11]
Below are excerpts from the book Peasant and Monks in British India, Chapter 2 available online:
“ By the late nineteenth century Kayasths had begun organizing a movement to reject their ascribed shudra status in favor of a kshatriya one; by the early twentieth century, many others—particularly Kurmis, Koiris, Kahars, and Goalas—followed the Kayasth lead (although each utilized distinct arguments) and defined for themselves similar kshatriya identities.”
Below excerpt from same source highlight importance of wearing Sacred Thread in the process of Sanskritization:
““a visit to any of the akharas of Ramanandi bairagis will convince that Sudras of all classes are as freely admitted and invested with the sacred thread as the twice born.”[113] Investiture with the sacred thread conferred, by definition, elite “twice-born” status and was theoretically reserved for vaishyas, kshatriyas, and brahmans. By performing this ceremony on behalf of shudras, the Ramanandi sampraday (or some in the sampraday) effectively undermined the hierarchy implicit to caste through the adroit application of varna ideology. The practice of sacred thread investiture in Ramanandi akharas should ultimately be understood in the context of the kshatriya identity movements of the early twentieth century, inasmuch as it encapsulates in a single ritual the entire thrust of the kshatriya campaigns. Lala Sita Ram’s assertion of Ramanandi progressivism in this regard would suggest that the sampraday was involved, at least tangentially, in the process of varna reidentification. It should be added that the willingness to countenance varna distinctions in monastic recruitment and training and the recognition of the varna systemics implicit to sacred thread investiture as a strategy for shudra social advancement are both entirely consistent with the essentially Ramanuji position expressed by Sita Ram in his reaction to Farquhar’s 1920 presentation of Ramanand. ““
The process of Sanskritization has caused almost all communities under influence of Hinduism to find some character in Hindu scriptures to identify with, to legitimize their claim of being upper caste. In fact, many of them have invented up stories and better names for their castes in this process, and prefer these names rather than traditional ones. Please also see wiki pages on kurmi, yadav, gujjar, jat, ahir, maratha and other castes. The connection between Chitragupta and Kayastha may be also similar. The present community or group of communities known as kayastha adopted this Kayastha name in near past. And as mentioned in references, Hindu scriptures who mention Kayastha primarily mention it as Shudra. Though Chitragupta is the character identified by these communities to relate with, Chitragupta himself appears to be a Shudra in Hindu scriptures. See the details with references to Hindu scriptures in page 36 of [Asok Mitra,11].
Courts in British India also passed judgment on status of Kayastha within Hindu caste system since Hindus were governed by Hindu laws. In a 1916 case, Calcutta High Court judged that Kayastha of Bengal are Shudra. Interestingly, issue of its status was again later considered by Justice Jwala Prasad, himself a Kayastha, in a 1926 case and he held that Kayastha of Bihar are not Shudra but Ksatriya. (See [2].The online available page of this article at the link starts with mention of the memorial of Kayasth protesting their classification as low-caste). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rollynigam1980 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Rollynigam1980 (talk) 19:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] This should not be repeated
I have been amused by the attempts made to defile us.
I am not at all amused by the way a Deity had been insulted.
I refer to the latest hoax pasted on the page insulting the Kayasthas and Shree Chitraguptaji. The writer of that hoax is an imbecile and that too of the highest degree, hereafter referred to as “the sly”.
He has a trace of vileness which only a man to be doomed can possess.
The citations that have been so talked about are very tricky things.
I’ll show you how:
Brhadharma Purana says that the sly is an idiot. Brahmavaivart Purana dealing with idiots mentions the sly as an idiot of the highest order. Padma Purana says this sly will never do any thing worthy. Agni Purana mentions that such idiots be burned alive.
Got my point.
So when I write something or give reference to a religious text I either give the Shloka or the Shloka number so that the people can go and see it for themselves. They are sure to find it. Example:
चित्र इद राजा राजका इदन्यके यके सरस्वतीमनु ।
पर्जन्य इव ततनद धि वर्ष्ट्या सहस्रमयुता ददत ॥ RIG VEDA 8/21/18
By the way the Vedas have the power of overriding all other texts in religious matters. It is the supreme court of Hinduism. The matter stands settled.
But the sly does not and can not do so and very slyly misses mentioning any Shloka numbers. He knows no one is going to read all the Puranas to see if such lies are there or not, here is the trick. Now let me tell you that all the talk of the Puranas mentioning the sly as an idiot was just to show how this trick works.
Also it be remembered that we can endure insults on us but not on our Progenitor, who as a matter of fact is also a Deity for the rest of Hindus, and everyone is this world is aware of the reactions that we Hindus are capable to giving when it comes to our religion and our Gods.
Do not provoke us. Nikhil Srivastava 13:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- Do not provoke you??? Has Wikipedia become a place for threatening people who disagree with you? You don't seem to have the slightest clue that this is an Encyclopedia and as such needs to be kept as objective and impartial as possible, and should not champion your personal religious views. Luckily, not many people seem to care one way or another. 70.186.172.75 (talk) 11:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Inaccurate Historical Description
There are factual inaccuracies in the page. The page contains material which lacks objectivity. Since the caste and particularly its status is directly related to dignity in Indian society, one cannot hope that one can ever find material in this (or any other specific caste related) page which is not in one way or other way of propaganda nature. Probably best thing will be to keep a list of references only and not to give any opinion.
By the way, below material was added on 14th September 2007 with references cited. Though in the past, it may be unpleasant when looked from angle of earlier mentioned dignity issue, in modern society we do not have to associate dignity with assigned caste status.
The material added is important because they at least accurately reproduce some higly interesting information from cited sources and further allow a serious student of ethonology/sociology to know that some other established view or facts exists on the issue. Further, it contains little bit of information about social changes in India in early 20th century. If a wiki page just contains one-sided view, it will just remain a medium of propaganda and will find difficult to attain status of even semi-reliable reference.
For benefit of people participating in discussion, the material added on 14th Sep 2007 is reproduced below with some additional emphasis, but parts that are still in latest edited page have been abbreviated.
[edit] The Material
The varying status of Kayastha within Hindu caste system is of great academic curiosity to Indian sociologists. Kayastha is supposed to belong to Shudra varna and is seen to provide example of gradual upward mobility of a caste within Hindu caste system on account of legitimately gained prosperity and influence. The claimed status of Kayastha as a caste within Hindu caste system varies from region to region. 1
Kayastha as a caste ... descent.
Puranas which mention Kayastha as a caste are not very old and deal with castes of a particular region. They mention Kayasthas as Shudras. Brhadharma Purana and Brahmavaivart Purana dealing with castes of Bengal do not mention Kayastha at all though they are comparatively recent creations. They mention however Karana as a writer Shudra caste. According to Vyas Smriti again, they are Shudra; Vallacharita puts them under newly created SatShudra subcategory of Shudra; according to Usanas Samhita, Kayastha has same origin as barber. The earlier stated theory that Kayasthas are descendents of Chitragupta and are born of Brahma's body is mentioned in Padma Purana. However status of Chitragupta himself is not that great in Hindu scriptures. According to Acharatantra, Chitragupta's father Masisa was born of Brahma's foot. According to Jatimala of Agni Purana, Chitragupta was son of Kayastha and a great grandson of original Shudra. In Skandpurana (Pravas 123), Chitragupta was son of Kayastha Mitra. 2,3
The rise of Kayastha as community ... from earliest Muslim conquests. Kayasthas attained ... British government of India. Kayastha has been ... in government matters.
In studies carried out in 19th century, Kayastha caste was found to admit people of other castes within its caste fold. Some studies consider Kayastha to be a mixed caste. As any Hindu, they deeply cared about their social status within Hindu caste system and raised their perceived status gradually by varios means. Studies noted them to be notorious for drinking freely in 19th century, but able to address this issue through caste conferences. One legend believed by some Kayasthas of Bengal traces their origin to 5 menial servants of those Brahmans of Kannauj who were summoned by king Adisur of Bengal to perform certain Vedic ceremonies. To elevate the perceived caste status, many Kayasthas took so called Sacred Thread like many other eagers when Brahmans in beginning of 20th century began performing Upanayan for anybody on payment of some fee which itself gradually reduced from a gift of 100 cows in 1904, 14 cows in 1920 to few rupees later.1,2
[edit] South Indian Kayasthas
Kayasthas are only called as such in North India (including East and West India). However, there are Kayastha-like communities in South India, such as the Pillais of Tamil Nadu, the Menons of Kerala, and the Reddys of Andhra Pradesh. Is there any evidence to link these castes with the Kayasthas of the north? 71.124.55.53 (talk) 01:10, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you 125.17.142.34 16:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
