Talk:Caste system among South Asian Muslims/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Jajmani

What does that word mean? Agoras 05:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Barani

From what I have read so far, there were ulema besides Barani who sanctioned the caste system. This article seems to focus on that 'alim too much and does not mention others. Agoras 05:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


Pure Propaganda

pure propaganda. THERE IS NO CASTE SYSTEM OF ANY KIND IN BANGLADESH AMONG THE MUSLIMS, IF SO PLEASE GIVE A SOURCE, any newspaper, any article or anything that is credible that mention such system in Bangladesh among the Muslims.Tarikur 17:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

First of all, give me something that I can read online and confirm without subscription; I bet you didn't read it either. Second of all, I said on top, no Indian source: the book is written in New Delhi, India. You can give me any Bangladeshi article or Western based article or any other article except for Indian. If there was such thing caste system in Bangladesh, there would be millions of article online.
There are millions of newspaper articles, human rights article or government articles or any article; just me one that make a sight reference in it to Muslim caste in Bangladesh; if there was such thing there millions of articles online. So shouldn’t be hard to find them.
In the article it says "Quoms" are lowest in caste system in Bengali Muslims. Search word "Quoms" in google, it only gives 619 hits, which is very, very few for google search; even non-sense words have more hits than this on Google. Second, all the pages are either from wikipedia, forum/discussion board or the term is used for something else.
Tarikur 23:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Wrong. Reliable sources can come from anywhere. This is a peer-reviewed periodical. It notes that intercaste marriages in Bangladesh are 10% of all marriages (among Muslims). Also the ranks of the Muslims in the area correspond with the indigenous castes in the area.Bakaman 23:54, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
That is pure lie and propaganda; you know and we all know it. You and others are forcing a fact, which is not a reality. Ask any Bangladeshi Muslims, what caste system they belong to; they will slap you and say "what are you talking about". This must be joke "intercaste marriages in Bangladesh are 10% of all marriages (among Muslims)", that is a pure lie. You guys think you know more than I know about my own country and its people. Like I said before, there are millions of newspaper articles, human rights article or government articles or any article; just give me one that make a sight reference in it to Muslim caste in Bangladesh; if there was such thing there millions of articles online. So shouldn’t be hard to find them. Convince me and try to me give me many as you can.
PS. I am bringing Wikipedia administer Ragib here, who is from Bangladesh. He should know if there is caste system among Bangladeshi Muslims and history behind it and what you said about intercaste marriage.Tarikur 00:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Ragib will be quick to notice that the word "Bangladesh" is noted twice on the page in the external links and references section and nowhere else. However, I'm sure "# Ali, A.F. Imam (September 1993). Changing Social Stratification in Rural Bangladesh. South Asia Books." has something on castes in Bangladesh as well. You're making a mountain out of a molehill. Even in the version before your unwarranted tagging the whole Muslims caste system explanation concerns Indian & Pakistani Muslims and the history of caste among Muslims. For that there are a multitude of reliable sources. I wrote almost none of the article, in case you did not care to look at the history. Just because X person is from Fooland doesn't make X an expert on Fooland (as you seem to suggest the opposite). I am not an expert on the USA, nor am I an expert on Kolkatta.Bakaman 01:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
This isn't a lie. this is the truth. Many bengali muslims do this.--D-Boy 01:32, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm...the second para goes into great deapth on dissociating the presumed presence of castes among Muslims to the prevalance of Hindu Castes and its effects on the converted population based on a single article by Yoginder Sikand when Encycolpedia Britannica emphatically states that Muslims castes are " 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." I can smell rat here.Seems some people want parts of the fringe research overtake the real development of the subject.Indian delhi 01:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


Frankly, any "caste systems" among Muslims in Bangladesh or Bengal is totally imaginary. And "inter-caste marriages" is an equally deluded notion. There might be castes/tribal systems among Muslims in Pakistan or Northern India, but in the Eastern part, the there are not castes -- rather there are social classes. --Ragib 02:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

On reading the article in detail, I think it is referring to "Social stratifications" rather than castes. So, I suggest renaming it as "Social stratifications among South Asian Muslims". --Ragib 02:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Tarikur, firstly, I don't understand what the fuss is all about. The article doesn't even mention Bangladesh, except in the Further Reading section. Like it has been pointed out above, you're making a mountain out of a molehill.

Secondly, there is no "propaganda" here. There are literally hundreds of books and articles about castes among South Asian Muslims. That includes Encyclopaedia Britannica, and several books written by Muslim authors.

Thirdly, just because you haven't observed any social stratification in Bengal region, it doesn't mean there is none. The situation might not be as bad as that in India, and the stratification might be limited to remote rural areas, but you can't deny its presence altogether. There are several books and articles written by Bangladeshi/Muslim authors on the topic. Though, it might be possible that "caste system" is not a term to describe this stratification.

This would be propaganda, if the article gave undue weightage to sources like this one:




The article mentions this source only once, and doesn't give it any undue weightage. It doesn't even talk about caste system in Bangladesh.

I am open to Ragib's suggestion about moving the article to a new title, but I don't agree with the article being tagged as disputed or POV, when almost every sentence in the article is attributed and well-referenced. utcursch | talk 13:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The article used be worse, I removed the word Bangaldesh from this article. Now, the article still does talk Bengali Muslims and I want to remove this too


The article you quoted, mostly talks about Hindu caste system in Bangladesh. I came from very rural area of Bangladesh and where I am from, there is no such practice. The caste system that your article mentions among the Bengali Muslims are not considered real "caste"; they basically family title or family last name and they make up less than about 0.001% of Bangladeshi population and if anyone wants they change last name to those names too. There are very, very few family in Bangldesh trace their ancestor to prophet Mohammed, like article mentions. I agree we should rename this as "Social stratifications among South Asian Muslims".Tarikur 16:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
There are castes in Pakistan, South Asia is pretty wide. In India, there is huge stratification between Muslim castes (even different graveyards for Ashraf and Ajlaf). There are castes in Sri Lanka. Social Stratification is only running away from the problem.Bakaman 17:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Utcursch's comments that *up until the early 20th century*, the social classes like Sharif (noble) and the commoners used to be present. However, exactly the same social stratification would be seen in countries like England, where you would have Royalty, peers, and commoners. So, the thing you mention here are social classes, not "castes" (unless you agree that "England had a caste system" too!).

The last paragraph is quite interesting: in the villages are broadly divided into Khandan (high status Muslims), Girhasta (low status Muslims) and Kamla (labourers/lowest status Muslims). Where do you see a caste here? Khandan means people with noble heritage / lineage, Grihasta means middle class people, and Kamlas simply mean someone who acts as a day labourer. While there are differences in social status, this is very common in ANY society. Even in contemporary United States, there is a stratification among White Collar - Blue Collar. So, that alone doesn't mean there are "castes". I think a confusion is being created by implying socio-economic classes as "castes", and this description can be applied to all societies with equal ease at any time.

So, I again reiterate my suggestion, let us rename it as "Social stratification among South Asian Muslims". The material Utcursch and Bakasuprman have compiled and cited are of genuine research value, but some of the assertions and wordings are making this ambiguous and taking it far away from ground reality through the emphasis on the word "caste". --Ragib 17:54, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Some sentences in this page are out of place, no doubt, and I'm sure Ragib and Tarikur can iron out the truth and the stretches. But "Islamic castes" are a verified phenomenon. Britannica, The Journal of Asian Studies - Imtiaz Ahmed, The Journal of Asian Studies - Aggarwal. I can seriously drown a user in newspaper articles about this like this article from The Tribune "Muslim caste clash: One killed in exchange of fire"


I think this page has some irrelevant tangents but that a change in the title would be disingenuous. Cate is purely a South Asian problem, regardless of religion.Bakaman 21:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The poorly worded Tribute example isn't really helpful. From reading the article, it seems like the journalist meant groups or factions when using the word Caste. --Ragib 21:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
They keep coming. Heres one from the The Telegraph Kolkatta - "Quota chorus for Dalit Muslims - Demand likely to run into wall, scheduled caste order could come in the way"


.Bakaman 22:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Bakasuprman, read the article. Muslims are just saying that so they can get reserve seats in the government and other places. The "muslim dalit" that they are talking about are actually tribes; where they are isolated and tend to marry each other from the same tribe.
YOu can basically look at anything and interpret it as a sign of caste system, when it has nothing to do it. You can look at USA and see the same caste system in a similar interpretation like there are blue collar, where they are poor and uneducated and most likely they will marry another blue collar; where white collar are rich and educated and tend to marry another white collar. Bangladesh and eastern Indian Muslims are very much the same. The difference between caste and non-caste is people are not marked; where poor and low class can be educated and be rich and get accepted into the high class.
Look me and Ragib are from Bangladesh. Truth is we are not trying to hide anything or make ourselves look better. Truth is there are no such caste system exists and trying to force it into a reality is nothing more than pure "propaganda". If there was such a practice, I would definitely allow it on wikipedia. Tarikur 14:40, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Come to west bengal. I shall show you what goes on in the muslim villages.--D-Boy 00:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Tarikur. These are Muslim castes in India' not Bangladesh. Get that into your head. India not Bangladesh. These are documented by newspapers and they got the degrees in journalism, sociology, anthropology, not you. Sadly, there are many more "pure propagandists" than people ignorant of caste among Muslims on wikipedia. There are millions of documents attesting to a Muslim caste system. All religions preach equality, and Islam in India definitely doesnt practice what it preaches.Bakaman 00:51, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
All, I am from a Muslim background and from India and I don't agree with the imposition of castes that Bakaman has been emphatically putting on the Muslims..Castes or tribes or whatever you call them that exist among Muslims are the remnants of Hindu Castes and there are extremely rare cases of rigidity that one normally finds with the Hindu caste system.Historically saying, as I have seen in Bakaman's edits, there has been a lot of emphasis put on Barrani by him and precedingly by another editor called Hkelkar - into proving that there was a religious sanction of the social heirarchy and thus existence of castes - what Barrani wrote during the Turkic rule was first of all a political treatise and not a religious edict..now anybody with no knowledge of Arabic/Turkic/Persian could easily be misled into reading the title of his treatise "Fatwa-i-Jahandar" as a religious edict when it's his Opinions on Jahandari or simply [Guidebook for the king http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2004/guest_homayoun_9_23.html] - what we see in Indian Muslims or most South Asian Muslims are the remnants of certain aspects of homologous social customs but not certainly not untouchability and rigidness that is the hallmark of the Hindu caste system.By the way we have ignored the fact that according to the Hindu caste system Muslims are Mlecchas[1] Indian delhi 17:06, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Bullshit. When I edited F-I-J I didnt touch the caste section, I talked about Barrani's concepts of government, politics, and religion. Muslim Dalits are a community in India. Anyways, Muslims of Arab ancestry are higher than Muslims of lowly Indian ancestry [2]. You can pretend it doesnt exist but the truth is out there for anyone and everyone to see. If Muslims are Mlecchas the only reason is because they make leather, kill cows and follow another religion. Arabs are not Aryan so the use of the word is in the right context.Bakaman 20:41, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Just like I said before, you can basically look at anything and interpret it as a sign of caste system, when in reality it has nothing to do with caste system. Just like they are trying to force the Bangladeshi Muslims into having a mythical caste system, they are trying to the same with Indian Muslims. I been to India and I know there no caste system among the Indian Muslims especially among the Eastern Indians Muslims. For Hindus who writes about Muslim caste system, it is basically based on cultural bias, where you interpret other people's culture based on yours. For Westerners who studies caste system among South Asians, they have experimenter's bias, where you interpret everything as a sign of caste system, which may not be related to caste system at all. For example, if someone was studying caste system in America, they would interpret blue collar and white collar as a sign of a caste system as they with Bangladeshi blue collar and white collar label. For Muslims who writes about caste system, I believe they don't know the actual definition of caste system. They basically think that social classes are caste system. Tarikur 18:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Zarina Bhatty

Who is "Zarina Bhatty" and why is he/she a reliable source?Bless sins (talk) 15:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Is there any response to the above question?Bless sins (talk) 14:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Dr. Zarina Bhatty is a sociologist, well-known in Indian academic circles. To name a few of her published works:
  • Socio-economic status of Muslim women. (in Muslim Women: Problems and Prospectsby Zakia A. Siddiqi, Anwar Jahan Zuberi, Aligarh Muslim University, ISBN 8185880042)
  • A Daughter of Awadh (in A Space Of Her Own: Personal Narratives Of Twelve Women by Leela Gulati, Jasodhara Bagchi, SAGE Publications, ISBN 076193314X). Published in Indian journal of gender studies (ISSN 0971-5215) 1999 Jul-Dec;6(2):311-25.
  • Social Stratification Among Muslims in India (in Caste: Its Twentieth Century Avatar, edited by M. N. Srinivas, Viking, New Delhi, 1996)
  • Gender Socialization: South Asia (in Encyclopedia of Women & Islamic Cultures Volume II)
She is also former President of Indian Association of Women's Studies. Her writings have also been published in well-known newspapers and journals, (such as The Hindu[3], Dawn[4]), and she has spoken at many national-level seminars (e.g. [5]). She has also worked as a gender specialist with USAID, IFAD and IDB. utcursch | talk 03:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Your arguments are strong. I think I will take them to WP:RSN.Bless sins (talk) 12:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

What is the difference between a Caste and a Tribe ?

Sindh and Pakistan Punjab have muslim tribes such as Jat, Awan, Arrain, Rajput etc. In India, the Hindu equivalents of Rajput and Jat would be called caste. So my question is when does a tribe become a caste ? Jonathansammy (talk) 15:05, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

A caste is hierarchical while a tribe is not. Awans are like Syeds, Shaikhs, and Quereshis as they claim descent from those core arab tribes and thus are not considered real punjabis. They're considered old muslims, meaning that they're ancestors were muslims from along time ago. Punjabi muslim Jats, Arrains, Rajputs are considered new-muslims meaning that they're not of arab heritage (unlike awans) and that their ancestors were fresh hindus converted to muslim and share a common heritage with punjabi Sikhs, punjabi hindus as well as the Hindi-speaking continuum. The new-muslim old-muslim duality in south asia basically distinguishes desi people who were recent converts to islam from the ones of arab-persian ancestry. It's likely that Punjabi new-muslims try to keep their caste in a tribal sense, they may have become muslim to escape jizayah and/or stop their treatments as the warrior caste by Brahmins. I think the majority of Sindhi, Hindko, Saraiki and Punjabi muslims are new-muslims, meaning they are of recent Indo-aryan kshatrya class heritage, unlike Awans, Sheikhs etc. who like to think they're arabs. Keep in mind that most of the races are regarded as patrilineal, so racial mixing is irrevelant, you will see many Awans and they look idenitical to new-muslman punjabis, punjabi sikhs and punjabi hindus on the same ratio of phenotypes, but they only count their father line regardless of how many hindus, sikhs, or new-muslmans their ancestors married.

Pashtuns on the other hand are supposed to believe that caste is evil (as possibly outlined by Pashtunwali) but there there is a difference here. Pashtuns have a habit of dividing their race into several tribes, and divide their tribes into several more tribes and it keeps on going as times go by. The tribes aren't believed to be superior to one another, as caste would be, but Pashtuns typically like to divide themselves and make an accurate description of who is who, but i think Pashtun sub-tribes/clans, or khels are like big families, but i'm not sure why pashtuns like to clump their race into bits and pieces and segregrate themselves, but some say they do it for marital reasons meaning that a Yusufzai can only marry within one tribal confederacy because they think Ghilzais are of Turkic origins or that the Karlan Pathans of the Khyber are too different, I don't know it's a bit hard to explain here. --108.173.174.134 (talk) 03:59, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your attempt at explaining. In my opinion, castes (jati) and tribes are synonyms as far as the Hindus are concerned. It was the western scholars of the 19th century who made the term caste more popular to fit their hypothesis on the ancient varna system which did not have any relevance to the vast majority of Hindus of the day. Jonathansammy (talk) 17:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

This is pure non-sense

I really don't know about Indian Muslim or Pakistan Muslim. I know for sure that there is no caste system or Ashrafs/Arzal or Quoms exist in Bangladesh. I will remove the country name Bangladesh from this article unless someone can provide me evidence from good reliable source (Western based source or Bangladesh based source, not Indian based source). I know this because search word "Quoms" in google, it only gives 692 hits, which is very few for google search. Second, all the pages are either from forum/discussion board or the term is used for something else. Tarikur 04:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I am a Pakistani Muslim and I agree with you completely. Quom in Urdu means Kingdom or nation not caste. I have tried to correct this entry regarding Pakistan (because I don't know about Indian Muslims) here and on the more general caste page but someone keeps reverting it back without even a cursory discussion of why. I have listed my problems with the entry on Pakistan in this article and in the more general caste discussion page here: [6]

Sraisa 18:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

"He was also critical of the precept of literalism of scripture among Indian Muslims that led them to keep the Muslim Caste system rigid and discriminatory."

I couldn't stop laughing at this statement that was allegedly made by Ambdekar. If the Indian Muslims really follow Quran literalism, then they should know that Desert Arabs are the worst race in the Quran as according to 9:97:

"The Arabs of the desert are the worst in Unbelief and hypocrisy, and most fitted to be in ignorance of the command which Allah hath sent down to His Apostle: But Allah is All-knowing, All-Wise."

I don't know which is funnier, Ambdekar making this statement or the editor of this article is trying to instill a non-existence issue in the Quran (i.e. racism or racial superiority). The caste system was influenced by Hinduism, please don't try to deny it and said that caste system in the South Asian Muslim communities are due to "Quran Literalism". This is one of the most dishonest attempt to tamper with the Quranic scriptures to make it look racist. This article must be produced (or made) by a Hindutva (Hindu Nationalist).175.136.189.72 (talk) 00:05, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Change title of the page to "caste system among muslims"

I am thinking of changing the title, so that caste system of Yemen, Afghanistan, and more can be added. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:19, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Page move and content deletion

I have moved the page back to its original title "Caste System among Muslims", User:Nestwiki had moved it to "Class system among Muslims" without any discussion. You can start a move discussion here before making any move. I also saw that he changed most of the instance of the word "Caste" to "Class" and also deleted a lot of content.-sarvajna (talk) 02:14, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Needs a complete rewrite

There are some good points, but overall the article misleads.--WALTHAM2 (talk) 21:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. 70.51.84.138 (talk) 21:49, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Rubbish

Muslims dont have caste, they have family groups or bloodlines. but it doesnt mean anything, for example rajput , a rajput in pakistan just been they are realated, you can have on rajput who is a millionaire another who is a tramp, unlike the hindu caste system, the pakistani family bloodline group has no economic status or economic limitation or discrimination —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.151.0.13 (talk) 02:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. 70.51.84.138 (talk) 21:50, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

lies

Lower castes are often persecuted by the upper castes. A particularly infamous example of such incidents is that of Mukhtaran Mai in Pakistan, a low caste woman who was gang raped by upper caste men

they did not rape her because she was lower caste it was just a disgusting rape and has no significance to caste persecution —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.151.0.13 (talk) 02:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. 70.51.84.138 (talk) 21:51, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Good Effort

Its a good article but still needs more research. Though Islam does not provide society model with castes like hindus but its a fact that muslim societies at least in south Asia still practice this system which they have inherited from Hindusim, so I totally disagree the above given views. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abulfazl (talk • contribs).

What you mean good article? This is pure propaganda. THERE IS NO CASTE SYSTEM OF ANY KIND IN BANGLADESH, IF SO PLEASE GIVE A SOURCE, any newspaper, any article or anything that is credible that mention such system in Bangladesh. Tarikur 17:10, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Last revert by me

I have few of the previous edit, a lot of them does makes sense but there were no proper referencing done in many places. May be we can have a discussion here. For example this kind of referencing where Gita is quoted makes no sense. Thanks -sarvajna (talk) 07:48, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. 70.51.84.138 (talk) 21:53, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Is This a Joke

I burst out laughing reading caste system in Pakistan, the person who wrote that section blatantly has poor understanding of Pakistani society since they have failed to acknowledge there is no such things as "Castes" in Pakistan, rather ethnic groups, which often encourage discriminations, for example Punjabis (Jatts, Rajputs etc) are often target killed in Baluchistan simple because they are Punjabis, I'm not condoning this, just stating an example. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yassinbaloch091 (talk • contribs) 10:19, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. 70.51.84.138 (talk) 21:56, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

This is unbelievable. Who wrote this garbage? This entire article is politically motivated - taking a CLEARLY Hindu practice of the caste system and saying yeah, the Muslims practice it worse?? The Hindus have basically injected every possible anti-Pakistan and anti-Muslim BS in every possible vein on Wikipedia. All this article does is cherry pick quotes and writers that seem to denigrate Islam and Muslims. lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.169.197.24 (talk) 07:14, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. 70.51.84.138 (talk) 21:56, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 30 September 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Page move with consensus. (Please follow-up with any needed corrections in terms of scope/version. (non-admin closure) — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 21:59, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Social class among Muslims → Caste system among South Asian Muslims – The 2007 version was the intended version of this article space. It was also named Caste system among South Asian Muslims, which is now a redirect. The current title "Social class among Muslims", has attracted wp:synthesis. The 2007 version is noteworthy while this version is questionable, Here is the 2007 version for comparison [7]. More background information for this move can be obtained at this AfD [8]. - Steve Quinn (talk) 03:33, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Support The 2007 version was the intended version of this article space. The current title "Social class among Muslims", has attracted wp:synthesis. The 2007 version is noteworthy while this version is questionable. Steve Quinn (talk) 03:00, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. This version is poor synthesis, as mentioned by Steve Quinn on the AfD page. utcursch | talk 03:07, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment. Steve Quinn, I believe we need to follow the standard procedure to request a page move because the target article already exists. P.S. Rereading those instructions, it looks like we may be able to do the move ourselves if the target article is a redirect. In fact, since there has been support for the move and no opposition at the AfD, let me try to do the move. Eperoton (talk) 03:16, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I've just tried moving the article, and the message said "use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move". Eperoton (talk) 03:24, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
@Eperoton: I can see that you are correct. We are now following standard procedure, see above. Is this acceptable or should I add something else? Steve Quinn (talk) 03:33, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Looks good! Eperoton (talk) 03:37, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. My comment from the AfD: This article was created as a spin-off from Caste_system_in_India#Muslims, but right from the start it was misguidedly given the current title, which made it a magnet for synthesis. There are RSs, including those cited in the article, devoted to the topic of caste system among South Asian Muslims. We can have an article on that. The current article is obviously not even close to a general discussion of Social class among Muslims. It just tags on some vaguely caste-like examples under that broad category, violating WP:SYN and confusing caste with slavery, and other phenomena in the process. It should be trimmed down to the scope supported by the RSs and renamed to Caste system among South Asian Muslims. Eperoton (talk) 03:37, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support for Caste system among South Asian Muslims. This seems to be a good encyclopaedic title with a specific scope. I noticed that the page moves were mostly done by blocked/banned users, so reverting to the original title as proposed is a good solution. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 02:53, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. The articles covers something much more like caste systems than general social classes, and it focuses on South Asian Muslims. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:28, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

British scholars of India?, East India Company and WP:BIASED

Henry Miers Elliot who worked for East India Company which has been criticized for macaulayism and the British education system have been blamed for producing a generation of Indians not proud of their distinct heritage.[1] So is not a neutral source.

Denzil Ibbetson who is also not a neutral source because he was a administrator in British India.

John Nesfield, again not a neutral source because he was a English clergy.

Herbert Hope Risley, William Crooke and Horace Arthur Rose, again not neutral sources because they were in Indian Civil Service (British India). Here is a criticism of Indian Civil Service (British India) by Dewey who has commented that "in their heyday they [Indian Civil Service officers] mostly run by Englishmen with a few notable sons of Hindus and even a fewer Muslims were the most powerful officials in the Empire, if not the world. A tiny cadre, a little over a thousand strong, ruled more than 300 million Indians. Each Civilian had an average 300,000 subjects, and each Civilian penetrated every corner of his subjects' lives, because the Indian Civil Service directed all the activities of the Anglo-Indian state."[2]

B. R. Ambedkar who is also not a neutral source because he was 1st Minister of Law and Justice in the government of India (so a politician) and a Buddhist convert. 65.95.136.96 (talk) 17:44, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Please read WP:BIASEDSOURCE. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:02, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
All the sources that appear in References, Bibliography and Further reading are post-1950. The article is reliably sourced as far as I can see. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:07, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Yep, the article doesn't cite Henry Miers Elliot, Denzil Ibbetson, John Nesfield, Herbert Hope Risley, William Crooke, Horace Arthur Rose, or B. R. Ambedkar as a source. utcursch | talk 20:31, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Christophe Jaffrelot, Hindu Nationalist Movement and Indian Politics: 1925 to the 1990s. New York: Viking Press, 1996; page 343.
  2. ^ Dewey, Clive (1993). Anglo-Indian attitudes: the mind of the Indian Civil Service. Continuum International Publishing Group. p. 3. ISBN 978-1-85285-097-5.

Converts from untouchable castes which are considered clean and part of Ummah E.g. Bhangi

I added which are still considered clean and part of Ummah as it is a true statement. Let me know if you have evidence against this statement. 45.116.232.40 (talk) 01:31, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Rename the article and enhance content

A. Rename article: Article was originally named "Ashraf and Ajlaf", which was renamed to a broader name "Caste system among South Asian Muslims". It must be renamed again to cover even broader spectrum "Stratification and discrimination among South Asian Muslims".

B. Include the following after appropriately sourcing the info: Earlier content based on fiqh/sect based stratification/discrimination which reject each other as kafir, Madhhab/subsect based stratification/discrimination which reject each other as kafir, gender based discrimination under which misogyny against women of own family is legitimised, etc should also be rephrased and expanded accordingly.

C. Include Demographics

  • Ashraf ~ 20% vs Ajlaf ~ 80%
  • Shia vs Sunni vs Ahmadia
  • Further breakdown among Madhabs e.g. Deobandi vs Barelvi vs Taghlibis vs ... so on

D. Include section on "future" scenarios or course of remedial action, etc. Such as need for Muslim Ummah to come together to reform islam through reinterpretation of Quran/Hadith/Sharia/values/belief/etc from medieval unscientific "radical/orthodox blind followership/interpretation of man written self-contradicting book and hypocrite system" to modern scientific humanist inclusive values based on contemporary Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

58.182.176.169 (talk) 07:21, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

I am sympathetic to the proposals. But you need to do a lot more work to convince all the editors of the merits of such changes. So I suggest you take them up one by one.
As far as page renaming is concerned, the past history is irrelevant. What matters is how the reliable sources describe it. There seem to be several listed in the references and bibliography sections which use the term "caste" for the phenomenon. So I don't see the justification for moving away from the term. You also seem to want club the social phenomenon together with sectarian divisions. Again, you need to check how the reliable sources deal with the issues. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:12, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Change south asian muslims to Islam

I suggest that the title be changed from south asian muslims to islam. It's absolutely ridiculous to single out south asian muslims for caste discrimination when scholarly evidence suggest that there very clearly exists several forms of caste segretation in muslim societies outside south asia. Furthermore, there is evidence of Arab-non Arab purity-impurity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krao212 (talk • contribs) 14:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Based on what data? Vikram 08:10, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Ref

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 03:46, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

This is rubbish

this is the first time i have ever heard of such things and after seeing the reference list i understood. every person in the reference list are hindus so its obvious why this page was created. all i have to say is shame on you. have you gone so low that you are writing such disgusting nonsense about islam. is this what you have become? that in your hatred you are going to make fake articles to put islam down. how can wikipedia allow something like this? IslamTruth (talk) 14:05, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. 70.51.84.138 (talk) 21:50, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Just because you haven't heard of something it does not mean it does not exist. PastaMonk 04:23, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Caste_system_among_South_Asian_Muslims/Archive_1&oldid=1216186536"