Talk:Saraswat Brahmin/Archive 1

Archive 1

Misc

People. Done some basic seggregation and created two new articles on the data from this articles namely Cochin GSB's and Chitrapur Saraswats. The saraswat article here needs more of substance and writeups on various other articles. Work on it guys and dont have any hard feelings for each other.

And do we do something about the list of saraswats???

Yessrao a.k.a Sushanth 21:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

What I propose is that lets have a broad write up of only Saraswat Brahmins here...and all the other sub communities can have a main article for themselves. Ready to help out?? Coz I feel it doesnt make sense to have CSB, Chitrapur etc in the main articles in their entirity.

And about people adding cochi GSB articles, I guess he or she has a write to. And there shouldnt be any talk of 'being endogamous' cos the entire saraswat community consists of multiple sects and divisions

Yessrao a.k.a Sushanth 20:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Cheers. No problems...

Amogh 20:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The list of Saraswats is getting too large....we should be having a separate wiki page for it rather than crowding this one making the overall look UGLY Sushanth aka Yessrao 21:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Konkani Wikipedia

Dear Konknni friends,

Konkani Wikipedia has been started and been in test stage since August 2006.

Kindly contribute towards the Konkani wikipedia. We intend to make it a multiscript

Wikipeida. At least tri-script with Roman ,Devanangiri and Kannada scripts since these are the most popular ones.

We would like to get more articles/templates in place. We also need volunteers to do the thankless and boring job of transliterating it to different scripts .

As of now only two members are making active contributions. The more the merrier. Your contribution is vital to its success.

The url is given below:

http://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Konkani_Wikipedia

Dev boro dees deum! -Deepak D'Souza 07:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

"related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 17:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

funny tone

Somehow this artcle seems to have a funny tone .. It maybe due to incorrect grammer .. for example a sub heading which says "othe name of goddess ..." please fix the grammer and tone of this article . Leningrad 07:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

This article needs cleanup

A lot actually. This is one of the handful articles in WP which has text sections after external links. GDibyendu (talk) 14:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Added citations in order to improve the article

I have added citations and some text in the history section in order to improve the article and make it more credible. Was actually surprised that there is so little effort by contributors on this article. I have met so many people claiming to be Saraswat brahmins and so proud of their lineage. However, looking at the condition of this article it appears that not enough citations or credible sources of information are presently cited here. I am currently working on too many India & Kashmir related articles and for me to take this up right now would be a little difficult. However, if anyone has links to websites or information on Saraswat Brahmins that is credible, please do leave a message on my talk page. I promise to get back to this a little later. -Ambar wiki (talk) 15:40, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Aryan Invasion

When there are lots of proofs provided by eminent historian against the so called Aryan Invasion/ Migration Theory, how come this article use the same. Even Romila Thapar has accepted recently that AIT is not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.184.192.192 (talk) 05:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, this section needs significant overhaul. Opinions are presented as facts, and no citations are provided. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.252.5.244 (talk) 02:38, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I changed the intro para to correct this. AIT has been dead for a few years now, so the reference to "Russian immigrants" was ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohufish (talk • contribs) 03:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Removal of redundant data

Since sections like cuisine,food habit all has been covered in some other page .This section has been removed here.If any clash of data please let me know . Joshi punekar (talk) 13:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

It is not redundant. Ethnic articles can have a brief mention of traditional cuisine and food habits even if it has a separate article, for example Marathi people and Marathi cuisine - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:00, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

But here directly it has been mentioned with the above mentioned community name “saraswat cuisine “ it is not Konkani cuisine or any generalised words . Joshi punekar (talk) 15:13, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

@the same time all the citation mentioned above are primary sources like news paper.When wiki started accepting news paper? Joshi punekar (talk) 15:14, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

It is also affecting neutrality of page.Since any page should be in the limit of neutrality but here simply some redundant information is floating. Joshi punekar (talk) 15:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

What newspaper? All are books except the Ravana reference. The section is "Diet and Culture" and the food habits of a specific community of Saraswats is mentioned along with its name. I don't see any problem here. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Please do recheck the citation,2 are news papers Joshi punekar (talk) 15:38, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Other sources are primarily,to avoid this new page was created.Don’t you see ambiguity there.Only 2 caste mentioned(Ambiguity there too) at the same time it is mentioning whole saraswat community. Joshi punekar (talk) 15:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

In articles like Kayastha, regional groups are also mentioned specifically depending on the context. The Diet section here doesn't say all Saraswats are fish eaters or something like that. It specifically mentions which regional groups eat what. And only one source in the section is a magazine, The Illustrated Weekly of India. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Kayastha have different origin but saraswat Brahmins don’t ,Here in the same region different Category works.Ex: Vaishanava doesn’t eat fish while smarta do but both are called saraswat Brahmins .At the same time in your talk page I have mentioned some list.This sentence is neither neutral nor particular. Joshi punekar (talk) 17:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

That’s why just search for saraswat Brahmin cuisine,there you will find all.If still want we can shift these primary stuffs to that page. Joshi punekar (talk) 17:08, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The Saraswat cuisine article is largely unsourced. This article has more sources. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

But arrangement is more there and yeah I can provide reliable citation. we shift this content there to avoid conflict. Joshi punekar (talk) 17:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I already told you, ethnic articles can mention cuisines briefly. All the cuisine related things in this article is sourced.

@MRRaja001: The source that supports the following text put by you is in snippets and cannot be viewed properly.

Marriages between Saraswat and non-Saraswat Brahmins are on the increase though they were unheard of before, mainly because the Saraswats eat fish and occasionally meat, while all other Brahmins are vegetarians 

Can you provide a better source? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=QLTfAAAAMAAJ Joshi punekar (talk) 17:39, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Some more citations are not clear looks primary source .It is quite clear instead of having neutral article we are ending with blunder.There is no rules like briefing anything when we have whole page. Joshi punekar (talk) 17:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I told you books can be used as reference as well as news article. I don't understand what you meant by neutral article. All the text have inline citations. Some doubtful ones have better source templates on them. I've also requested MRRaja001 to clarify things here. Just don't be in a hurry to change the article as per your POV. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:58, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

All the citation for above mentioned paragraph are not redirecting at all so can it be justified? “Marriages between Saraswat and non-Saraswat Brahmins are on the increase though they were unheard of before, mainly because the Saraswats eat fish and occasionally meat, while all other Brahmins are vegetarians“ In one source they meant with some other contrast but here it has been used as per their POV.This is what we term it as page without neutrality. Joshi punekar (talk) 15:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Frederick J. Simoons (1994). Eat Not this Flesh: Food Avoidances from Prehistory to the Present. University of Wisconsin Press. p. 284. Some citation like this is neither redirecting properly . Joshi punekar (talk) 15:41, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Saraswat Brahmins of North India eat fish(Citation is not redirecting)
• Goud Saraswat eat fish,
• Division of Madhwa Goud Saraswat are vegetarian and smartha Saraswat are fish eaters !!!!

Ambiguity at it’s level best . If I start adding some actual content then the content will not be neutral and mythological characters will come at once!

Joshi punekar (talk) 15:47, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

First decide what’s neutrality and what’s not. For example in Deshastha Brahmins page I added one paragraph of English officer terming them as “Intelligent,brave,short and dark complexion” .Here to avoid racism I deleted dark complexion from that sentence (Go through the history of the page).This is called as neutrality of page. Hope this is clear.Waiting for your response. Joshi punekar (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• DBigXrayᗙ

Cross verify above statements then come to conclusion .It seems you want to pour your perception here. Joshi punekar (talk) 05:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

How it is mythology ?

The Saraswats are a sub-group of Hindu Brahmins of India who trace their ancestry to the banks of the Sarasvati River.Saraswat Brahmins are highest order brahmins with high literacy.The saraswat Brahmins are mentioned in vedas,Ramayana,Mahabharata,bhagawata and bhavishyat purana.They are descendants of great saraswata muni.

With citation I am keeping the info ,May I know in which basis you reverted ? Joshi punekar (talk) 12:57, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

The following line added by you : Saraswat Brahmins are highest order brahmins with high literacy.The saraswat Brahmins are mentioned in vedas,Ramayana,Mahabharata,bhagawata and bhavishyat purana.They are descendants of great saraswata muni Is unacceptable since it is based on mythology this WP:FRINGE. Do you think the text He continued to recite the Vedic text by consuming the fish given to him by Goddess Saraswati is reliable in an encyclopedic article about a caste. Totally not. On a side note, well known books like Mein Kampf considers Germans to be most intelligent, pure, etc. Do you think these books can be referred in the Germans article? Totally not. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:48, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

You want citation rite that there .As per your logic only citation matters.Isn’t it?From day one I am telling the samething to maintain neutrality of article but it seems like someone targeting some group. Mentioning name of Saraswat Brahmins in vedas,Mahabharata, etc it’s an information not mythology .I accept may be saraswat muni may be mythological for wiki but higher order is not like with any comparison with other caste. Joshi punekar (talk) 17:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk I doubt your neutrality mr.Fylind.I know your are Indian but in wiki make sure that you be neutral.Still come to discussion and tell me how It mythology ? Joshi punekar (talk) 15:27, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Listen, you either keep the discussion in my talkpage or in this one. And for Almighty's sake use WP:INDENT. I've explained in my talk page with example that legendary stuffs get deleted from this page. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:30, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

FylindfotberserkFirst learn to mention the name if not how will I know about your message here? Joshi punekar (talk) 20:54, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk Pescatarians means strictly fish eater but have you ever hear someone calling vegetarians as vegetable eaters ?what’s your logic. Joshi punekar (talk) 20:55, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Learn first what is meant by WP:NOR. The sources say they "eat fish". Pescetarian article writes ..is the practice of adhering to a diet that incorporates seafood while abstaining from the consumption of food made from any other animal. The source doesn't pin point that Sarswats only eat "Marine fish" nor does it say they eat any other kind of "Seafood" (crustaceans, squids, etc.). Better to stick to the source. A vegetarian diet is a generalized term just like pescetarian here. It is always better to mention what kind of vegetables a group of vegetarians eat source provided. It is obvious that a Tamil vegetarian wouldn't eat the same type of items eaten by an Irish. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:24, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Regarding last info delete

Marriages between Saraswat and non-Saraswat Brahmins are on the increase though they were unheard of before, mainly because the Saraswats eat fish and occasionally meat, while all other Brahmins are vegetarians

What it means?How it is related to diet and culture. Thanks, Joshi punekar (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

• You appear to have a mania about the eating—or not—of fish by certain castes. This material is sourced to Oxford University Press, although the prose could doubtless be improved. ——SerialNumber54129 15:27, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

• This is by far the best comment, I have ever came across in these areas. Mania about the eating—or not—of fish by certain castes--. ∯WBG^converse 15:43, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Saraswats from other regions

We need to expand on saraswats from other regions of India such as Punjab, Jammu, Rajasthan and Bengal.I am searching for information on these communities and will add content later.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 15:25, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your diligence as always, Jonathansammy. Regards, Acharya63 (talk) 16:28, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Gaudapada

The references used to refer to Gaudapada's caste here is from sources closely related to the person. I'm removing the content as per WP:Independent. Would suggest people to bring scholarly sources if it needs to be re included. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:35, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Deshastha and Chitpavan relations on a Saraswat Brahmin article

I think talking about relations between Deshastha and Chitpavan is totally irrelevant on this article. Yes, let us mention disputes between Saraswats and the Chitpavans during Peshwa rule but please keep out Deshastha, Karhade, CKP etc. out of this discussion. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 18:09, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm rather neutral here. My edits (or rather reverts) were in response to this as explained here.

Acharya63 for suggestions. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:22, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Also this page is about the broader Saraswat community which, in addition to Gaud Saraswats, also includes Kashmiri Pandits, sections of Bengali brahmin communities etc.The dispute with the chitpavan can be briefly mentioned here but it surely belong to the Shenvi Brahmin.thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 19:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I am also quite neutral to this now. I agree with both of you. I agree that Deshastha/Chitpawan relation is not relevant. But if mentioned it should be specific- that is why I agree with Fylindfotberserk's latest edit that makes it more specific. If it is not made specific, it gives the wrong impression that the Chitpawans took revenge on Saraswats for their mistreatment by them earlier - when the fact is that only Deshasthas and Karhades looked down upon Chitpawans. All the Gramanya literature I have read between Chitpawans and other castes have a common point - it was politically motivated due to rivalry/jealousy at that particular time from educated castes(like Saraswats and others) to the Chitpawans. Otherwise, had it been due to revenge alone, the Chitpawans would have gone against Karhades - which they did not. My main concern was WP:SYNTH. The reason is that the source "Goa Indica: A Critical Portrait of Postcolonial Goa"(Sinha) is specifically mentioning relationships of post-colonial Goa and not Peshwa rule. So I think we are combining three sources that are referring to three different eras to arrive at a new conclusion. Gokhale's(The Chitpawans) is talking about the Peshwa era gramanyas and Sinha is talking about post-colonial Goa (post 1961) and the court case(not sure which source has it) is during the British rule. That is why I am a bit confused about this section. Perhaps someone who is more knowledgeable about this can clarify. IMHO, ideally we should not mention previous status of Chitpawans in the eyes of Deshasthas at all because that is not relevant in post colonial Goa. But if we do, then we should be specific and at least not combine different eras and different communities. Currently, it is still WP:OR as it is combining eras. I have the book "Chitpawans(Gokhale) and Marathas(Gordon) and can give any quotes from those if needed but unless the other references are giving the information mentioned, the section is still WP:OR IMHO. Perhaps Acchuta Sharma may know more about the other references and might be able to clarify the doubts. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 05:22, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

@Jonathansammy:@Acharya63: I've removed the part about Deshastha and Karhade as per your suggestions. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:35, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Also 90% of social status content applies to the shenvi brahmins only.Surely it should be either removed from here and placed in the Some other article, or kept in both places.Any thoughts?Jonathansammy (talk) 15:21, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Probably both places if others also agree. It is only 3-4 sentences. If it were 20-30 sentences, we could mainly have it on GSB and then a summary here pointing to the main section in GSB. Readers might refer to either page. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 16:27, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Keep in both the articles IMO. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:37, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Let me clear one point here,Maharashtra saraswat doesn’t mean it’s Gaud saraswat Brahmins.It contains Rajapur saraswat Brahmins ,Citrapur saraswat and Saraswat from konkan .So be clear in your statement. Acchuta Sharma (talk) 04:33, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

When coming to saraswat and citpavan dispute, is related to politics(I have given reference for this).To avoid them towards administrator position,Saraswat superiority claim from Skandapurana and citpavana low origin made them to target saraswat. Gramanya is the best possible source for this if you want I can give reference. Acchuta Sharma (talk) 04:40, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you. All Gramanyas were related to politics and jealousy. For saraswats, the issue got resolved by the Bombay court. If you have any material for saraswats, please feel free to mention the "jealousy/politics"part for Saraswats for Gramanyas if you like. All these specific details should probably be on the Gramanya page. We should only mention a bit here and only list the end results otherwise it gets confusing to readers. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 05:12, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Till 17th century saraswat had strong hold over konkan While citpavan were treated as low origin by saraswat (Check our the history or I’ll give you reference).In konkan Desastha were not there instead saraswat(With sub communities were termed as Bommans).I can give references for above mentioned statements . Regards, Acchuta Sharma (talk) 04:50, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Acchuta Sharma, Please feel free add directly to the saraswat page or GSB page(wherever it is applicable). Thanks for your contribution to wikipedia. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 05:14, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Acchuta Sharma, The quote about merger is on page 50 of the book. You can verify it yourself. If you cannot see it on google books let me know, I will quote it here. Some times google books hides some pages based on location/time of access.Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 05:45, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

The merger is there but reason is something else it’s like saraswat wanted to take over politics that’s it!!!!.That’s not related to citpavan and saraswat. Secondly in my previous reference it has clearly mentioned as “Traditionally saraswat and Deshatha has been administrators in Deccan “..But saraswat brahmin Claim was based on skandapurana .They just wanted to destroy this book but Deshatha took it as advance and started called chitpavan as new Brahmins.These created competition for Pune authorities posts,(Reference available about gramanya) Acchuta Sharma (talk) 06:24, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

But I can prove anywhere like Deshatha had a very good relation with saraswats.But Chitpavan had very bad relation with saraswat particularly during peahwa rule. But historically saraswat and Deshatha worked together in Deccan kingdoms. Acchuta Sharma (talk) 06:30, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Before Deccan kingdoms era saraswats were administrators in Shilahara kingdoms,Yadav of konkan ,mauryas of konkan etc But show me one citation which gives account of citpavans being mentioned in konkan before Maratha empire ? Acchuta Sharma (talk) 06:32, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

One thing I have doubt here ,Why we are mentioning everything in the perception of citpavans.Saraswats looked down upon citpavans mentioning their origin in skandapurana.So as per this logic should we write these things in chitpavan page?!!!!.Doesn’t it look odd to mention others perspectives here? I agree if you mention Shankaracharyas or Madhwa Peeetha rejected but they didn’t.Infact grand guru of Adi Shankaracharya was a saraswat brahmin named Guru gowdapadacharya and first proponent of Advaitha siddhanta(Source:Shankara Vijaya authentic book). Acchuta Sharma (talk) 06:41, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Acchuta Sharma, Please do not discuss any other communities on this page any further. It is distracting and takes focus away from the real topic. If you want to reply to this post, and discuss communities other than Saraswats, please take it to my talk page. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 11:47, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

See how you take it’s left to you.Even I can ask why citpavans caste name is mentioned here in this page?Secondly what’s detorating statement here,I just mentioned the perspective of saraswats on chitpavan(@ the same time chitpvans have some other perspective).

In Goa temple priests/ Mahajans are only from castes like saraswats,padyes and Karhade.

Hope you have heard of sharada peetha(Kashmir) where Adi shakaracharya went for debate with pandits.That pandits are none other than saraswat Brahmins. Nothing is detorating statement here I am just specifying perspectives errors in this article.

Still any debate please come to my talk page I appreciate debate with valid references.But keep caste away stay neutral then come to discussion.

Regards, Acchuta Sharma (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Acchuta Sharma, you cannot discuss and denigrate Chitpawans or Karhades by calling them low on this saraswat page - not because of censorship or "hurt feelings" but because their discussion is irrelevant on this page. Same for other non-Brahmin castes as well. Most importantly, you should think from the point of view of someone who is reading this talk page. He/She will get completely distracted by discussions about other communities here. That is why I requested you to limit the discussion to saraswats and discuss about other communities elsewhere. I have edited this talk to remove all discussion (including my own) not related to saraswats. Hope that is Ok. I will give quote about merger also that ou requested. BTW, all editors agree that the relation of Deshasthas/Karhades and how they looked at Chitpawans is irrelevant to Saraswats. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 18:55, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Here is the quote from Goa Indica: A critical portrait of postcolonial Goa, page 50 (you should be able to the see page on googlebooks at least partially). That is why we need to order things chronologically. I am only quoting because you asked for the quote. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 19:13, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Also, I will be honest and admit that I do not understand the different terms: Saraswat, Saraswat Brahmin, GSB, Chitrapur Saraswats etc. very clearly. That is why I avoid editing this page as I have not studied them. Sorry to everyone if I made any mistakes. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 19:25, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hope now this talk page is neutral.Now let me tell you the actuality of Saraswat Brahmins as a whole.In North India they are called as Uttaratraya saraswat (Kashmir Pandits,Punjabi saraswat,Rajasthani saraswat.Sarsawat of Gujarat,Saraswat of banaras(Uttar Pradesh),saraswat of bengal). In south India (Gaud Saraswat Brahmins,mainly in Karnataka,Kerala and Goa......Rajapur Saraswat Brahmins mainly in Maharashtra,Goa and karnataka......Chitrapur saraswat mainly in Goa and karnataka.....Aadhya Gaud Saraswat Brahmins(shenvis) mainly in Maharashtra...Saraswat Brahmins mainly in Konkan).So here which Saraswat you are Referring as fish eaters/vegetarians and which Saraswat you are associated with chitpavans?Doesn’t it look strange? GSB are rich and popular that doesn’t mean they are only Saraswat Brahmins in south India.what about others? But when merger comes I can give you the list of reference which clearly indicates it was fight for Konkani language not caste.(reference:Goembab Shenoy)

Acchuta Sharma (talk) 21:40, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Ok Thanks. I did not know this at all. I cleaned up irrelevant data for others as it becomes a distraction. Sonars(Daivadnyas), Deshasthas, Karhades Prabhus etc. are complete irrelevant here. One last question: In the quote I had mentioned from "Goa Indica: A critical portrait of postcolonial Goa, page 50", he says Saraswats - is he talking about Gaud Saraswat Brahmans, Rajapur Saraswat Brahmans or Chitrapur saraswat? Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 22:11, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Not sure coz non of the source reference bifurcates the saraswat Brahmins here.But if you go in depth via multiple source,only shenvis were worried about caste at that time but Gaud saraswat had strong influence in konkan they just wanted to hold politics and implement Konkani .So that caste problem may be for Aadya Gaud saraswat Brahmin/ Rajapur saraswat.But still cannot tell at once and cannot be generalised though. Upendra Pandit (talk) 19:09, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Origin legends

@Acharya63: Hi, since Talk:Chitpavan#Jewish origin fringe theories justifies the inclusion of "legendary" origin of Chitpavans, I wonder if we should re include the following

According to S.M.Sonak(1995) Parashurama was a Saraswat Brahmin by birth..Some Saraswats in Agra claim Ravana belonged to the Saraswat sub-caste of Brahmins.

References

- Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:57, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Fylindfotberserk , I think the reason Sitush and the admin included the legend is because he said there were numerous academic sources citing it - hence it was not fringe. These theories were published by several universities and historians. In the case of Parshuram/Saraswat, this myth is published by Dr.Sangeeta Sonak, a marine microbiologist , not a historian, sociologist, anthropologist or even a religious scholar - nor is the book some reputed academic publication like Oxford University Press etc. The quote about Ravan is from a newspaper. The other problem is that Parshuram is generally treated as mythology (magic/supernatural) whereas the other might be a legend(may have some historical facts that are are distorted or exaggerated and perhaps never documented by historians). Please see this: https://www.diffen.com/difference/Legend_vs_Myth. Unfortunately "legend" and "myth" are often used interchangeably. The other issue is that our ancestors put so much magic and supernatural around historical events that they became myths in Puranas. But the fact is that many of the religious matters and historical events related to caste/religion were written in Puranas. That is why Puranas have been the basis of establishing varnas in gramanyas. In fact, if we get rid of the Puranas, it will be difficult for almost any caste(especially Brahmins) to justify our own varna. But to answer your question , based on the following two reasons, I think we should avoid Parshuram(for now) and Ravan mention (1)Fringe theories (almost no sources)(2) Mythology engulfed in magic rather than some distorted legend. (3)low quality sources like newspapers and a marine biologist for historical opinions. If some good quality sources about Parshuram are found, then maybe we can add the legend(or myth).For example, a community called Panchakslshi in Maharashtra , had put Sage Vishvamitra as one of their caste notables but he was removed.[7]. The reason Chitpawan and Parshuram myth is mentioned is because numerous academic sources - including western universities - mention it. But in case of Saraswats, there do not seem to be many. Thanks, Acharya63 (talk) 10:06, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

@Acharya63:, I agree with you. That is why I removed these myths in the past [8], [9]. And yes myths and legends get mixed up many times. Both Parashurama and Ravana are mythical characters but many times are presented as legendary/historical characters. I didn't verify the qualifications of Dr. Sonak. Yes it fails RS. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:29, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Here it’s quite clear with respect to source,too much mythology is not included anywhere instead small content from reliable source and image from wiki(Given by one author in 2009) has been added.But removal of these basics creates no connection throughout.

Upendra Pandit (talk) 19:15, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

In Puranas they have (unfortunately) mixed history and mythology together. Historian Shailendra Nath Sen says that historical Chronicles were almost non existent and Puranas contain reliable sources of history - see [10]. Of course, some is obviously mythology(all the magical and supernatural stuff). Varnas of most brahmin groups cannot be decided unless the Puranas are used and based on my study the Skanda Puran has been used in Maharashtra to decide varnas. After all, the varna system as well as many other Hindu religious issues are based on Puranas so it makes sense that they are used to determine varna of a group. Hence we cannot neglect them altogether but they cannot be used as primary sources as per wiki rules. However, if a secondary source(especially academic or some high quality university publication) refers to a Puran, then it(the secondary source) can be used. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 07:37, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

article quality

I just went through the page and don't understand recent edits since June that have basically reverted changes suggested by @Winged Blades of Godric: in June.

1)There are many grammatical mistakes.

2)There are some non-WP:RS sources (external websites) that are used as sources. A primary source(a Puran) is also used.

3) Gaudapada wiki page does not list his caste and says that even the century he lived in is debatable. So why is he mentioned here?

4)Why are Chitpawans being unnecessarily vilified on the saraswat page when it has no relation with Saraswat-Chitpawan relations? A brief mention -without going into details- that they had issues with other communities too(not just saraswats) during Gramanyas is fine IMO and it has been already mentioned. Their denigration by Deshasthas has already been explained on the Deshastha as well as the Chitpawan page and was an issue between Karhade/Deshastha and Chitpawans(as the sources there clarify). Why do we need it here when there is no relevance?

5)why was this old quote added by ARRaja removed? - please see [11]? Please see this diff for the exact quote from the book from which ARRaja took it=> [12]. Senior editor WBG said that we need to mention it - it is not an old issue(it has nothing to do with 18th century Gramanya based on jealousy that no one really cares about). This quote is about something much more recent - the merge of Goa-post independence. Also WBC has asked that this remain explicitly. Please seeUser_talk:Winged_Blades_of_Godric/Archive_Unsorted#Revert_all_5_edits? Acchuta Sharma, please read this discussion. There was another user who made the same mistakes.

Acchuta Sharma, or someone else, please can you go though the article carefully fix the article, especially the Social Status section? Thanking you in anticipation.The intent is not to hurt or denigrate someone but to make sure that sources used are reflected here accurately and avoid WP:SYNTH and WP:OR or out-of-context denigration and avoid WP:FRINGE. There is a special page for the Gramanyas where issues may be discussed in detail - a brief mention in a non-provocative way about gramanyas should be sufficient(as it is done currently). Editing this page is too stressful due to persistent edit wars - nor I am very knowledgeable about this community - but a cursory glance shows that it is definitely WP:OR. @Jonathansammy:@Fylindfotberserk:@Winged Blades of Godric:, please can you look into this if you have the bandwidth? Acchuta Sharma, please can you be more careful while editing - also please fix the issues above - especially the grammar? Personally, I do not have any strong opinions one way or the other on what should and should not remain on the webpage. So I leave it to other editors to decide. Thanks, Acharya63 (talk) 05:59, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Don’t worry about those mentioned list it can be done but the matter of concern is should we mention chitpavan here?.Mentioning chitpvan in negative/positive shade only applies to that caste but mentioning saraswats in general will create ambiguity as author didn’t mentioned which subcaste of saraswat were looked down upon?.Historically it’s was termed as shenvis but what’s the subgroup is called now?.This is an never ending ambiguity in this page.If you have solution let me know . Regards, Upendra Pandit (talk) 19:44, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

I do not have any solution. Perhaps, we can put quotes and let other senior editors who are familiar with this community decide how to rephrase it in some neutral ways. For example, they can say "social disputes" rather than "looked down upon" to make it less offensive- but that is their choice. I do not have enough information. In any case, it is always a good idea to put quotes as not all people have access to the books.Acharya63 (talk) 07:54, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Relevance

I don't think the sentence "In Maharashtra, till the rise of Peshwas, the Chitpavans held low social status and other Brahmins refused to dine with them" here is relevant to the article on Saraswat Brahmins. Pinging @LukeEmily, MRRaja001, Jonathansammy, and Shivansh Kaul91:. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:18, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

It is not relevant and support removal. 1)first source is not WP:RS 2)Gordon's book does not mention it? 3) Goa Today is not WP:RS for such caste views and is not published by "University of MIchigan" as the editor states. The last citation is definitely a fake. LukeEmily (talk) 11:46, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support removal. ThanksJonathansammy (talk) 13:40, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
• I too support removal. - MRRaja001 (talk) 06:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit reverted

Hello @Fylindfotberserk, Acharya63, and Jonathansammy:

Its my first time contributing/editing on wikipedia and Im figuring how to go about stuff...so if theres any lapse/procedural mistake on my part, please pardon me but Idont think there should be any issue with it

(Cited the meaning of the word as used by the Portuguese(giving a reference) and deleted the statement:”, a word used for Vaishya community” which is irrelevant to this page)

how is the explanation of the word as used by the Portuguese irrelevant here?The word as used by them was merely a term for "trader"...it did not signify that they were from the Vaishya caste...adding the statement "a word used for Vaishya community" in continuation with Sanjay Subrahmanyam's sentence which ends at Chetti is not only irrelevant but also misleading as it makes it seem that Sanjay Subrahmanyam is making that statement

I think it is more relevant to cite the Portuguese interpretation of the word chatim which was a word used by them.For eg.If an american says,"I ate a biscuit" that would be a different thing from what a British referes to whem he/she says II ate a biscuit" and if someone were trying to elaborate on what the American person meant to say, they would give the American definition not some other nations definition of "biscuit".

And if it is irrelevant because the source given doesnt mention Saraswats,how is "a word used for the vaishya community" relevant?...the source for that doesnt mention Saraswats either.It should be deleted

Please consider reinstating my edits.If not,please let me know whom I can take this up with.

Thanks --Obramane (talk) 13:08, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Obramane: Firstly, thanks for communicating. Coming to the point, since the article is about the Saraswat Brahmins and not Chatim, there is no reason to elaborate on the use and nature of the word itself in this article, so this →"They are men with such a genius (tao naturaes) for merchandise and so astute (delgados) in every mode of trade that among our people (the Portuguese)when they desire either to blame or praise any man for his subtlety and skill in trade they say “he is a Chatim" should not be added, not to mention your source [13] doesn't establish a relation of the subject of the article with this specific word. Instead it talks about a different geographical region (Bengal and Arakan).

The phrase "a word used for Vaishya community" is possibly explain the relationship between the words "Chetti, Vaisya, and merchant caste", since this source seem to equate chatim with chetti. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:11, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk, Acharya63, and Jonathansammy:

Thank you for the prompt reply.Much appreciated.The reason for going through the trouble of presenting detailed explanations is that I am keen on making sure that the article gives a picture of the community which is unbiased and accurate-my intention is not to be argumentative or antagonise anyone.Apologies for the many edits...I need more practice with this.

Having gone through the list of other edits made to the article and reason given for not including mine,I request you to apply the same standard and rules for inclusion/deletion to all edits and contributions(If a certain standard has been used with one post,the same should be applied accross the board.I request you to state why you are rejecting something when a similar statement has been included previously)

I am presenting my arguments and logic in detail so that the grounds for approving/rejecting them be clear.Even so,if you feel the original unedited content is to be kept unchanged please let me know where else in Wikipedia to take up/escalate the issue since i find the unedited version redundant and more importantly misleading.Here are my arguments in favour of editing:

1)The region doesnt change the language used by the user (Portuguese)...at the very least not in this case...

For eg. an Englishman in the erstwhile Madras from the era of the British rule using the term "Bungalow" of Indian origin would have meant the same meaning as an Englishman using it in Lahore-it has no bearing on the meaning of the word

If not the whole sentence,a mention that the word "chatim" was used generically for traders by the Portuguese wouldnt be out of place and is infact highly relevant in this case and should be included

2)Going by the logic,that Chatim as used by the Portuguese in used Bengal and Arakan cannot be used to explain the usage in Goa,how can an explanation for the word chetti which has nothing to do with either Goa/the Portuguese/the Saraswats be mentioned?

If the word chetti needs to be explained by a third source(not the author himself) which has nothing to do with either the Saraswats or the Portuguese,why would there be a problem with explaining the word chatim?

W.r.t your reply "a word used for Vaishya community" is possibly to explain the relationship between the words "Chetti, Vaisya, and merchant caste"

3)First of all the word Vaishya has not been mentioned by Subrahmanyam,so there is no need to explain its relation to the terms Chetti or Chatim.Secondly,as the word chetti has already been linked to the Chetti page,the statement is redundant...someone wanting to know more about the Chetties can go to that page,the statement "a word used for Vaishya community" should be deleted

Sanjay Subrahmanyam does seem to suggest/equate Chatim with Chetti and has explained in as much detail as he wanted to by indicating that they were associated with mercantile activity (as were the Chetties presumably).If he wanted to elaborate any further on their ritual status OR the implications of their ritual status for that of the Saraswats' he would have done it himself-it need not be done by someone second guessing his intention.

And w.r.t your reply that my source doesn't establish a relation of the subject of the article with this specific word,

4)Neither does the source mentioned for "Vaishya" establish a relation with the subject of he article i.e Saraswat Barhmins.And if the word chetti which already has a page begs an explanation in context of the article,the word chatim is even more deserving of an explanation

Thanks, --Obramane (talk) 14:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

• This sentence → "They are men with such a genius (tao naturaes) for merchandise and so astute (delgados) in every mode of trade that among our people (the Portuguese)when they desire either to blame or praise any man for his subtlety and skill in trade they say “he is a Chatim" is just irrelevant in the article. We are not discussing the qualities of Chatin. We are trying to figure whether Saraswats were called chatin by the Portuguese or not, which has been established by this source. Create a separate chatim article if necessary, where we can mention/explain the various iterations and meanings of the word.
• As for the "vaishya" part, mercantile means "vaish" in Indic. The main source [14], mentions clearly that Saraswat merchants were called Chatins (from Chetti), and the second source seems to establish that the terms "Chetti, Vaisya or merchant caste" are same, but whether we should write something like ...from Chetti, a word used for Vaishya community. can be discussed. Pinging @LukeEmily, MRRaja001, and Jonathansammy:. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:18, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk:Thank you. That Saraswats were called chatim and that the author thinks it is from the word chetti has been established.What the author has not mentioned or thought necssary to mention is anything about is the ritual status of the Chetti community.Even so if needed,there exists a page for it (just as you are suggesting I make one for chatim).

Moreover, using your logic of how the sources for chatim and vaishya "seems to establish that the terms "Chetti, Vaisya or merchant caste" are same (and so the Vaishya statement deserves a mention) ,on similar lines,doesnt the source and text [15] which makes it clear that the Portuguese used the term generically for traders and that it did not allude to any particular caste(when they desire to blame or praise "any man" for his subtlety and skill.... and that the terms chatin and chatinar(to trade) are "very commonly" used by them indicating chatin=trader/subtle and skillful trader similarly deserve a mention? This is the type of instance where I request for the same standards and rules be applied to all posts.

My intention is not to create a new page but to make clear the accurate meaning of the term Chatim and the context(non caste) in which it is used.

The statement "a word used for Vaishya community" suggests that "the ritual status of Chettis was Vaishya (and so) the Saraswats (who were also involved in mercantile activity) have the same ritual status"-which is not the case...For that matter the Saraswats have historically been employed in a variety of occupations-mostly secular and requiring high levels of literacy but that is besides the point

I request the admins to delete the statement "a word used for Vaishya community".In its absence ,I would have no reason to state This sentence → "They are men with such a genius (tao naturaes) for merchandise and so astute (delgados) in every mode of trade that among our people (the Portuguese)when they desire either to blame or praise any man for his subtlety and skill in trade they say “he is a Chatim"" .

Not to mention ,the statement is not even a part of the original text written by Sanjay Subrahmanyam--Obramane (talk) 20:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for pinging me @Fylindfotberserk:. The sentence is the dominant trading community here were Saraswats , a caste of open status , which at times claimed Brahminhood but more usually was identified with mercantile activity ( the Portuguese usually term them chatins , from chetti ). Please refer to Rajput#Origins where we have used "open status". @Obramane: , the Portuguese cannot decide the ritual status of Saraswats. From "Area Handbook for India": Page 219 Richard F. Nyrop - The Vaishya castes, including the Bania or Vaniya castes in the north and the Chetti or Chettyar castes in the south , generally rank below Brahmans and Kshatriyas. The sentence in the article does not imply that they had ritual status of vaishyas - only that they performed those functions. Can we rephrase the sentence in a better way? But Subrahmanyam does call them open status caste that claimed Brahminhood sometimes but was mercantile.LukeEmily (talk) 06:02, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk:@LukeEmily: As far as i understood from the source, the author is speaking about only Saraswats living in Basrur, a coastal village, which is present to the south of Goa - in the Karnataka coastal region. I think the author is using the terms such as "Saraswat Merchants" or "Saraswat Chetins" only to describe their character or skill, since majority of the Saraswats in this village were carrying merchantile activity, (i think the portuguese also referred them as "chetins" in the way). I don't understand why should we include this to Saraswat Brahmin article. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 13:29, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk, LukeEmily, and MRRaja001:

1)Any explanation or mention of caste/Vaishya assumes that Subrahmanyam uses the word Chetti to denote the community/caste of the people the Portuguese use the word “Chatim” (which comes from Chetti) for.

If he wanted to suggest such a thing he would have said something like “ a caste of open status….associated with mercantile activity -a function usually performed by the Chetti caste(OR a function performed by the Chetties who belonged to the Vaishya community/caste.)

Looking at the statement “Chatim from Chetti” it is possible (and even likely) that he meant it to denote merely the pronunciation/phonetics of Chatim and Chetti

Since one cant say for certain,it cannot be used to qualify his “open caste status” comment.

2)Subrahmanyam makes the “open caste status” comment in as much detail as he wants to.If he wanted to elaborate,he would.Adding to the text is not only unnecessary and somewhat inappropriate but amounts to second guessing the authors intentions needlessly...

Hence in the light of reasons 1 and 2,I think the phrase “a word used for the Vaishya community”should be deleted and the sentence should end at “from chetti”…as given in the original text.Kindly let me know if I that can be done-by me or someone else. ThanksObramane (talk) 14:05, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

@LukeEmily:Wrt your statement “But Subrahmanyam does call them open status caste that claimed Brahminhood sometimes but was mercantile” What the source says is,” a caste of open status ,which at times claimed Brahminhood but more usually was identified with mercantile activity “ The use of the word “usually” suggests that it was (at times/sometimes?) associated with other presumably non mercantile activity. Is is important not to conflate “more usually was identified with mercantile activity” with “was mercantile” OR “was a mercantile caste”-that seems a little too sweeping. Thanks --Obramane (talk) 14:18, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

OK. I removed Vaishya as that word is not used by Subrahmanyam.LukeEmily (talk) 14:47, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

@LukeEmily: Thanks for editing the vaishya term.

Reverted the edit that was made to the Gaga Bhat part because:

1)It is mentioned in footnote no.59 on Pg279

2)Whether Pillai talks about the time before or after Shivaji is irrelevant.I am merely using a piece of information found in his book which is considered a credible source acceptable to Wikipedia regardless of what Pillai wrote the book for.

Also thanks for editing the Nilamata Purana part and pointing that the source wasnt a credible one.I will look for better sources.

Thanks againObramane (talk) 14:11, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

That Pillai information was not removed. Please see the end of the section. It was put in right chronological order. And I will shortly add a source that contradicts Pillai. LukeEmily (talk) 14:23, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

@LukeEmily: There are the following timelines in the article in this order 1)Post independence India (1947) 2)Goa under the Portuguese (From the 1500s) 3)Sociologist Pillai’s text (From 1997 3)The Deccan sultanates (Around the 1700s) 4)peshwa rule (Around the 1700s) 5)gaga bhat and coronation of shivaji from (in the 1600s) Not only is there no chronology,it is also irrelevant to the section

Also I did notice that it wasnt deleted and shifted elsewhere but that is not necessary. thanks Obramane (talk) 16:04, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Post-independence *ritual* status is more relevant than 500 or even 200 year old status due to Sanskritization. *Ritual* status is chronological and if not, we need to fix it. The Portuguese rule was until 1961 and during Shivaji's time also they traded with Portuguese. Peshwa rule was until 1818. In the future, kindly do not engage in edit wars. You reverted the edit twice. Please discuss on talk page. Thank you. LukeEmily (talk) 09:16, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

Welcome to the discussion page of the article "Saraswat Brahmins" Please organize your comments .. it makes the page much more readable .. Leningrad 07:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

There are certain people attaching cherry picked articles which are nothing but propaganda against the community in question and they're vandalising this article

Vishnuvrida (talk) 16:38, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Removal of content

@LukeEmily: @Fylindfotberserk: @Jonathansammy: In some states such as Karnataka and in Maharashtra and Goa, their claim to be Brahmins is either currently disputed or not accepted as other Brahmin communities of the respective regions consider them ritually lower than themselves.— I think we need to remove this from the lele as well as Karnataka and Kerala section. The author is explaining some scenarios in that book. Taking particular sentence and writing it in our own POV doesn't make any sense. I think we need to remove this. Other Brahmins may consider them ritually lower since they are fish eaters, but this doesn't mean that they are not Brahmins. What is your opinion on this? - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 06:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@MRRaja001: The part on Karnataka about their claim to Brahmin hood seems to be sourced. This → "Saraswat claim to Brahminhood is still strongly under dispute, particularly in the coastal districts of Karnataka" — is written in the source, but whether that should be kept in the lead or needs to be reworded is another issue. The other ones seems WP:OR to me. I'd like to ping @LukeEmily and Jonathansammy: as well for suggestions. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:06, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: It is just his opinion. In real sense they are Brahmins. They are ritually considered inferior by other brahmins because of their fish eating habits that's it. Even marriages among Saraswat Brahmins and other brahmins is common in these areas after independence. If they are not brahmins why will other brahmins marry them. How can we conclude these things by taking a quote from single author like this. I think we need to do something about this mate. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 07:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, it is indeed POV to put here and obviously they are Brahmins. Lets see what Luke and Johnathan has to say about this. IMO we can remove this. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: Okay. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 07:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: Although somebody else added the original claim on "some Saraswats not being accepted as brahmins", I actually added the caveat it was only other brahmin communities making that claim and not the general Hindu community. I did not delete it because it was sourced. In my opinion it can be removed. Wikipedia should not be giving platform to outdated views of bigoted minorities. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 15:43, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jonathansammy: That makes the two of us. Wait for Luke? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:54, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

You should wait for Luke because they may have added it originally although I am not sure.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 17:19, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: @Jonathansammy: Looks like Luke is inactive since 13th of this month. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 06:40, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

@MRRaja001: Only been 2 days since we started discussing on it. Lets give it a few more days. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:48, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: Okay mate! - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 13:20, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: @Jonathansammy:, @MRRaja001: , sorry for the delay. It seems that it is not just brahmins but sociologists and other scholars as well who consider them different. Bairy is a well respected academician and his view is not fringe and the book is quite modern(2013). Sitush noticed the issue here Talk:Marathi_Brahmin#Saraswats in a number of sources and that made me curious as Bhumihar also has similar issues in the north. Jonathan, I do not think it is a bigoted view of a minority because scholars and some journals also consider them different communities. It is not based on veg-nonveg issue as Kashmiri brahmins are non-vegetarian but are considered ritually high and "full" brahmins by other brahmins too. The Bairy source also says There is thus many an element at work here. At the level of the community as a whole, Brahmins might not be incensed by the Saraswat claim to Brahminhood. But a non-Saraswat Brahmin family will not be very keen on proposing marriage with a Saraswat family. We need to understand his context. He is referring to saraswats of Karnataka only not to northern saraswats. About marriages, these days upper castes intermarry. In Bengal, it is not uncommon for Bengali Brahmins, Bengali Baidyas and Bengali Kayasthas to intermarry these days - they were part of the elite group called Bhadralok. You can also read the autobiography of S. H. Belavadi -With Malice Towards None: An Autobiography - where he writes on page 17 In Kolhapur where I joined the college , I had to search for accommodation , as there were no hostel facilities for Brahmins . Every other community had a hostel for its members – such as Saraswats , Prabhus , Lingayats , Marathas , Jains , etc(2003). Here they are referred to as non-Brahmins too. There are many such sources. Secondly this quote: Telugu Chetty, Telugu Chettiar, Vanniyar and Ezhava in Karnataka; Saraswat non-Brahmins and Mooppan in Kerala;(OBC list by Govt of India) . Here it says saraswats in kerala are non-Brahmins and are classified as OBCs. On wikipedia, we do not even have a page for non-Brahmin saraswats. I will go into depth some other time but both Shenvis and Palshikars who are subcastes of southern saraswats were declared as non-Brahmin on November 21, 1788 and this was even signed by the government at the time. The Palshikars specifically were declared as descendants of Bhils based on Vruddhranya( a sanskrit text). I have not added it to the page as it is a little derogatory and the page already has a lot of edit wars going on. In my opinion, based on reading of sources, Saraswats in the south are like the Bhumihars in the north. IMHO, it is not POV because we are explicitly specifying the author and there is no opposing opinion (not fringe). But if you want to remove it from lede, I will go along with the majority. But we should follow the source closely and remove all WP:OR. My suggestion is to rephrase it and remove all WP:OR. Regards,LukeEmily (talk) 00:20, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

References

@Fylindfotberserk: @Jonathansammy:, @MRRaja001:, also see the section and references in Maharashtra and Konkan, Goa section. Let me know what you folks think. Also, articles like this one https://www.ayurvedajournals.com/article/cochin-saraswat-non-brahmins increase the confusion :-) LukeEmily (talk) 04:30, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

OBC in Kerala! Hmm... What do you suggest as far as rephrasing the sentence is concerned LukeEmily? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@LukeEmily: Only Rajapur Saraswat Brahmins comes under OBC in Kerala. Other Saraswat Brahmins comes under OC. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 08:05, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@LukeEmily: They consider Saraswat Brahmins separately because they are migrants from North India and come under Pancha Gauda Brahmins. And also other Brahmin communities looked down upon them because of their fish eating habits. Saraswat Brahmins are considered as Brahmins by whole Hindu community. There are Mathas for them. There are also peetadhipathis from this community, whole Hindu community follow them. Gokarna Math, Kashi Math, Kavale Math and Chitrapur Math are some of the prominent mathas, where peetadhipathis are exclusively taken from Saraswat Brahmin community. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 08:29, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@LukeEmily: FYI, In Western and South India Saraswat Brahmins are divided into three sub groups, Gaud Saraswat Brahmins, Rajapur Saraswat Brahmins and Chitrapur Saraswat Brahmins. This is the reason why they are called "Dakshinatraya Saraswat Brahmin". There are no other specific Saraswat Brahmins as such other than these three communities. By the way don't compare Bhumihar with Saraswat Brahmins. Saraswat Brahmins, Bengali Brahmins may be eating fish but they are always considered as Brahmins by the Hindu community. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 09:05, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Saraswat brahmins of India

Please make sure that the article includes information on all Saraswat communities of India rather than just the GSBs. After all, there is a separate page for GSB. Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 13:11, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

@Jonathansammy: Okay. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 07:41, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Apart from Saraswats of coastal western and south-western India (GSB, Chitrapur saraswat, Rajapur Saraswat etc.), and Kashmiri Pandits, are there any other brahmin communities in India who are part of the greater Saraswat community? If the two communities I mentioned are the only ones then our efforts are better spent on the individual articles rather than on this one. Thoughts? Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 15:40, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@Jonathansammy: Doing research on this will update it as soon as i find it. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 14:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

@Jonathansammy: So far found these The Saraswat Brahmins are : Kashmiri Saraswats , Punjab Saraswats , Sind Saraswats , Gujarat and Rajputana Saraswats , and the Konkani Brahmins of Goa , Kanara and Kerala. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 14:09, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2022

Sir I request you to add Dogra Brahmins of Jammu division to Saraswat Brahmin community types. Sharmasourav703 (talk) 11:03, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:41, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Origin of Saraswat Brahmin

Please refer “Sahyadri Khand of Skand Purana”for origin of Saraswat Brahmin . This is more authentic literature from Vedic era .

Western writers and authors are not authentic in their limited capacity & study and politically motivated to write articles during that era .

Just because OUP had some books written by few authors in limited study and not properly researched, but subject to socio political information available at that time can not be considered as authentic and do not become a source of legal and authoritative documents.

Wiki articles are motivated about caste and written with the intention to create a disharmony amongst the castes by various western editors

( seems to have specific agenda as like we see  on Twitter and other social  media) . 

Indians don’t need to be told the history by western editors and group of specific people who are writing articles based their immature and opinion based studies. 2402:E280:3D4F:A3:9D63:ADA1:6B16:6B3B (talk) 07:49, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2023

change the article to the sub sections of saraswats in karantaka are gaud saraswat brahmins and chitrapur saraswat brahmins] 117.248.83.94 (talk) 13:06, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 15:27, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2023

Kindly remove the mention of saraswat brahmins as low caste, as it creates a sense of hatred towards our community. 103.199.175.21 (talk) 04:50, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 17:30, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Rajasthani – Sarswat Brahmins

In fact, you wrote something or the other on all the local Sarswat Brahmins, but did not mention anything about the Rajasthani/Rajputana-Sarswat Brahmins. You are requested to write something on Rajasthani-Sarswat also.. If you want, I can give information related to this, because I'm a Rajasthani Sarswat Brahmin. 106.205.202.87 (talk) 03:53, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Wrong edit Pov In origin section

“The Saraswat Brahmins originating in Balochistan were called sindhur and were considered a low caste. They have a legend of origin related to Lord Ramachandra(not the same as Parashurama), who could not find a priest in Balochistan and applied a Tilaka on the head of some Mleccha. Jürgen Schaflechner cites the historian Rowe who states that such "low ranking Brahmins" formed a symbiotic relationship with Vaishya castes such as Khatris, Lohanas, etc. who were trying to raise their varna status - which in turn would benefit the Saraswats as well. For this purpose, certain religious texts were written during the British Raj era” This statement is under perspective section of source and related to one region how can it be valid and common to the page?

secondly no where it is mentioned as low caste and tilak on forehead of mleccha why it is mentioned here? Pondakar (talk) 01:39, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2023

The Saraswat Brahmins believe themselves to be named after the mythical Saraswati river, which was thought to arise in the Himalayas and flow through the present Punjab and Rajasthan region to the western sea near Dwaraka, in Gujarat. Saraswat brahmins are mentioned in the Ramayana, Mahabharata and Bhavishya Purana. The Saraswati river of Rigvedic and Vedic texts has been historically identified with parts of watercourses near Lake Pushkar in Rajasthan, Sidhpur in Northern Gujarat and Somnath in Saurashtra, Gujarat. A popular belief identifies it with an underground flow at Prayag, Allahabad, emerging at the confluence of Ganga and Yamuna to form the Triveni Sangam. It has been suggested that around 1000 BCE the Yamuna breached and permanently drained the Sarwasati, the most important water course of the Swati Valley civilisation and early Vedic Civilisation; the desertification of their homeland would have compelled the Saraswati migration to the other parts of Bharat Khanda. According to the Sahyadrikhanda of the Skanda Purana, ninety-six Brahmin families belonging to ten gotras migrated to Goa from western India, along with Parashurama. Linguistic evidence for such a migration of Saraswats to Konkan and Deccan is based on distribution of Indo-Aryan linguistic expansions, beginning before 500 BCE.

Lord Parshuram is considered as the sixth incarnation of Lord Vishnu. Due to the injustice done to his father and mother by the Kshatriyas, Parashurama took vow that he will ruin the entire Kshatriya clan from the face of earth,he sought revenge. He decides to do a huge Yagna to purify this earth from all sort of evil.At the same time period, river Saraswati of western India was hit by a calamity resulted in the entire region becoming the victim of drought. The Brahmins that resided on the banks of this river had to leave their penance and study of Vedas there by worked for a livelihood by migrating to other parts of India this went on for a lot of years. When Saraswati restored her waters again the Brahmins delighted, thought they can go back to their Veda studies. But they had been so engrossed in tilling and planting that the entire clan forgot everything they had memorized about the Vedas.They thus, decided to do penance to impress the Vedas and the gods. The entire saraswat Brahmans did penance on devi saraswati. Finally, Devi Saraswati appeared in front of them and advised to listen closely. She said they will have to follow the voice. Thus, they will be able to find the solution for their problems. They followed her order soon they could hear chants of Vedas from far. They followed the voice and found a child reciting the Vedas. Devi Saraswati appeared and said, this child will teach them all the Vedas again. The Brahmins got offended on knowing that they will have to learn from a child now. When the calamity happened she realised that the Brahmins will lose the knowledge of Vedas. Saraswat was born to fulfil the purpose of keeping Veda alive. After listening to the story, the clan bowed in front of him and agreed to learn Veda from him. They, thus came to be known as Saraswat Brahmins.Alternative theory states they got name from the saraswat river.At the same time in the western India Parshuram decided to do a Yagna and needed the purest for land for the purpose. He walked southwards in India but did not find an appropriate place. Therefore, he climbed the Sahyadris. Prayed to Indra Dev and Varun Dev to pull his sea back. Parshuram said he will throw his axes as far as possible in the sea and where it lands the sea has to go back till the demarcation. The gods agreed and stepped back. Parshuram wanted to make this place the most beautiful place in the world. The place is now called KONKAN, the western coast of India, that stretches from Maharashtra, runs across Goa and Karnataka and ends at malabar.Now he wanted Brahmins to live in this place. But there weren’t any in south. He travels till Bramavartha region of Saraswati river where he finds a clan of Brahmins chanting mantras since they were in drought affected area,He invites them to live in Konkan as it is a flourished land and they were living in hostile conditions currently. They agreed and traveled with him to the west coast. This is how Saraswats first migrated from North to West in India. They settled in the Agrahars, a civilisation in west.Later in the future, they followed a Guru named Gowdapadacharya and thus they were named as Gowda Saraswat Brahmins or the G.S.Bs. Pondakar (talk) 01:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 04:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2023 (2)

“The Saraswat Brahmins originating in Balochistan were called sindhur and were considered a low caste. They have a legend of origin related to Lord Ramachandra (not the same as Parashurama), who could not find a priest in Balochistan and applied a Tilaka on the head of some Mleccha. Jürgen Schaflechner cites the historian Rowe who states that such "low ranking Brahmins" formed a symbiotic relationship with Vaishya castes such as Khatris, Lohanas, etc. who were trying to raise their varna status - which in turn would benefit the Saraswats as well. For this purpose, certain religious texts were written during the British Raj era.”

In the source this reference is not mentioning about whole saraswat Brahmin community.Since this page is about Kashmiri,konkani,Punjabi and other north saraswat community.Mentioning the perspective History (Mythological) of One region(Baloch) community in the main stream without alternative reference related to this May not justify the info instead it will generalise.I have added the topic in talk so I request you to delete this section which is misguiding until further talk from the source. Pondakar (talk) 03:15, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 04:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Orgin

The Saraswat Brahmins believe themselves to be named after the mythical Saraswati river, which was thought to arise in the Himalayas and flow through the present Punjab and Rajasthan region to the western sea near Dwaraka, in Gujarat. Saraswat brahmins are mentioned in the Ramayana, Mahabharata and Bhavishya Purana. The Saraswati river of Rigvedic and Vedic texts has been historically identified with parts of watercourses near Lake Pushkar in Rajasthan, Sidhpur in Northern Gujarat and Somnath in Saurashtra, Gujarat. A popular belief identifies it with an underground flow at Prayag, Allahabad, emerging at the confluence of Ganga and Yamuna to form the Triveni Sangam. It has been suggested that around 1000 BCE the Yamuna breached and permanently drained the Sarwasati, the most important water course of the Swati Valley civilisation and early Vedic Civilisation; the desertification of their homeland would have compelled the Saraswati migration to the other parts of Bharat Khanda. According to the Sahyadrikhanda of the Skanda Purana, ninety-six Brahmin families belonging to ten gotras migrated to Goa from western India, along with Parashurama. Linguistic evidence for such a migration of Saraswats to Konkan and Deccan is based on distribution of Indo-Aryan linguistic expansions, beginning before 500 BCE.

Lord Parshuram is considered as the sixth incarnation of Lord Vishnu. Due to the injustice done to his father and mother by the Kshatriyas, Parashurama took vow that he will ruin the entire Kshatriya clan from the face of earth,he sought revenge. He decides to do a huge Yagna to purify this earth from all sort of evil.At the same time period, river Saraswati of western India was hit by a calamity resulted in the entire region becoming the victim of drought. The Brahmins that resided on the banks of this river had to leave their penance and study of Vedas there by worked for a livelihood by migrating to other parts of India this went on for a lot of years. When Saraswati restored her waters again the Brahmins delighted, thought they can go back to their Veda studies. But they had been so engrossed in tilling and planting that the entire clan forgot everything they had memorized about the Vedas.They thus, decided to do penance to impress the Vedas and the gods. The entire saraswat Brahmans did penance on devi saraswati. Finally, Devi Saraswati appeared in front of them and advised to listen closely. She said they will have to follow the voice. Thus, they will be able to find the solution for their problems. They followed her order soon they could hear chants of Vedas from far. They followed the voice and found a child reciting the Vedas. Devi Saraswati appeared and said, this child will teach them all the Vedas again. The Brahmins got offended on knowing that they will have to learn from a child now. When the calamity happened she realised that the Brahmins will lose the knowledge of Vedas. Saraswat was born to fulfil the purpose of keeping Veda alive. After listening to the story, the clan bowed in front of him and agreed to learn Veda from him. They, thus came to be known as Saraswat Brahmins.Alternative theory states they got name from the saraswat river.At the same time in the western India Parshuram decided to do a Yagna and needed the purest for land for the purpose. He walked southwards in India but did not find an appropriate place. Therefore, he climbed the Sahyadris. Prayed to Indra Dev and Varun Dev to pull his sea back. Parshuram said he will throw his axes as far as possible in the sea and where it lands the sea has to go back till the demarcation. The gods agreed and stepped back. Parshuram wanted to make this place the most beautiful place in the world. The place is now called KONKAN, the western coast of India, that stretches from Maharashtra, runs across Goa and Karnataka and ends at malabar.Now he wanted Brahmins to live in this place. But there weren’t any in south. He travels till Bramavartha region of Saraswati river where he finds a clan of Brahmins chanting mantras since they were in drought affected area,He invites them to live in Konkan as it is a flourished land and they were living in hostile conditions currently. They agreed and traveled with him to the west coast. This is how Saraswats first migrated from North to West in India. They settled in the Agrahars, a civilisation in west.Later in the future, they followed a Guru named Gowdapadacharya and thus they were named as Gowda Saraswat Brahmins or the G.S.Bs. Pondakar (talk) 03:25, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 04:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

References

Origin and migration

The Saraswat Brahmins believe themselves to be named after the mythical Saraswati river, which was thought to arise in the Himalayas and flow through the present Punjab and Rajasthan region to the western sea near Dwaraka, in Gujarat. Saraswat brahmins are mentioned in the Ramayana, Mahabharata and Bhavishya Purana. The Saraswati river of Rigvedic and Vedic texts has been historically identified with parts of watercourses near Lake Pushkar in Rajasthan, Sidhpur in Northern Gujarat and Somnath in Saurashtra, Gujarat. A popular belief identifies it with an underground flow at Prayag, Allahabad, emerging at the confluence of Ganga and Yamuna to form the Triveni Sangam. It has been suggested that around 1000 BCE the Yamuna breached and permanently drained the Sarwasati, the most important water course of the Swati Valley civilisation and early Vedic Civilisation; the desertification of their homeland would have compelled the Saraswati migration to the other parts of Bharat Khanda. According to the Sahyadrikhanda of the Skanda Purana, ninety-six Brahmin families belonging to ten gotras migrated to Goa from western India, along with Parashurama. Linguistic evidence for such a migration of Saraswats to Konkan and Deccan is based on distribution of Indo-Aryan linguistic expansions, beginning before 500 BCE.

Lord Parshuram is considered as the sixth incarnation of Lord Vishnu. Due to the injustice done to his father and mother by the Kshatriyas, Parashurama took vow that he will ruin the entire Kshatriya clan from the face of earth,he sought revenge. He decides to do a huge Yagna to purify this earth from all sort of evil.At the same time period, river Saraswati of western India was hit by a calamity resulted in the entire region becoming the victim of drought. The Brahmins that resided on the banks of this river had to leave their penance and study of Vedas there by worked for a livelihood by migrating to other parts of India this went on for a lot of years. When Saraswati restored her waters again the Brahmins delighted, thought they can go back to their Veda studies. But they had been so engrossed in tilling and planting that the entire clan forgot everything they had memorized about the Vedas.They thus, decided to do penance to impress the Vedas and the gods. The entire saraswat Brahmans did penance on devi saraswati. Finally, Devi Saraswati appeared in front of them and advised to listen closely. She said they will have to follow the voice. Thus, they will be able to find the solution for their problems. They followed her order soon they could hear chants of Vedas from far. They followed the voice and found a child reciting the Vedas. Devi Saraswati appeared and said, this child will teach them all the Vedas again. The Brahmins got offended on knowing that they will have to learn from a child now. When the calamity happened she realised that the Brahmins will lose the knowledge of Vedas. Saraswat was born to fulfil the purpose of keeping Veda alive. After listening to the story, the clan bowed in front of him and agreed to learn Veda from him. They, thus came to be known as Saraswat Brahmins.Alternative theory states they got name from the saraswat river.At the same time in the western India Parshuram decided to do a Yagna and needed the purest for land for the purpose. He walked southwards in India but did not find an appropriate place. Therefore, he climbed the Sahyadris. Prayed to Indra Dev and Varun Dev to pull his sea back. Parshuram said he will throw his axes as far as possible in the sea and where it lands the sea has to go back till the demarcation. The gods agreed and stepped back. Parshuram wanted to make this place the most beautiful place in the world. The place is now called KONKAN, the western coast of India, that stretches from Maharashtra, runs across Goa and Karnataka and ends at malabar.Now he wanted Brahmins to live in this place. But there weren’t any in south. He travels till Bramavartha region of Saraswati river where he finds a clan of Brahmins chanting mantras since they were in drought affected area,He invites them to live in Konkan as it is a flourished land and they were living in hostile conditions currently. They agreed and traveled with him to the west coast. This is how Saraswats first migrated from North to West in India. They settled in the Agrahars, a civilisation in west.Later in the future, they followed a Guru named Gowdapadacharya and thus they were named as Gowda Saraswat Brahmins or the G.S.Bs. Pondakar (talk) 03:29, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 04:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

References

Removal of content - Culture section — Maharashtra, Konkan, Goa

@LukeEmily: @Fylindfotberserk: @Jonathansammy: First - I propose removal of this—Similarly, Saraswats of the Western Indian Konkan belt historically had no knowledge of vedas, no priesthood, and even ate non-vegetarian food, according to Sociologist S.D.Pillai, based on the studies by G. S. Ghurye. Claim of Brahminhood by communities such as these groups demonstrates that the Brahmin claim was available on other grounds and using legends to justify Brahmin origins. But the non-vegetarian tradition did not apply to Saraswats of the south. from culture section in Maharashtra, Konkan, Goa sub-section. First source is from Popular prakashan, which is considered unreliable. Second source by Dennis Kurzon is just his opinion. Looks like using these citations someone wrote conveniently whatever they want. These are serious allegations. Without knowing Vedas and Vedanta how did people from the community became Peetadhipathis of Gokarna Math, Kashi Math, Chitrapur Math and Kavale Math. These Mathas have good following from Goa to Kerala. This citation clearly says that—S. Anees Siraj (2012), Karnataka State: Udupi District, Government of Karnataka, Karnataka Gazetteer Department, p. 189, All Saraswats have their own separate mathas. Chitrapur saraswats have Chitrapur Matha , Gauda Saraswats have Kashi Matha , Rajapuris have Kavale Matha (Goa) and Kudalas have Parthagali Matha. Second— As far as i understood from the source, the author is speaking about only Saraswats living in Basrur, a coastal village, which is present to the south of Goa - in the Karnataka coastal region. I think the author is using the terms such as "Saraswat Merchants" or "Saraswat Chetins" only to describe their character or skill, since majority of the Saraswats in this village were carrying merchantile activity, (i think the portuguese also referred them as "chetins" in the way). I don't understand why should we include this to Saraswat Brahmin article. What is your opinion guys? - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 16:19, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Please check this thesis for background to Saraswat brahmin v other brahmin dispute.. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

[General answer and request] I am specifically trying to address Sitush's concerns and the sources seem to support the points Sitush made. In general, any content that is WP:RS is OK on Wikipedia since we are uncensored - unless it is redundant(mentioned already). Please check the Rajput page - someone added yesterday that the word means illegitimate children. The sources used here are not journalists. They are historians or sociologists or anthropologists. Anyway, I am getting the Bairy book from the library in a few days - google books does not show all the pages as we need to get full context of what he is saying. His profile is here and he is definitely a reliable scholar. https://www.uvic.ca/research/centres/globalstudies/people/alumni/bairy-t.s.ramesh.php Subramanyam specifically uses "caste of open status" in Goa. If we delete sourced content from academic sources we will be POV pushing. Please can you give me 3-5 days? I will get the entire text from Bairy's book and try to summarize what he is saying on this talk page.LukeEmily (talk) 01:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@LukeEmily: @Fylindfotberserk:@Jonathansammy: Okay I'll wait for Bairy. What about Subrahmanyam citation. Here Subrahmanyam is not talking about Goa at all. He just took an example and is explaining specifically about Saraswats in Basrur, a village in Kanara coast. The analysis in the whole page is about Saraswats in Basrur village. And it was just an example. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 20:04, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

And check this thesis too by Uma Patil of UT Austin for understanding the centuries old conflicts between different Brahman communities of Maharashtra and Goa.

Sure! - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 03:40, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

@LukeEmily: @Fylindfotberserk: @MRRaja001: Any update on the contentious material? Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 18:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Jonathansammy: No update till now. I think we need to conclude this now. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 18:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@MRRaja001: We can write things that are written explicitly. For example, in the above comment of yours, if the author is speaking about only Saraswats living in Basrur, then we should write it likewise. Didn't get the ping by Jonathan yesterday for some reason. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk:@Jonathansammy: I think we need to remove this because they are concentrated throughout coastal line from Maharashtra to Kerala. It doesn't make any sense in writing about one village in particular. What do you say guys? . And also we need to remove the content saying they are not Brahmins in Maharashtra, Karnataka or other states because this is not true. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 03:31, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Apart from being published by Popular Prakashan, I consider this one unreliable especially for relying too much on racialism and anthropometric measurements. As for the other source, Kurzon, I see that his comments refer to other studies like "Wagle:1970" and "Shirodkar & Mandal 1993". So it is not exactly Dennis Kurzon's own opinion. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:03, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fylindfotberserk: @Jonathansammy:, @MRRaja001:, forgive me gentlemen, took me a long time to get access to the books. But have a few. I also did some WP:OR . Based on what I have read from sources most scholars do not consider certain subcastes of Saraswats such as the Goan GSB(Shenvi) as Brahmins and that is the result of the confusion because I think the authors are referring to those groups. A group of scholars had made a formal legal declaration as the community being non-Brahmin. The Karnataka saraswat Brahmins are considered "new" Brahmins but accepted nonetheless as Brahmins according to the book. It took a long time for me to get the books due to covid. Fylindfotberserk, that particular statement has nothing to do with anthropometric measurements. It is supported by other sources. My suggestion is to avoid generalization by using specific author names when an opinion is given. Sanjay Subrahmanyam is a top quality scholar but someone removed the reference. See the Bunt_(community) varna section. The Gaud Saraswats do attach a "Brahmin" just as many communities attach a varna. Using the reasons above, we would have to remove all sources from all pages. Not mentioning any controversy at all is WP:NPOV. MRRaja001, I found about arranged marriages between Deshastha Brahmin men and maratha women in conservative places like Pune. It is 2021 upper castes generally intermarry. Marathas were upper caste(non-OBC) despite the ritual status which is different and has almost become irrelevant. I think lot of unreliable sources have been added on this page. Can we please discuss?LukeEmily (talk) 15:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC) An Outline of Pre-Portuguese History of Goa(p 13) If they had been brought to Goa by Parashurama, earlier than this date, for performing sacrifices and to officiate as priests, then the question arises, how is that in the whole of Konkan and particularly in Goa, not a single Kshatriya, Vaishya, Sudra or other Hindu has engaged a Gaud Saraswat Brahmin as his purohit or bhat. On the contrary, it is found that a large number of Gaud Saraswat Brahmins themselves are engaging non-Gaud Saraswat Brahmins as their purohits.. Basically, this matches with other sources. We should not be removing reliable sources unless that issue has been covered by another source. If we do that, every caste page will do that. LukeEmily (talk) 16:12, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

In present times or even earlier times, what % of Marathi or Konkani speaking brahmins were engaged in priesthood for their living? Brahmins being engaged in other trades / professions can be seen in Hindu mythological tales such as Mahabharat ( e.g Dronacharya or even Parshuram as Warriors).Maharashtrian brahmins also have been warriors, bankers, and administrators at different levels.So not performing priestly duties is not a reason for somebody not being brahmin. Many sources include judgments by pandits of Kashi and of Maharashtra that accept the claims of GSB to brahmin status.Having said, the Marathi brahmin sub-castes have disputed the claims of brahminhood of each other for centuries. We can add that in the article here to give full picture on who refuse to accept GSB as brahmins and on what basis? You can refer to the Patil or Khandeparkar theses for additional information. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 20:28, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Gaga Bhatt(Kashi) opinion is already present. So we should add others too. For their status during Shivaji's time, please refer to [16]. The source clearly does not identify them as Brahmin and clearly treats them as non-Brahmin. Varna was changeable but later opinions are superseded by prior opinions. Are you familiar with the British era court case for saraswats ? Bairy mentions it in passing. If they had been accepted as Brahmins what was the need for the Raj era case? The difference is that they were not given the right to teach vedas or become priests. This was not by choice like dronacharya or others. Many sources clearly do not even identify them as Brahmins and that is exactly what Sitush pointed out. For example, Subhramaniyam is obviously not talking only about one village. We should add all opinions. We cannot cherry pick opinions. I am not sure if a PhD unpublished thesis can be used for controversial issues but we can use it for looking at other references or for non-controversial topics. - LukeEmily (talk) 23:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Here are few more examples:
-Cambridge University press - Empire, Civil Society, and the Beginnings of Colonial Empire, Civil Society, and the Beginnings of Colonial Education in India Jana Tschurenev · 2019 page 46 Table 7.3 Caste Classification of the Students under Vernacular Instruction ... Girls Boys Girls Boys Brahman 7 44 2 10 Shenvi (claim to be Brahman) 24 55 0 0 ..
-Oxford University press - Hinglaj Devi: Identity, Change, and Solidification at a Hindu Temple in Pakistan 2018
- By Jürgen Schaflechner Burton mentions that many of these Saraswat Brahmins were considered low caste and were also called “Sindhur,” from the vermillion ṭīkā (Hin. mark ...(here the source is discussing punjabi saraswats)
- Yes, I agree with your view that we can add individual views rather than making generalizations. For example, for Shivaji the editors have added that Gaga Bhatt(kashi) accepted him as Kshatriya but later it was overturned by later Brahmins. Based on reading of the disputes , I think Shenvis had a similar problem.LukeEmily (talk) 23:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
- S. H. Belavadi -With Malice Towards None: An Autobiography - where he writes on page 17 In Kolhapur where I joined the college , I had to search for accommodation , as there were no hostel facilities for Brahmins . Every other community had a hostel for its members – such as Saraswats , Prabhus , Lingayats , Marathas , Jains , etc(2003). Here he is treating them as non-Brahmin. Such sources make it so confusing. Imagine that there was a hostel for other Brahmins communities like Gujrati or Bengali. Would he have worded the sentence in the same way? He would have said: In Kolhapur where I joined the college , I had to search for accommodation , as there were no hostel facilities for Maharashtrian Brahmins . Every other community had a hostel for its members – such as Saraswats , Prabhus , Lingayats , Marathas , Jains , Bengali Brahmins, Gujarati Brahmins.LukeEmily (talk) 23:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

• @LukeEmily: Here are the citations which clearly answers your question on their priesthood:
  • The Illustrated Weekly of India, Volume 103, Issues 1-24. Bennett, Coleman & Company, Limited, at the Times of India Press. 1982. p. 28. Temples in Goa are run by the Saraswat Brahmins.
  • Vithal Raghavendra Mitragotri (1999). A Socio-cultural History of Goa from the Bhojas to the Vijayanagara. Institute Menezes Braganza. The priests of this temple are Saraswats and Karhades.
  • Emma Maria (2002). Women in Portuguese Goa, 1510-1835. Institute for Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, MESHAR. p. 29. When the Kadambas declined and were replaced by the Vijayanagara rule , during which the Saraswats were the priests of the famous temples in Goa.
  • Karnataka State Gazetteer: Uttara Kannada. Director of Print, Stationery and Publications at the Karnataka Government Press. 1985. p. 533. It is noticed in the district, that people of different faiths such as Veerashaivas, Havyakas and Gaud Saraswats have their own priests and they are invited even by other castes. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 07:03, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

• @LukeEmily: Go and ask S. H. Belavadi for his statement, who can say what he had in his mind. How can you take cherry picked statements like these. I can show you thousands of references where Saraswat Brahmins are included Chitpavan and Karhades especially in Konkan coast. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 07:48, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

• For total Saraswat Brahmin community citation from Oxford University Press — Kumar Suresh Singh (1998). India's Communities: N - Z. Oxford University Press. p. 2773. Traditional occupations of the Saraswat Brahman community are priesthood , astrology (jothiksha) and preparation of janmkundali.. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 07:58, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@LukeEmily@MRRaja001@JonathansammyHere and in GSB page I can find total messup.Throughout history GSB and deshasthas worked as administrator in Deccan together.(Citation is available)

secondly Madhwachaya himself gave Vaishnava Deeksha to GSB in Goa.

Thirdly the issue of shenvis araised from Gramanya(Intercaste issue ) in Maharashtra between Chitpavan and Deshastha,chitpavan and Shenvis.After fall of Maratha empire this reached court.But this issue was not regarding brahmin or not brahmin instead satkarmi or trikarmi.Finally court gave verdict of Satkarmi Brahmins.(Citation is there)

The main problem I saw with this two pages are citing from a particular reference.Basrur is on small trading town,by giving reference of basrur where GSB as a whole may be doing merchant work cannot be generalised as cheti.

Secondly priesthood https://shrivijayadurga.org/about/

Just giving one example where GSB and Kharhade are mahahans of single temple.I can give whole temple list here.They are priest throughout the konkan.They call their own priest.

So my concern is generalising the single book to broad community may not be correct.

here in sarawat brahmin page one author called baloch Brahmins as mlecch but this page contains saraswat Brahmins from different region and irony is Rama didn’t visited Baloch nor saraswat were present in that area.

Even as per my knowledge Adishakarachrya reached to debate with saraswat Brahmin of Kashmir,Guru of adi Sankara was Gauda padacharya was GSB.Based on this the whole Hindu system stands.

I may be wrong but pointing reference need to be generalised in these two pages. Pondakar (talk) 05:44, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

On the GSB talk page, I will add the details with page numbers from the dispute. My simple suggestion is that we should not have any opinions ourselves and only quote sources. But I will try to add it in such a way that it is not too negative. In my opinion, controversial opinions about an upper caste should not be emphasized even if mentioned. No need to add negative without reason. We should ask Sitush or someone else like an administrator for second opinion.LukeEmily (talk) 23:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

• @LukeEmily: For Gaud Sarasat Brahmins you can go through these links:
  • Temples where Gaud Saraswat Brahmins are priests — In Mumbai, From Konkan coast to Kerala, For all temples refer to this
  • Mathas and swamiji's

How many times will you raise the same issue. I won't explain you once again all the things. Refer to my first statement in this discussion for the discussion. Thank You - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 07:41, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

• @Fylindfotberserk: @Jonathansammy: @LukeEmily: Let's close this and conclude the discussion. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 12:54, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

• @Fylindfotberserk: @MRRaja001: @LukeEmily:, Yes, let us end this.In post-independence era, I don't think there are any authorities charged with determining specific varna /caste for any group. There may be groups fighting for OBC status for economical benefits it may bestow on their particular community but in my research, I have not come across any cases that challenge the claim of GSB or other similar groups of their brahmin status. And per Wikipedia policy (by Sitush), we are not allowed to quote Raj era sources. The two theses I cited do say that there have been attempts in the past to challenge GSB rights to brahminhood and we can certainly add that to the article. BTW, these two theses have been published by the Universities that granted the degrees and these institutions are of high repute.Also the advisors like Ann Feldhaus for one of the author have written extensively on Maharashtra. So LukeEmily let us stop this now. For me caste is a relic of the past. We should not forget it, but let us not be derogatory and claim one group to be having higher status than another group. Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 21:40, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Which of the sources are Raj era? Saraswats have been formed from different subgroups- Shenvi is one of them. Showing that some of them are brahmins does not prove anything because it is obvious which group the author is referring to. In Karnataka, despite the challenges, based on my reading so far, I think these groups have a valid claim to being brahmins. In march, Oxford university sources were removed and now caste organization books and sources/caste websites are being used. I have read comments that PhD thesis are allowed only for non-controversial material. You say: in my research, I have not come across any cases that challenge the claim of GSB or other similar groups of their brahmin status. I don't mean to be disrespectful but I have come across 20 modern sources at least that imply the challenge directly or indirectly. Please read Bairy's book and see the quotes. Also, please read other books/papers. I agree with you about removing derogatory content but that needs to be done from every caste page in the interest of fairness. My only intent in this discussion is to resolve Sitush's dilemma. I personally do not mind removal as long as we follow wikipedia rules of WP:NPOV and WP:UNCENSORED. I do not have any horse in this race. My concern is that we will be declaring a lot of sources as "unreliable" if we go down this path of removing modern well sources references and that is Sitush's concern as well. And we will be setting a bad example for wikipedia. Anyway, can we resolve this by two weeks time (around 18th)? Some of my book requests are arriving early next week. It will give me some time to read more and I will show you some quotes from the books I recently received in these two weeks.LukeEmily (talk) 04:41, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

I have removed the controvertial content from lede section.LukeEmily (talk) 05:21, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

@LukeEmily: What about this statement - Similarly, Saraswats of the Western Indian Konkan belt historically had no knowledge of vedas, no priesthood, and even ate non-vegetarian food, according to Sociologist S.D.Pillai, based on the studies by G. S. Ghurye. Claim of Brahminhood by communities such as these groups demonstrates that the Brahmin claim was available on other grounds and using legends to justify Brahmin origins. But the non-vegetarian tradition did not apply to Saraswats of the south. I think the citations which i provided for their priesthood is enough to remove this statement too. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 06:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

As previously requested, can we resolve by 18th? If we still disagree on 18th, then let us get admins involved. I am collecting and making a list of quotes and citations as requested by Johnathansammy.LukeEmily (talk) 16:01, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

@LukeEmily: I am no more interested in this topic. I don't want to waste my time. Do whatever you want, Thanks. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 16:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

@MRRaja001:, I am also not interested. You already changed it a lot and deleted sourced content from oxford university source without waiting for any consensus. Anyway, two of my friends went to two different libraries to get the books that I had requested and mailed them to me during covid. So I will do my duty of providing quotes from them at least. Do what you think is right after I provide quotes. If anyone can resolve the dilemma Sitush mentioned on the talk page, I will be happy to support him. Unfortunately, none of the views so far answer his confusion. I did read your explanation but it still does not answer his question.LukeEmily (talk) 17:01, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

@LukeEmily: FYI, Other than this I did not remove anything. I also clearly explained why i removed this. - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 17:17, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

References

Review the way of mentioning content seems POV

@LukeEmily @Jonathansammy:

In occupation section related western saraswat 1.Sanjay Subramanyam is not Social historian instead he is economic expert.He has mentioned about the town called basrur where Saraswat Brahmins were involved in trading business. POV: Basrur town doesn’t represent whole community and economic author cannot be a perfect citation in this.If they term them as chetti will they become non brahmin,Portuguese era documents categorise western Goan sarawat brahmin as Bomman.

2.The same saraswat Brahmins were administrators and priest in the rest of konkan.Does it change their caste status. So seems highlighting POV.

3.Saraswat Brahmins and fishermen were involved in sea trading.Does this statement really make sense and is required here.The word fisherman is irrelevant as the take is about Saraswat Brahmins.

4.Story of mleccha tilak has been highlighted which as per author is related to Balochistan seems few more citation is required.Here LOW CASTE is highlighted.Main mythology of Parashuram has been deleted which was applicable for all saraswat subcastes.This is void of neutrality.

Pondakar (talk) 11:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 November 2023

“History section contains origin by the name Baloch sarawat instead I want to add history of whole sarawat in general.This need to be updated in History section May be sub heading origin”

The Saraswat Brahmins believe themselves to be named after the mythical Saraswati river, which was thought to arise in the Himalayas and flow through the present Punjab and Rajasthan region to the western sea near Dwaraka, in Gujarat. Saraswat brahmins are mentioned in the Ramayana, Mahabharata and Bhavishya Purana. The Saraswati river of Rigvedic and Vedic texts has been historically identified with parts of watercourses near Lake Pushkar in Rajasthan, Sidhpur in Northern Gujarat and Somnath in Saurashtra, Gujarat. A popular belief identifies it with an underground flow at Prayag, Allahabad, emerging at the confluence of Ganga and Yamuna to form the Triveni Sangam. It has been suggested that around 1000 BCE the Yamuna breached and permanently drained the Sarwasati, the most important water course of the Swati Valley civilisation and early Vedic Civilisation the desertification of their homeland would have compelled the Saraswati migration to the other parts of Bharat Khanda. According to the Sahyadrikhanda of the Skanda Purana, ninety-six Brahmin families belonging to ten gotras migrated to Goa from western India, along with Parashurama. Linguistic evidence for such a migration of Saraswats to Konkan and Deccan is based on distribution of Indo-Aryan linguistic expansions, beginning before 500 BCE..Alternative theory states they got name from the saraswat river.At the same time in the western India Parshuram decided to do a Yagna and needed the purest for land for the purpose. He walked southwards in India but did not find an appropriate place. Therefore, he climbed the Sahyadris. Prayed to Indra Dev and Varun Dev to pull his sea back. Parshuram said he will throw his axes as far as possible in the sea and where it lands the sea has to go back till the demarcation. The gods agreed and stepped back. Parshuram wanted to make this place the most beautiful place in the world. The place is now called KONKAN, the western coast of India, that stretches from Maharashtra, runs across Goa and Karnataka and ends at malabar.Now he wanted Brahmins to live in this place. But there weren’t any in south. He travels till Bramavartha region of Saraswati river where he finds a clan of Brahmins chanting mantras since they were in drought affected area,He invites them to live in Konkan as it is a flourished land and they were living in hostile conditions currently. They agreed and traveled with him to the west coast. This is how Saraswats first migrated from North to West in India. They settled in the Agrahars, a civilisation in west.Later in the future, they followed a Guru named Gowdapadacharya and thus they were named as Gowda Saraswat Brahmins or the G.S.Bs. Pondakar (talk) 12:10, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

 Question: Do you want the above text to replace the contents of section "Origin and migration"? If not, do you want it above or below it? I ask for the benefit of whomever decides to undertake this request in the future. —Sirdog (talk) 00:18, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

I want these text to be at the starting of Origin and migration section.The versus mentioned regarding Baloch needs more citation as one non researchers general writing cannot be cited. Pondakar (talk) 12:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Sockpuppetry. -Lemonaka‎ 02:51, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2024

Write this sentence exactly at the starting of History(Section:Origin and migration)

The Saraswat Brahmins believe themselves to be named after the mythical Saraswati river, which was thought to arise in the Himalayas and flow through the present day Punjab and Rajasthan region to the western sea near Dwaraka, in Gujarat. Saraswat brahmins are mentioned in the Ramayana, Mahabharata and Bhavishya Purana..According to the Sahyadrikhanda of the Skanda Purana, ninety-six Brahmin families belonging to ten gotras migrated to Goa from western India, along with Parashurama. Linguistic evidence for such a migration of Saraswats to Konkan and Deccan is based on distribution of Indo-Aryan linguistic expansions, beginning before 500 BCE. Krishnan01 (talk) 13:21, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done — FenrisAureus ▲ (she/they) (talk) 03:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

@EkdalianYour reasons are as below,

1.Khare is unreliable-It cannot be unreliable just by considering his caste as mentioned by you(Khare from the community itself is unreliable;).It’s published by pearson.

2.Skanda Puran (Marathi version) is a primary source typically used for caste promotion-Serious allegation as Source reference and primary reference both are different.Here Dcunha didn’t write skandapurana instead it already exists. Krishnan01 (talk) 14:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

No, sorry; you are wrong, Krishnan01!

I have mentioned in my last edit summary that "Such edits require consensus on talk page; Khare is unreliable; Skanda Puran (Marathi version) is a primary source typically used for caste promotion". Let me explain:

1. You need to achieve talk page consensus for such edits.

2. The source, one of whose editors is Khare, is not reliable (I am not talking about Khare's reliability here).

3. Skanda Puran (Marathi version) is equivalent to a primary source. Ekdalian (talk) 18:18, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

@Ekdalian

1.Can you please show me the link where Khare has been declared unreliable.(According to ?)

2.Skanda Puran is an important script which explains migration.I have given additional reference which explains exactly the same history Swapna saraswat(Gopalkrishna) and socio cultural history(Mittagotri).All three sources explains the same thing.In this case I can delete skandapurana reference as it doesn’t effect the existing literature.

3.Consensus with the person who opposes

the inclusion as I read in the Policy,it’s @Ekdalian in this case. Krishnan01 (talk) 07:35, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Go for RfC, or else achieve consensus with other experienced editors on this talk page! It was my responsibility to raise my concern, and I have done so! It's your responsibility to explain others that your proposed content conforms to our policies. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 07:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@EkdalianI have kept this infront of everyone.I didn’t entered this directly,If any user have objections they would have raised.Currently you have opposed this even after acceptance so if you have any particular issue please feel free to express. Krishnan01 (talk) 10:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Already mentioned above! Wait for others, I mean, let other experienced editors get involved, or else, go for RfC! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 10:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

References