Talk:Bhumihar/Archive 2

Content moved to talk page

Bhumihar is a Hindu caste, mostly found in Bihar & Uttarpradesh. They are land holders and they consider themsevles to be superior to Brahmin community. They observer all brahmin rituals and some have brahmin surnames. They also have kshatriya surname as well as surname of backward castes. They usually do not marry outside the community but in Mithilanchal there are Maithil Brahmins who have got relation among Bhumihar. There is very high dowry in this caste. This community has given great Leaders like Dandi Swami Sahjanand Sarswati & Raja Narayan. In addition to this Rastrakavi Dinkar also belong to this community. Bhumihars are only 3% of the population. They face major challance from Maovadi Communist as they are treated fedual caste( Zaminadars)and also from OBC as they are dead against Caste based reservations. Unfortunately, they are also not accepted by Brahmins because they have produced more talented Sanskrit Scholars such as Dr.Karan Sharma, Swami Ramprapanna Acharya & Swami Ranga Ramanuja Acharya. In fact, Uttradhi Math is run by Bhumihar Brahmin having its headquarter in Treta Patna.This community has become major threat to other Brahmins Roji Rotee. They have political rivalary and traditional rivalary with Rajputs as Mythologically, Bhagwan Parsuram captured Siezed the land from kshatriya and gave to these brahamins presently known as The Bhumihar. Initially, When Dr. Shri Krishna Singh became the chief minister of Bihar, he was opposed by Anugrah Babu a Rajput by caste, but later, He joined his fold. A very few Bhumihars have job at the moment and they have lost the land also.... But still they are rude ......l

[edit] Bhumihar and their relationship with other castes Pench in hindi means screw. It is said that if a bhumihar eats a nail it will come out as a screw implying that bhumihars have a twisted personality. This trait of bhumihar is famously known as bhumihar pench and because of this trait, bhumihars are disliked by all castes. Though they want to be associated with the brahmins, brahmins will not eat bhaath(cooked rice) with them. Similarly, all castes whether they are rajput, kurmi, yadav and harijan, hates bhumihar. There is a popular saying in rural India, that if you see a bhumihar and a cobra, you should kill the bhumihar first, because a bhumihar is more deadly.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumihar"

Plz dont use words which may hurt sentiments of some communities.This is not the right place.Holywarrior 08:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Unanswered question

Bhumihar finds reference in modern times only .The theory is that some shudras were elevated to the rank of brahmins by a king in Bihar who had disputes with brahmins.The evidence which support it is that they have subcastes like Domkatar (dom with weapon),dholbajja(drum beaters),Dogmaiya(literally meaning bastards).In indian context to know about the true status of castes one must dig into the subcastes which reveals more about their real origin.All claims of links with Parshuram and budhist returning to hindu fold is nothing but mere bullshit. - :

I rolled back the page, and restored above contents, as talk page should have most of the discussions. --Bhadani 15:08, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I am adding more comments from history.
Some people belives that Bhumihars are the result of cross breeding between Brahmin and other castes. Their surname range from that of brahmin(sharma, tiwari) to shudra(domkatar, dholbajja). In orthodox hinduism, the caste structure is observered strictly and if someone deviated from the tradition or the will of the patriarch, he/she was thrown out of the commnitiy. Such people were then relegated to the lowest of all caste, shudra. It can be therefore concluded that Bhumihars are shudra.(comments by 63.71.19.253)Holywarrior 12:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Highly Misleading Article

I request wikipedia to protect the page with saner version. Whole article is flawed and full of dubious claims for no rhyme or reasons. Even people listed as famous people seem to be having no linkage with this community.Holywarrior 08:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I donot know how to respond to Mr.bhadani.I am writing here, but I donot know whether it is a proper method.However, my replies are as follows: 1.First of all Bhadani should correct himself.It is not 'Domkatar'.It is 'Domaticar'.This was some kind of official post;perhaps pre mogul period;when the word 'Jamidar' was coined. 2. Dogamias are those who marries both with Maithil Brahmans and Bhumihars.Since both are brahmans it is perfectly OK. 3.So called Dholbajjas may be in existence in Bhadani's half informed world.There is no such Bhumihar clan. Thanks C,P,Singh

Mr CP Singh we want etymological relations so that conclusions may be drawn.You are getting speculative.Holywarrior 12:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't see the word in any of its suggested forms in the main article.Should we assume if Dholbajjas never existed Domkatars and others by whatever name you call it have become extinct or they became eksaria la bla bla overnite .Why bhumihar clan name is a mystery .Holywarrior 14:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

a probable meaning of "bhumihaar"

"bhumi", meaning "land" is OK. But the"haar" is not from "ahaar" (food). I think "haar" is from "haran" ie snatching or grabbing- "hri" dhatu means "collecting"(aharan) which may be a more sober interpretation.. So a bhumihaar could be somebody who snatches or grabs land.. or ironically somebody whose land has been lost to natural disaster, or more likely, robbed or grabed by somebody else..Thus depending on what context it is used Bhumihaar can mean these two opposite things. When it is applied in the context of a land-lord it has a connotation of a kind of a cunning "land-shark". On the contrary when applied to a poor it could mean one whose lands have been taken away by social or financial oppressive force. The Bhumihaar is more frequently applied to a particular kind of higher cast landlords whose social status have varied depending on time and place. It could be the ancestral history of someones family which might have earned the person a "bhumihaar" title.

It sounds logical to me that "bhoinhar" might have come from "Bhumihaar"; and "Bhuian" might have also come from the same, though another alternative for "Bhuian" is "bhumipal" or landlord. "Bhumipal" means somebody who who protects and develops a land and "bhumihaar" possibly means somebody who grabs or robs a land. but there were times during feudal-like nature of the ownerships of lands when the "protector"s robbed the "protected". So there was this dual character in the landlord. In the history of Bengal, there were 12 powerful "bhuian" jaminder/landlords known as "bara-bhuian" in bengal who resisted Akbar's attempt to regain the control of Bengal. Raja Pratapaditya Ray was the foremost of them. But the social status of these "bhuian"s might have been different from that of the Bhumihars of Bihar about whom I dont have much knowledge. Dr.saptarshi 02:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The word Bhumihar consists of two Sanskrit words, bhoomi, meaning "land" and har, meaning 'capturer'. It can be deduced that Bhumihars must have traditionally been landowners.
Actually the word is Haar which means loosing .Hence Bhumihar may mean One who has lost his land.The question is where was the homeland and why they lost it.Plz don't try to discover or link it with sanskrit --the term which has its origin some 300 yrs back or may be even more recent.Holywarrior 13:58, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

From main page

The write up on Bhumihar clans mentions that Maharaja of Tekari was an Eksaria Bhumihar.This is not correct.Infact,he was a Domaticar Bhumihar.There are many villages, near by Tekari,namely Jamuara,Ahiyapur,Kaithi etc, where many Domaticar Bhumihars live.Many of their famlies were Jamindar families during British period.Family of Tekari rose to fame when Nababs of Murshidabad became defacto rulers of Bihar-Bengal.Earlier than that they were dewans of Bharatpura Riyasat; situated in present day Patna district. Descendents of Bharatpura family invariably add 'Dhari' to their names.In recent times, Late Rajan Dhari Sinha had been a prominent member of this family. Their gotra is 'Atharab' and are supposed to have migrated from Deccan some time in antiquity. Thanks C.P.Singh Just now I went through Dr.saptarshi's views regarding meaning of the word 'Bhumihar'.He suggests that the word segment 'har' means grabing or 'Haran'.Thus,the word in totatality, in Saptarshi's views,means land grabber.It seems that Saptarshi is totaly knave.Here 'har' means jewel. That means these people have land as jewel.Otherwise har also means loosing.Hence,the word also may mean those who lost the land.However, har never means grabing.Neither in Sanskrit,nor in Hindi or even in Bangla. Thanks C.P.Singh

every thing that we say on any matter is disputed until it is supported by facts.people denouncing BHUMIHARS are not able to produce proofs which could substantiate their assertions.For ex. one editer says that a king in Basti gave power to rule to lower castes and gave them recognition as Brahmins to sattle a score with Brahmins.Moverover, as a proof he sites the domkatras being the subcastes.now this fact that these doms are a subcaste is again not proved.Also,which king will be so fool that just to settle a score with someone ,will give power to other so that in near future that person, one day, raise the sword against him to expand his boundaries. Hence there is no merit in these arguments. these are only heresies floated by the envious castes on the success of this great race.

           Now what we ,the Bhumihars Claim, is well supported by the facts.

The lands that we posses make us the land oweners, thus justifing the title BHUMIHAR. we claim Parashuram to be our originator is supported by the fact even in modern age we resort to arms when needed to save ourselves and the example is Ranveer Sena.Parashuram had organised a sena which cleaned the earth of atrocious khsatriyas,so have Bhumihars to counter lower castes who see formers' properties with saliva oozing out of their mouths. the indian caste system is so complex that the casts that were backword in ancient times are in the same state even after the country bearing them as a liability in the form of RESEVATIONS.So,if had Bhumihars been a low caste, they would not have been able to assume power(by becoming kings ,chief ministers,ministers ) and land(an undisputable fact) in modern time. RAI SAHAB Dear Pinak pani Dont just edit prove your points too.You should quote sources to relate bhumihar to brahmins.Holywarrior 12:58, 5 April 2006 (UTC) the frustration in the form of the written material from a friend is understandable.Idirectly he has conceded that the Bhumihar is a dominating cast and now the question of proving them to be brahmins.look the case of kshatriyas .this cast has several subcasts e.g. suryavanshi,chandra vanshi,lodh,kurmi,parivar thakurs etc. now refer to ancient text and you will find the word khsatriya or more stricly surya and chandra vanshi.it is very unusual to here about parivar thakurs.many thakurs will be such as they are not the part of royal pedigrees but still they find their existence in most respectable forms. similarly brahmins divided themselves many times depending on their specialities like chturvedis resorted to four vedas while dwivwdis only two.in the same manner a group of brahmins also parted itself from bhiksha dependent brahmins and became self - serviving landlords and only gave, never begged.it is exactly not mentioned in the texts that when they parted themselves from bhikshak brahmans, in the same manner as it is not mentioned as to when parivar thakurs and dwivwdi -chaturvedi and many such were formed. moreover, as it is well known that we pick up arms when it is needed and are landlords as well,it must be far easier for us to prove that we are kshatriya yet we say we are brahmins because we are brahmins . but the intolerence of bhikshak brahmins will never allow them to admit the fact because of glittring success of ours.

The article tries to relate Bhumihar to bhoinhar brahmins which is incorrect .Bhoinhar Brahmins existed for a long time while bhumihar word was coined by Swami sahjananda saraswati who was actually a brahmin himself but had worked for bhumihar upliftment. Holywarrior 13:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

By the way this entire piece appears to be totally subjective and there is nothing empirical which supports the above. The most amazing thing is complete distortion of facts. There is no connection between jijhoutiya brahmins and bhumihars and the great peassant leader and sanyasi Shri Sahajanand Saraswati himself was a Jijhotiya Brahmin who worked towards uplifting Bhumihars' social status by recognizing them as equal. Bhumihars are one of the most economically and politically powerful communities in Bihar however they are an entirely different caste although in the varna hierarchy they can be lossely fitted somewhere between Kshatriyas and Brahmins. The Brahmins do not accept Bhumihars as one of them on a social scale - Objectivist

Pundit Yogendra Bhattacharya in his book "Hindu castes and sets" writes that Bhumihar Brahmin literally means landholder. The Bhumihar Brahmins are evidently those Bhrahmins who held grants of land for secular services. Whoever held a secular fief was Bhumihar. Where a Brahmin held such a tenure he was called a Bhumihar Brahmin.

Bhumihar Brahmins are sometimes simply called as Bhumihars. They perform all their religious ceremonies in the same manner as other Brahmins, but as they also practice secular occupations like the Laukik Brahmans of Southern India, they are not entitled to accept religious gifts or to minister to anyone as priest. The usual surnames/titles of the Bhumihar Brahmins are same as those of other Brahmins of Northern India. Being a fighter by caste few of them have Rajputana surnames/titles.

1. Bhumihar Brahmins are addicted to agriculture, a pursuit considered to be beneath the diginity of pure or orthodox Brahmins. 2. They have accepted and adopted in their cheif families the secular title of Raja, Maharaja and so forth distinctions which high brahmins eschew. 3. The Bhumihar Brahmin only perform one half of the prescribed Brahmanical duties. They give alms, but do not receive them; they offer sacrifices to their idols, but do not perform the duties and offices of the priesthood; they read the scared writings, but do not teach them.

Aristotle In the year 331 B.C. Aristotle visited India and wrote that now the ideas about castes and professions, which have been prevelant from a long time, are gradually dying out, and the Brahmins, neglecting their education.......... live by cultivating the land and acquiring the territorial possessions, which is the duty of Kshatriyas." If things go on in the way, then instead of being(Vidyapati) i.e master of learning, they will become(Bhumipati) i.e master of land."

Fahian In the year 399 A.D. Fahian came to India and he wrote "The Brahmins having given up asceticism........... are ruling here and there in the place of Kshatriya and are called Sang he Kang ( land-seizer)."The land-sezier word indicate Bhumihar Brahmins.

Dr. Wilson Dr. Wilson in his book "Indian castes" part II page 134 has decribed The Mohiyal( synonym of Bhumihar Brahmin) as mentioned below: Saraswat Brahmins: Another class of the character refers to is that of the Moyals or movals. They are extensively scatterd over the Punjab. Taga(Tyagi) Brahmins of the Punjab are generally cultivators. They belong to the Gauda division of the Brahmin-hood. They care little about religious rites of any kind..... They are found principally on the banks of the Saraswati, near Thanser, some of the less pure agriculture Brahmin of these villages are called Taga of Gauda Tagas. (Tyagi is the synonym for Bhumihar Brahmin)

Mr. Crook Mr. Crook in his book "The Tribes and castes of UP and Oudh" part II, page 64 has written---- Bhumihar(Sanskrit Bhumi and Kara(har) 'maker'): An important tribe and landowners and agriculturists in eastern districts. They are also known as Babhan, Zamindar Brahmin, Grihastha Brahman or Pachchima or "Western Brahmin".

Sir Elliot According to Sir Elliot's supplemental glossary, there are five divisions of the Kamkoobj Brahmins. They are Kamkoobj proper, Sunadh, Surwaria, Jijhotia and Bhoinhar.

Mr. William Oldham Mr. William Oldham in his book "NORTH WESTERN PROVINCES HISTORTICAL AND STATICAL MEMOIR" has categorically mentioned that Bhoinhars, both by themselves and by ethnologists, are belived to be the descendants of Brahmins, who on becoming cultivators and landholders gave up their priestly functions.

The greatest piece of literature in modern times regarding the types and origin of Bhumihar Brahmins has been the book written by DANDI SANYASI SWAMI SAHAJANAND SARASWATI who was himself a Bhumihar Brahmin of Jijhoutiya clan (which has even been given the status of a barhmin subcaste in regions around jhansi)by the title of "Brahmarshi vansha vistar" in which he has done a very dispassionate study of the community as also the acclaimed book on brahmins "vayam rakshmah" by acharya chatursen shastri (who incidentally happens to be a kanyakubj brahmin) on brahmins and his disposition on bhumihar brahmins. all accounts show that such a brahmin which claims its origin from Bhagwan Parashuram and Brahmarshi Vashisht are present all across the subcontinent and those who have been engaged in secular work, for example one subcaste of nambudiri brahmin in Kerela, havyaka brahmins of andhra pradesh, chitpawan brahmins of maharashtra, goud brahmins of UP and rajasthan, Khandelval Brahmins of rajasthan, Anawil brahmins of Gujarat, and a few others. so if people are abusing bhumihars they are abusing all the other brahmins as well and if this simple fact is not realised by someone it is a matter of shame for all brahmins. bhumihars have produced great scholars like swami sahajanand saraswati, mahapandit rahul sankrityayan, ramdhari singh dinkar, ramvriksha benipuri and many others; great political leaders like Shri krishna singh, Basawon singh, Ramnandan mishra, Kishori prassana sinha, Ganga sharan singh, Yogendra shukla, Baikuntha shukla, karyananda sharma and many others who were great natinalists as well. in fact, if we find out the caste of all the great nationalists and even mainstream nationalists, small workers of the nationalist movement, an overwhelming majority of them were bhumihars. it is the shameless people who cannot recognize the genius of the people who critize and target the whole community without knowing the reality out of their own frustration and inferiority complex. if things go on this manner, there would be no future of the country. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.78.173.42 (talk • contribs) .-kaliputra

There are many clans among bhumihar brahmins and if the person who has expressed his reservations against some clan-names like domkatar or dogamiya he must go through the works of swami sahajanand and others before coming to any conclusion as it is again reflective of the person's shallow knowledge and preconceived notions and prejudices. infact, one approved form of marriage was daiva vivah according to manu smriti which says how the officiating priests who performed yajna were offred daughters by kings, i don't know what opinion people would have about it. even supreme court judgements have declared bhumihar brahmins to be brahmins of high order, infact if you will read some historical accounts of some historians (european) "bhumihar brahmins are the most aryan looking people of the gangetic plain". all brahmanical rites and rituals are performed by bhumihar brahmins and even if we look at their varna or colour nobody can match their aryan looks, which is reflective of the purity of their race as against many others because of their mixed heritage look more unaryan. because it is a no-nonsense race which is extremely conscious of its identity and has been the foundation on which the brahmanical superstructure was constructed and thrived that it has been the target of most vitriolic and irrational attack. i do not prefer making the same mistakes which some free wheeling individuals have done regarding bhumihar brahmins, but the very fact that they visit the site about bhumihar brahmins inspite of not being one, is reflective that they somehow suffer from inferiority complex and try to give in their irrational and uninformed, unresearched and unread idiosyncracies.-Kaliputra

Recovered from history

- I donot know how to access the original report.However,it is clear that it is something about Bhumihars;some are pro and some are anti.However,bothsides have relied mostly on heresays and unfounded history.Bhumihars severally link themselves with Parashuram.They forget that story of Parashuram is a mythology.This is not a serious history.No one will accept this theory and they are right.It is correct that Bhumihars donot find mention in ancient literature.Perhaps this subcast gradually separated out in last 1000=1500 yrs.There have been several Brahman Kings or dynasties scattered over various regions of the country in historical period.Perhaps first among them was Pushya Mitra Sunga who succeeded Moryans and successfully defended the empire from 2nd invasion of Greeks.Sunga were succeeded by Kanvas;but they didnot survive for long.Then threre was Kadambas in south.Punjab was defended for a long time by a Brahman dynasty popularly known as Hindushahies.The last king of Sindh 'Dahar' and his father 'Chach' were also Brahmans.Infact in many cases Brahmans succeeded Baudh rulers.Perhaps they made last ditch effort to save the empires/Kingdomes from disintegration.This has been the case with Pushyamitra,Hindushahies and Chach/Dahar.Infact, in Bihar-Bengal region also the Budhist ruling dynasty of Pals was succeeded by Sens and Karnats.They also were Brahmans frm Deccan. In fact, it was Sens and Karnats who are credited to resurrect hinduism in Bihar-Bengal region.They invited Brahmans from Kanyakubja to repropagate hinduism.Local Brahmans who had abondoned priesthood and adopted other livelyhoods during preceding Budhist hegemoney actively collaborated with new rulers and benifitted.They might have got land grants,appointed as state officials and helped reputed Brahmans from outside to settle and spread hinduism.With incoming of new priests from Kany akubja etc the local Brahmans separated themselves as Bhumihar Brahmans.Brahmans were notorious for inforcing cast system.The new commer Kanyakubjas would not marry even with other Brahmans like Sarayuparins or Sakaldwipies.Perhaps this helped local Brahmans to separate out as Bhumihar Brahmans.Infact in villages Bhumihars are generally called 'Bhabans'. - Chakrapani - ::Chakrapani,
This website is not a discussion board and therefore it's inappropriate to post your opinion. You can't say in the article things like, "I think..." because that is your opinion and may not be a fact. State the fact in the language which present it as a fact. Charvak
I have recovered these comments from history to help editorsHolywarrior 11:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandals behaving as admin

One vandal particularly anonymus has long been behaving as admin on this page.He has no authority to put the templates on the page still he does it and calls every other differing individual vandal.Will he explain why he should not be booked for vandalism.Holywarrior 16:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

user:hardinge,59.94.. and related Ips are suspected sp of banned user:WiseAdminHolywarrior 16:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I have blocked one for 31 hours/ removed the unauthorized templates/ warned that placing such templates shall attract action. --Bhadani 17:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

List of suspected socks of permabanned user:VandalPatrol/user:PandalPetrol/user:vandalpatrol which was actually sock of abovementioned Ids are as follows:

• 59.94.38.34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.40.19 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.40.253 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.41.30 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.41.197 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.41.210 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.42.51 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.42.85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.42.197 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.43.28 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.43.114 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.43.136 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.40.201 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 59.94.41.197 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

An admin may take a look HW 10:32, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

59.94.41.197 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)was noticed today.Holy|Warrior 13:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Warning

I find that some users are indulging in anuthorized action like placing templates to be placed by administrators only. Any user doing this may be blocked for disruptive activities. --Bhadani 17:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I have semi-protected the page and it shall be lifted in a day or two. --Bhadani 17:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Useless

I find that this has become a really useless page with so many useless information. Please try to make the page encyclopedic. Such pages affect the credibility of wikipedia. --Bhadani 14:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

In view of persistent efforts on my behalf having failed to stop uselss information on this page, I feel highly frustrated. I would request the editors to avoid editing in a style which lowers the credibility of wikipedia. --Bhadani 16:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I am removing this page from my watch list. I will see it after few months. --Bhadani 16:31, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

disambiguation

Kindly stop reverting to versions where the links point to Punjab, as opposed to a specific usage of the term. It's really bloody annoying, cuz I've busted my chops trying to remove disambiguation links to Punjab. — riana_dzasta • t • c 14:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

To all cocerned editors

One editor 59.144.178.112 had expresses himself,his comments has been reverted because he had tried to change others comments too.Plz don't take offence.He can make his point whatever it may be.I would request him to comment either below the existing comments or in a separate section.Putting comments within existing ones is considered vandalism.I would rather ask all editors to join hands to build up this article.Holy---+---Warrior 07:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Bhumihar/Tyagi Merger

I think Bhumihar are found in Bihar only whereas Tyagi are found in UP,am not aware much about these two but if their identity is different they should not be merged.
Holy + Warrior 13:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Famous Bhumihars?

On Famous_Bhumihars, we see the list of people who are Sinha. As far as I know they can be Bhumihar, but can not be Bhumihar Brahmins. Additionally there are people who claim to be Bhumihar Kshatriya also. What about them. This article should be about Bhumihars and there should be a distinction drawn between Bhumihar Brahmins and otherwise. This I am saying only because not every Bhumihar claims he is a Bhumihar Brahmin also.
And another thing, Ramdhari Singh Dinkar was not regarded as the national poet (Rashtrakavi). This is the honour given to Maithili Sharan Gupt only. Please discuss this issue here. If I do not listen to any one for some time, I will start making changes. Thanks --APandey 13:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)