Talk:Kayastha/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

My answer to IP 90.184.8.189

Yes, that can happen. To understand this article you need to have an adequate knowledge of the Vedic religion. I can, of course, make it more understandable but that would certainly increase the size of this article, manifolds. You can follow the links and references and get a better grasp of it. And if you want to have a thorough knowledge of the subject, you can talk to me. Be confident, all your doubts will be cleared.Nikhil Srivastava 13:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup! You need it, IP 202.54.176.51

Look at the history of IP 202.54.176.51: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:202.54.176.51 He has a long history of --.

Now, he was the one who did this:

"This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
Please discuss this issue on the talk page or replace this tag with a more specific message."

Do I need to say more? NO.Nikhil Srivastava 13:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Readers, look at the edit history before considering any of the views expressed on this page for reflection.

I decline to respond to any of the libel inflicted upon me and my article, by that IP 70.186.172.75. That being, in fact, has tested my patience too far. ‘It’ has been spared for the only consideration that she is a woman. Yes, Miss Arundhati Bakshi of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, it is my desire to ignore you. Don’t let me get down to your level. You enjoy your stay here at Wiki and let the peace be undisturbed.Nikhil Srivastava 12:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

The guy with IP address:70.186.172.75; fondly known as MR.BAKSHI, is continually deleting useful information from the Kayastha page, it is painful to me for I had done a lot of work to collect them and so is it to all those who are seriously inclined to make this page a better one. One fact, here, must be brought to notice, this guy constantly keeps on deleting the Shlokas and also the references. What can be this be called but Vandalism, the Shlokas(and those too from the Vedas and the Puranas) are considered the ultimate authority on a subject like this, and deleting them is a sin. Also he keeps on updating the page for no apparent reasons.Nikhil Srivastava 17:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

See also

The discussion of the proposed deletion of this article will also throw some light on the kind of attitude a few ‘Gentlemen’ sport. Click : 'the discussion' in the message "This article was nominated for deletion on April 4, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep." that appears at the top of this page.

Makes No Sense

This article makes no sense.. I can't understand what is being said. Rewrite so it's understandable to the lay-man? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.184.8.189 (talk) 09:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

It has been ruined over the past few months. A historical copy is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kayastha&oldid=115504062 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.186.172.75 (talk) 13:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

Vaishys

The Kaysthas are identified with the third sect of the Indian caste system, the facts that people have to understand is that kayasthas are not at all intrested in the business aspect of the third sect but the high level services aspect has been a speciality of the Indo European clan, the fact that they have used their knowledge to perform tasks of diplomacy, official services, ministerial positions, accountancy, finance, law, adminstration has earned them a title of "Likiya Munshi". Also, plush jobs in the finance sector has earned them title of "Lalaji" in India, a title synonymous with well earning Vaishys.

The attachement of the Kayathas to services like Sube`dars, Kotwals and Diwans have earned them title of "Diwanji" in Medival India, these posts are one are the highest echelons of bureaucracy in Medival India, the Kaysthas are the ones doing just that, attaining the posts that form the highest echelons of bureaucracy, military, finance and other services through sheer knowledge. Freedom skies 09:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Sen

In Bengal, Sens can be both Vaidyas, which means doctors; or Kayasthas. The word Vaidyas is also spelled as Baidyas in Bengali. As they spell Vivekananda as Bivekananda. Attaching an internet link about family names http://www.ancestry.com/learn/facts/fact.aspx?&fid=10&ln=sen&fn=&yr=1920 Ref: Dictionary of American Family Names, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-508137-4 Further more, if you read the main article on Kayastha it says that "Some other sub-castes e.g. Khare, Vaidya have also come into picture but they all are derived from the original twelve." So please don't delete Sen from the list of kayasthas.

It seems that Kayastha originated with the advent of British rule in India. There was almost no court, no justice in Medieval India. Brahma would not like His lovely creation carved out of His lovely body i.e Kayastha to sit like a petty Muneem on land in front of the mighty lords. The Kshatriya of Ancient India seems to be no more in place as all Kshatriyas presently seems to be of foreign origin because most of them claim that their forefathership rests in some land like Scythia.

Kaliyug at its worst

With the advent of ‘Kaliyug’ anti-religiousness increased like never before. Gods were insulted (recently Lord Rama), their Progeny called what not, learned Brahmins molested…
This is nothing new, every Yuga had evils and without it we can not feel the presence of righteousness. This is the law of God, the most intelligent. It is for you to decide which side you want to be.
Be with us- revere your Gods and believe your scriptures or be with sacrilegious devils who are bound to be doomed and will accompany their mates to hell.
The decision is yours now…
Be on our side or …
Nikhil Srivastava 18:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Jesus loves you. Repent or you will burn in Hell forever my friend!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.186.172.75 (talk) 10:30, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Shudra Status and Non-Shudra Claim

Since late 19th century AD, officials, anthropologists, and Indologists who took interest in caste aspect of Indian society had/have studied Kayastha community and its agitation for raising its caste/Varna status (in addition to similar study of other communities). Result is that there is enough information available on present and past of Kayastha along with those of other castes in their works.

See the discussion page discussion and old wiki page rise of kayastha regarding some of factual inaccuracies in this page. Kayasth appears to be a caste under Shudra category, and Chitragupta himself a Shudra, in Hindu scriptures.

For not initiated readers, Shudra is the status assigned in Hindu scriptures to a large number of communities. These scriptures and hence such assignments reflected views of Brahman community (who are of highest caste/Varna according to Hindu scriptures created by them). These views are world outlook, not confined to believers in Hinduism. In fact, anyone who is not one of three higher Varnas - irrespective of his religion, color, nationality and so on- is a Shudra. See page 24 of [Asok Mitra,11]

For a community that follows Hindu religion but is considered Shudra, it is a dilemma whether to accept this assigned status. Since there is enough abusive preaching/sermon in Hindu scriptures that denigrates an individual of Shudra status, these communities make conscious effort to shed off their Shudra status. This denigration includes everything: from judicial treatment, manners, sex to food. ^{page 22 of [Asok Mitra, 11]}

While living inside Hindu society, practical way of avoiding denigration by people believing in Hinduism is avoiding detection of oneself or the community as Shudra. This leads to impersonation and aping of Hindu Varnas which are assigned higher status in these scriptures. This process of impersonation and aping is what Mr M.N. Srinivas has called Sanskritization. Many of Shudra communities do everything, often in an organized manner, in this process of impersonation and aping which leads to change in their customs, eating habits, and so on. This is done in order to make claim of higher Hindu Varna origin. [1]

Calling a community a Shudra under Hindu caste system cannot be morally or otherwise wrong. Shudra status is just the view given in Hindu scriptures about all who do not belong to certain communities. Even if a community is not a Shudra, calling it Shudra may be a mistake but cannot be an offence: note that almost every foreigner is a Shudra in view of Hindu scriptures. ^{page 24 of [Asok Mitra, 11]}

Below are excerpts from the book Peasant and Monks in British India, Chapter 2 available online:

“ By the late nineteenth century Kayasths had begun organizing a movement to reject their ascribed shudra status in favor of a kshatriya one; by the early twentieth century, many others—particularly Kurmis, Koiris, Kahars, and Goalas—followed the Kayasth lead (although each utilized distinct arguments) and defined for themselves similar kshatriya identities.”

Below excerpt from same source highlight importance of wearing Sacred Thread in the process of Sanskritization:

““a visit to any of the akharas of Ramanandi bairagis will convince that Sudras of all classes are as freely admitted and invested with the sacred thread as the twice born.”[113] Investiture with the sacred thread conferred, by definition, elite “twice-born” status and was theoretically reserved for vaishyas, kshatriyas, and brahmans. By performing this ceremony on behalf of shudras, the Ramanandi sampraday (or some in the sampraday) effectively undermined the hierarchy implicit to caste through the adroit application of varna ideology. The practice of sacred thread investiture in Ramanandi akharas should ultimately be understood in the context of the kshatriya identity movements of the early twentieth century, inasmuch as it encapsulates in a single ritual the entire thrust of the kshatriya campaigns. Lala Sita Ram’s assertion of Ramanandi progressivism in this regard would suggest that the sampraday was involved, at least tangentially, in the process of varna reidentification. It should be added that the willingness to countenance varna distinctions in monastic recruitment and training and the recognition of the varna systemics implicit to sacred thread investiture as a strategy for shudra social advancement are both entirely consistent with the essentially Ramanuji position expressed by Sita Ram in his reaction to Farquhar’s 1920 presentation of Ramanand. ““

The process of Sanskritization has caused almost all communities under influence of Hinduism to find some character in Hindu scriptures to identify with, to legitimize their claim of being upper caste. In fact, many of them have invented up stories and better names for their castes in this process, and prefer these names rather than traditional ones. Please also see wiki pages on kurmi, yadav, gujjar, jat, ahir, maratha and other castes. The connection between Chitragupta and Kayastha may be also similar. The present community or group of communities known as kayastha adopted this Kayastha name in near past. And as mentioned in references, Hindu scriptures who mention Kayastha primarily mention it as Shudra. Though Chitragupta is the character identified by these communities to relate with, Chitragupta himself appears to be a Shudra in Hindu scriptures. See the details with references to Hindu scriptures in page 36 of [Asok Mitra,11].

Courts in British India also passed judgment on status of Kayastha within Hindu caste system since Hindus were governed by Hindu laws. In a 1916 case, Calcutta High Court judged that Kayastha of Bengal are Shudra. Interestingly, issue of its status was again later considered by Justice Jwala Prasad, himself a Kayastha, in a 1926 case and he held that Kayastha of Bihar are not Shudra but Ksatriya. (See [2].The online available page of this article at the link starts with mention of the memorial of Kayasth protesting their classification as low-caste). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rollynigam1980 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

This should not be repeated

I have been amused by the attempts made to defile us.
I am not at all amused by the way a Deity had been insulted.

I refer to the latest hoax pasted on the page insulting the Kayasthas and Shree Chitraguptaji. The writer of that hoax is an imbecile and that too of the highest degree, hereafter referred to as “the sly”.
He has a trace of vileness which only a man to be doomed can possess.

The citations that have been so talked about are very tricky things.
I’ll show you how:

Brhadharma Purana says that the sly is an idiot. Brahmavaivart Purana dealing with idiots mentions the sly as an idiot of the highest order. Padma Purana says this sly will never do any thing worthy. Agni Purana mentions that such idiots be burned alive.

Got my point.

So when I write something or give reference to a religious text I either give the Shloka or the Shloka number so that the people can go and see it for themselves. They are sure to find it. Example:

चित्र इद राजा राजका इदन्यके यके सरस्वतीमनु ।
पर्जन्य इव ततनद धि वर्ष्ट्या सहस्रमयुता ददत ॥ RIG VEDA 8/21/18
By the way the Vedas have the power of overriding all other texts in religious matters. It is the supreme court of Hinduism. The matter stands settled.

But the sly does not and can not do so and very slyly misses mentioning any Shloka numbers. He knows no one is going to read all the Puranas to see if such lies are there or not, here is the trick. Now let me tell you that all the talk of the Puranas mentioning the sly as an idiot was just to show how this trick works.

Also it be remembered that we can endure insults on us but not on our Progenitor, who as a matter of fact is also a Deity for the rest of Hindus, and everyone is this world is aware of the reactions that we Hindus are capable to giving when it comes to our religion and our Gods.

Do not provoke us. Nikhil Srivastava 13:38, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Inaccurate Historical Description

There are factual inaccuracies in the page. The page contains material which lacks objectivity. Since the caste and particularly its status is directly related to dignity in Indian society, one cannot hope that one can ever find material in this (or any other specific caste related) page which is not in one way or other way of propaganda nature. Probably best thing will be to keep a list of references only and not to give any opinion.

By the way, below material was added on 14th September 2007 with references cited. Though in the past, it may be unpleasant when looked from angle of earlier mentioned dignity issue, in modern society we do not have to associate dignity with assigned caste status.

The material added is important because they at least accurately reproduce some higly interesting information from cited sources and further allow a serious student of ethonology/sociology to know that some other established view or facts exists on the issue. Further, it contains little bit of information about social changes in India in early 20th century. If a wiki page just contains one-sided view, it will just remain a medium of propaganda and will find difficult to attain status of even semi-reliable reference.

For benefit of people participating in discussion, the material added on 14th Sep 2007 is reproduced below with some additional emphasis, but parts that are still in latest edited page have been abbreviated.

If Kayastha is Sudra whats is bad about it and if Brahmins are best what is the special about them.Now a days you can not find any brahmin of brahmogyani Vipra (Vipra is so called brahmin cast and vipra means the special human being).I do not find anything special in them where 75% of them are working as domestic servants and may be in the house of kayasta and other caste.Now a days if a Vipra(Brahmin) talks in public that he is brhamin and special human being .. what will happen.. all people will laugh and that stupid will go back home as a foolish.. SOif I'm a descendent of a great rishi like bhrigu or basistha and I'm working as a domestic servant then it is not really a big achievement and if I'm not wrong they are just downdraded by themselves.Whereas the Kayatha they are well to do not from the Vedic era and now also they are in fore front of civilization..Now if vipra (brhamin) says a Kaysatha is a sudra out of frustration then he is just defaming his own forefathers and belittling their own varna.Kayasths is a caste who are always revolutionary and they broke out of rigit Hindu Verna system and disobey the edicts of stupid brhmans.Lord Krisha said chaturvarnam mayasristam goonkarmabibagashya.So heridity is little importance unless one's heridity takes one's to sublime goona and karma and make him a greate human being.Otherwise if I say my gotra is basistha and I'm wokring as a domestic servant or cooking in hotel has no meaning of being a basistha by gotra.Kayatha is a sublime caste who knows how to grow and how to give maximum to the society.They never bow to Brhmin and never accepted the supremacy of brahmins.So bhrahmins outcaste them as sudra.But today or even in days of Veda what is significance of taking a upavita (sacreficial treat) if some one is not intilligent or bramhogyani.If only 8-9 rishis are gramhogyani then how the other of their followers or descendants who are just associated with them can be said as vipra( spcial human being).Actually it is a unnatural imposition on some specially planned idea to gave some people of special benefits though they are not entitled to this and though some of them were really a special human being but naturally it come to the reality of today.See if my father is a great knwoledgable person then their is likely chances that I'll be knowledgeable person and my son will be more talented if I can follow the correct path of eugenics and correct ways of life and slowly I'll grow bether then my ancestor but for Vipras it is reverse?But see about Kayastha they are the most fast growing caste and no Brahmin dare to say them sudra today in front of them .Because they have already lost the autority to say this.Who cares them. Just do not say these rubish to make you great .Now a days a vipra( brahman) is like a joke a laughing stock.

The Material

The varying status of Kayastha within Hindu caste system is of great academic curiosity to Indian sociologists. Kayastha is supposed to belong to Shudra varna and is seen to provide example of gradual upward mobility of a caste within Hindu caste system on account of legitimately gained prosperity and influence. The claimed status of Kayastha as a caste within Hindu caste system varies from region to region. ¹

Kayastha as a caste ... descent.

Puranas which mention Kayastha as a caste are not very old and deal with castes of a particular region. They mention Kayasthas as Shudras. Brhadharma Purana and Brahmavaivart Purana dealing with castes of Bengal do not mention Kayastha at all though they are comparatively recent creations. They mention however Karana as a writer Shudra caste. According to Vyas Smriti again, they are Shudra; Vallacharita puts them under newly created SatShudra subcategory of Shudra; according to Usanas Samhita, Kayastha has same origin as barber. The earlier stated theory that Kayasthas are descendents of Chitragupta and are born of Brahma's body is mentioned in Padma Purana. However status of Chitragupta himself is not that great in Hindu scriptures. According to Acharatantra, Chitragupta's father Masisa was born of Brahma's foot. According to Jatimala of Agni Purana, Chitragupta was son of Kayastha and a great grandson of original Shudra. In Skandpurana (Pravas 123), Chitragupta was son of Kayastha Mitra. ^2,3

The rise of Kayastha as community ... from earliest Muslim conquests. Kayasthas attained ... British government of India. Kayastha has been ... in government matters.

In studies carried out in 19th century, Kayastha caste was found to admit people of other castes within its caste fold. Some studies consider Kayastha to be a mixed caste. As any Hindu, they deeply cared about their social status within Hindu caste system and raised their perceived status gradually by varios means. Studies noted them to be notorious for drinking freely in 19th century, but able to address this issue through caste conferences. One legend believed by some Kayasthas of Bengal traces their origin to 5 menial servants of those Brahmans of Kannauj who were summoned by king Adisur of Bengal to perform certain Vedic ceremonies. To elevate the perceived caste status, many Kayasthas took so called Sacred Thread like many other eagers when Brahmans in beginning of 20th century began performing Upanayan for anybody on payment of some fee which itself gradually reduced from a gift of 100 cows in 1904, 14 cows in 1920 to few rupees later.^1,2

Thank you 125.17.142.34 16:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Logic

The article, written by a brother Kayastha, is very appealing to the intellect.
Since the thing has come to pure logic, let me use a little bit of it.

We all understand that caste is linked to our genes and upbringing, the two vital factors that makes us what we are.

I very well understand that most people today wouldn’t believe what the Vedas have to say, yet that is wherein the castes have there roots. So, even if you don’t believe them- To solve a matter of caste, you got to take their help. Their authority in this matter can’t be challenged, it overrides everything else.

चित्र इद राजा राजका इदन्यके यके सरस्वतीमनु ।
पर्जन्य इव ततनद धि वर्ष्ट्या सहस्रमयुता ददत ॥ RIG VEDA 8/21/18

Let’s look what can logic bring us to, if we go to the past.
Kayastha by profession were into the profession of writing. Now, in ancient India, Sanskrit was the state language so a knowledge of Sanskrit was must for them. Also, in the initial stages, writing was a whole lot bound to governance and religion, both of which needed a person to be of noble birth.

Also the Kayastha were granted land by then Hindu Kings, a privilege enjoyed by Brahmins. Historical proofs in form of plates written to mark such occasions have been found.

Kayastha Kings are found in ancient history(what many call mythology) and historically noted times. They being preffered as ministers can not be disputed (again, you know these can be enjoyed only by a man of noble birth). In fact, this led to bad blood between the Kayasthas and Kashmiri pandits, as described by Kshemendra in Rajtarangini. In this book, many an insults were inflicted on the Kayasthas but never was a question raised on thier being of high birth, for Kshemendra was doing his duty of taking the part of his fellows but never committed the sin of insulting the Gods.

Now, let me see what is the social position of the Kayasthas today:
They are the hardest hit because of government policies of reservation in educational institutes and government offices. The Indian government considers them an UPPER CASTE. At least that’s something more credible to on than a stray anonymous wikipedia ID questioning and maligning the Kayasthas.

The Kayasthas are the only caste other than the Brahmins(if they are not considered one) to perform religious rites and sacrifices (thanks to ‘the God of Justice’ connection.)

Now, comes the question of their being Brahmins or not.

Learned Brahmins all over India consider the Kayasthas as Brahmins. (Except, it seems, in Bengal- thanks to the ‘Divide and Rule’ policy of the new rulers of India then, whose strongest hold was Calcutta and Bengal saw some of the finest applications of Machiavelli’s principles and experiments on spreading of an Empire)

Caste, what’s their?

A good example to illustarte this is Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (founder and developer of the Transcendental Meditation technique and related programs and initiatives, including schools and a university with campuses in the United States and China). He was the secretary of Swami Brahmananda Saraswati,the Shankaracharya (from 1941 to 1953) of Jyotir Math, located in the Indian Himalayas. Maharishi is a Kayastha and his real name is Mahesh Prasad Varma. Atleast the Shankaracharya can be assumed to have enough knowledge of caste and not to let a non-brahmin to be his secretary.<br />

Also, a few links to some Brahmanic sites will be helpful to prove these facts.

• Vedah.net, which presents a list of the main sub-divisions of Brahmins, lists the Kayasthas as one of the 31 main sub-divisions of Brahmins. Vedah.net
• Kamat.com puts forward a comprehensive list of more than 50 Brahmin Communities in India, the Kayasthas are also listed. Kamat.com
• The Sanskrit dictionary at Hindunet.org defines ‘Kayastha’ as follows:

ka_yastha, ka_yata a man belonging to the writer-caste; a tribe of bra_hman.as whose employment is writing (Ka.)(Ka.lex.) Sanskrit Dictionary at Hindunet.org

There is also a marked similarity between the life styles of Brahmins and Kayasthas of North India (especially of the Gangatic planes). These two have many a surnames in common and also inter-marry.

30 Nov., 2007 Nikhil Srivastava (talk) 20:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC) Hello Gurus just to inform you that Brahmins also evolved from Sudra and brhamin never comes to brahmins without evolution and evolutions also made Kayastha a Super caste.I think many saints from vasistha to Bhrigu may be the forefather of Brahmins but today's brhamin are not befetting with these great saints.I bow to this saints always but I'll never bow to this so called brahmin crocks who just want to use thiir name nit their hard work and research and controbution to the human society.I all innocent sudras or other caste just respect them because of these saints but not because of your surname or gotra bby which you claim to be brahmins( actually there is no brahmins at all at this point of time because brahmin means brahmogyani which is very rare and they are saints like vasistha to Bhrigu or narada, but today's brahmins are a caste who demand that they are the descendants of these saints which are very difficult to prove or even remotely get a link).I think if these brahmins are demanding that they are descendants of vasistha to Bhrigu then just they are insulting thses great souls .They can see their own face in the mirror of self retrospection.While Kayastha though Brahmins say them sudra is a epic caste who are sublime from Vedic era to modern era.Now a days brahmins also started eating mean, fish or liqor and if you offer them free they will eat anything sir.So it is not Kayastha eat non veg and even manay kayastha eat vegetarian foods.See bottom line who is the fittest in this world a great person will not say any one high or low but say every one is son of god and contribution to society by all same ( by Sudra , Vaisya, Khestriya and Bharman).See why and how Brahmins touched the legs of Mayawati in public in UP to get a ticket in election .It is evolution of brahmin to survive in this world .They one time say you Sudra have no right to read and write and no right to live with dignity and now the same brahmins is asking the same thing to Mayawati the Sudrani. But the biggest joke is Kayatha never bow to Malaywai or Brahmyawati , so Kayastha is Kayastha.. they never bow to any one and all world bow to kayatha because their intellect. If Kayastha is Sudra whats is bad about it and if Brahmins are best what is the special about them.Now a days you can not find any brahmin of brahmogyani Vipra (Vipra is so called brahmin cast and vipra means the special human being).I do not find anything special in them where 75% of them are working as domestic servants and may be in the house of kayasta and other caste.Now a days if a Vipra(Brahmin) talks in public that he is brhamin and special human being .. what will happen.. all people will laugh and that stupid will go back home as a foolish.. SOif I'm a descendent of a great rishi like bhrigu or basistha and I'm working as a domestic servant then it is not really a big achievement and if I'm not wrong they are just downdraded by themselves.Whereas the Kayatha they are well to do not from the Vedic era and now also they are in fore front of civilization..Now if vipra (brhamin) says a Kaysatha is a sudra out of frustration then he is just defaming his own forefathers and belittling their own varna.Kayasths is a caste who are always revolutionary and they broke out of rigit Hindu Verna system and disobey the edicts of stupid brhmans.Lord Krisha said chaturvarnam mayasristam goonkarmabibagashya.So heridity is little importance unless one's heridity takes one's to sublime goona and karma and make him a greate human being.Otherwise if I say my gotra is basistha and I'm wokring as a domestic servant or cooking in hotel has no meaning of being a basistha by gotra.Kayatha is a sublime caste who knows how to grow and how to give maximum to the society.They never bow to Brhmin and never accepted the supremacy of brahmins.So bhrahmins outcaste them as sudra.But today or even in days of Veda what is significance of taking a upavita (sacreficial treat) if some one is not intilligent or bramhogyani.If only 8-9 rishis are gramhogyani then how the other of their followers or descendants who are just associated with them can be said as vipra( spcial human being).Actually it is a unnatural imposition on some specially planned idea to gave some people of special benefits though they are not entitled to this and though some of them were really a special human being but naturally it come to the reality of today.See if my father is a great knwoledgable person then their is likely chances that I'll be knowledgeable person and my son will be more talented if I can follow the correct path of eugenics and correct ways of life and slowly I'll grow bether then my ancestor but for Vipras it is reverse?But see about Kayastha they are the most fast growing caste and no Brahmin dare to say them sudra today in front of them .Because they have already lost the autority to say this.Who cares them. Just do not say these rubish to make you great .Now a days a vipra( brahman) is like a joke a laughing stock

Status of Kayastha

Brahmin or Not. But Kayastha definitely do not seem to be Shudras in this modern world.

Some of the discussion given in these pages is difficult to rationalize with realities of today. Most of it is based on quoting ancient Indian text which might give reference and evidence which is contradictory. What is required is to analyze this issue in today’s context, and with reference to what is acceptable or prevalent today.

Caste in India definitely has a strong relationship to color - if you look at high castes' people of India. The word varna (caste) itself means color. If not most, many Brahmin and other high castes are lighter color than the other castes. Now consider some of the well known Kayasthas as a sample - Sonu Nigam, Shatrugan Sinha, Amitabh Bachchan, Nutan, Jaya Prakash Narayan, Gary Saxena, Bipasha Basu, Moon Moon Sen, Mini Mathur, Deepti Bhatnagar to name a few - it is difficult to categorize these people as Shudras. Either all these folks are very badly mixed with high castes somehow or their caste is being placed wrongly as Shudra. This is not to say that all Kayasthas are similar in looks and color!

Another factor worth considering is DNA analysis evidence. Sometime back reading an article in National Geographic about the Genographic project I got my DNA analysis done. I am a Kayastha and I belong to R1a1 Haplogroup of Indo-European race. R1a1 group of people are found in Norway (35+%), Iceland, England, Germany, Ukraine, Russia, and other eastern european countries. So it is a group that came into India from Europe - a group of Indo Aryan which most high caste of India fall in. I find that most of the folks from India who belong to R1a1 database (ysearch.com and look for R1a and R1a1 groups) are Brahmins like Iyers, Iyengars, Gokhale, Mishra; many Punjabis; and other Kayasthas from Bengal and UP. Either Kayasthas are lost cousins (who got categorized differently) of these other folks, or belong to the same categorization as other high castes at least genetically. Again this is not to say that all Kayasthas are R1a1, but if a study is done majority will be. In fact one the study of DNA analysis done finds majority of Bihar Kayastha in R1a1.

Other familial evidence I see around me is that most family members of mine look more like Brahmins & other high caste, have been traditionally very well educated (from big name places for last 100 years at least), reasonably wealthy, and living in the best part of some of the best towns of the indo gangetic plains. Another quirky thing has been - our kitchens were always typically run by Brahmins of UP (maharajs and maharajins) mainly but definitely high caste even today, and just like other high castes some folks in our family discriminate against ... whatever high castes discriminate against. Definite similarities with high castes! These are not traits of Shudras who have been put down for ages!

Many of the points mentioned in this discussion end of quoting ancient texts which are being translated - somewhere something might be getting lost. Their validity and authenticity is debatable probably. The points I mention are more easily discussed or debated in today's context. Social evidence around does indicates that Kayastha belong to high caste rather than Shudra! In everyday life, Kayasthas have been treated like high castes. For years Brahmins have been coming and doing puja at Kayastha homes, and in temples for Kayasthas. Probably Shudras do not really have these traditions. From experience I can say that at Kashi Vishwanath, Puri, Bhanke Bihari, Trichur temples I have seen my accompanying escorts (drivers) being stopped because of their caste. But Kayasthas do not face this problem in modern India today. You see pictures of famous Kayastha stars being taken Trupathi. Or the problem exists and the Brahmins of these most famous temples just fold up under the Kayastha money!

The debate on the caste status is not just limited to Kayasthas, but exists with many others groups and is all prevalent. Namboodris Brahmins of Kerela have known to discriminate against other Brahmins of India specially the Tamil Brahmins who probably rubbed shoulder for superiority with them in their own backyard. Namboodris have known to term other Brahmins as Shudras. So the concept of terming any high caste or other caste as Shudra to subjugate and prevail over them is not new (and limited to this page), but a definite construct and devise used for ages. Even Brahmins or for that matter Kayasthas are not one homogeneous group - there are differentiations, distinctions and discriminations based on regions, and even within regions. Many Brahmin castes of UP and Bihar are typically maharajs who cook in the kitchens, and others work on the gaths. Surely, even in modern India it is not possible that the sacred temples of India are going to allow these Brahmins to do puja even if they could and wanted to.

Being a vegetarian is not a definite requirement of being a Brahmin. Most Kashmiri Brahmins eat meat on regular basis. All Bengali Brahmins eat fish, whereas all south Indian and UP Brahmins will not. Variations exist and are accepted in India not just today but for many years. Just like Brahmins fall in both categories of vegetarian and non-vegetarian. Kayastha also among them have vegetarian who will discriminate against you if you are a non-vegetarian. So you cannot really divide or assign caste on this one single basis. It is inconceivable that ancestors of Brahmin or the vegetarian Kayasthas where always vegetarian. Before cultivation (Kurgan Culture of Indo European) and agriculture, probably man was really surviving on hunting and eating meat. Surely educated folks cannot take recourse in ancient texts and start quoting that some Hindu god created their race or caste, Brahminical or otherwise!

Knowledge and literacy has been a definite factor in caste. Brahmins and other high castes have been typically literate and read scriptures. Kayasthas in this regard also have not been behind. They have a very strong tradition of education going back to over 1000 years at least, or maybe longer. One finds reference of literate Kayasthas running local governments and courts when first Muslim conquerors came to India in ~1000 AD. Kayasthas have even a script - Kaithi - associated with their name. Kaithi (also known earlier as Kayati, Kayathi or Kayasthi) similar to Dev Nagri was used mainly by Kayasthas in northern India. It has its own Unicode now. Kayastha families of UP have had women in 1930-40s who were college graduates, when most other UP high caste women (or their families) did not really pay equal attention to education.

Lastly taking about contribution, one cannot deny the Brahmins what they have contributed to advancement of knowledge in the various fields like scientific discoveries, literature, politics, government etc. But you will find that Kayasthas are not really far behind! List of famous Kayasthas gives a glimpse of their contributions. So if Kayasthas are not Brahmins they have been probably one of the biggest challengers to their supremacy.

Nov 20th, 2007, Oct 13th, 2008

Not my view. Rolly

I moved it to avoid fighting on main page. This is not my view. I am a true Kayastha.

---

Shudra Status and Non-Shudra Claim

Since late 19th century AD, officials, anthropologists, and Indologists who took interest in caste aspect of Indian society had/have studied Kayastha community and its agitation for raising its caste/Varna status (in addition to similar study of other communities). Result is that there is enough information available on present and past of Kayastha along with those of other castes in their works.

See the discussion page discussion and old wiki page rise of kayastha regarding some of factual inaccuracies in this page. Kayasth appears to be a caste under Shudra category, and Chitragupta himself a Shudra, in Hindu scriptures.

For not initiated readers, Shudra is the status assigned in Hindu scriptures to a large number of communities. These scriptures and hence such assignments reflected views of Brahman community (who are of highest caste/Varna according to Hindu scriptures created by them). These views are world outlook, not confined to believers in Hinduism. In fact, anyone who is not one of three higher Varnas - irrespective of his religion, color, nationality and so on- is a Shudra. See page 24 of [Asok Mitra,11]

For a community that follows Hindu religion but is considered Shudra, it is a dilemma whether to accept this assigned status. Since there is enough abusive preaching/sermon in Hindu scriptures that denigrates an individual of Shudra status, these communities make conscious effort to shed off their Shudra status. This denigration includes everything: from judicial treatment, manners, sex to food. ^{page 22 of [Asok Mitra, 11]}

While living inside Hindu society, practical way of avoiding denigration by people believing in Hinduism is avoiding detection of oneself or the community as Shudra. This leads to impersonation and aping of Hindu Varnas which are assigned higher status in these scriptures. This process of impersonation and aping is what Mr M.N. Srinivas has called Sanskritization. Many of Shudra communities do everything, often in an organized manner, in this process of impersonation and aping which leads to change in their customs, eating habits, and so on. This is done in order to make claim of higher Hindu Varna origin. [3]

Calling a community a Shudra under Hindu caste system cannot be morally or otherwise wrong. Shudra status is just the view given in Hindu scriptures about all who do not belong to certain communities. Even if a community is not a Shudra, calling it Shudra may be a mistake but cannot be an offence: note that almost every foreigner is a Shudra in view of Hindu scriptures. ^{page 24 of [Asok Mitra, 11]}

Below are excerpts from the book Peasant and Monks in British India, Chapter 2 available online:

“ By the late nineteenth century Kayasths had begun organizing a movement to reject their ascribed shudra status in favor of a kshatriya one; by the early twentieth century, many others—particularly Kurmis, Koiris, Kahars, and Goalas—followed the Kayasth lead (although each utilized distinct arguments) and defined for themselves similar kshatriya identities.”

Below excerpt from same source highlight importance of wearing Sacred Thread in the process of Sanskritization:

““a visit to any of the akharas of Ramanandi bairagis will convince that Sudras of all classes are as freely admitted and invested with the sacred thread as the twice born.”[113] Investiture with the sacred thread conferred, by definition, elite “twice-born” status and was theoretically reserved for vaishyas, kshatriyas, and brahmans. By performing this ceremony on behalf of shudras, the Ramanandi sampraday (or some in the sampraday) effectively undermined the hierarchy implicit to caste through the adroit application of varna ideology. The practice of sacred thread investiture in Ramanandi akharas should ultimately be understood in the context of the kshatriya identity movements of the early twentieth century, inasmuch as it encapsulates in a single ritual the entire thrust of the kshatriya campaigns. Lala Sita Ram’s assertion of Ramanandi progressivism in this regard would suggest that the sampraday was involved, at least tangentially, in the process of varna reidentification. It should be added that the willingness to countenance varna distinctions in monastic recruitment and training and the recognition of the varna systemics implicit to sacred thread investiture as a strategy for shudra social advancement are both entirely consistent with the essentially Ramanuji position expressed by Sita Ram in his reaction to Farquhar’s 1920 presentation of Ramanand. ““

The process of Sanskritization has caused almost all communities under influence of Hinduism to find some character in Hindu scriptures to identify with, to legitimize their claim of being upper caste. In fact, many of them have invented up stories and better names for their castes in this process, and prefer these names rather than traditional ones. Please also see wiki pages on kurmi, yadav, gujjar, jat, ahir, maratha and other castes. The connection between Chitragupta and Kayastha may be also similar. The present community or group of communities known as kayastha adopted this Kayastha name in near past. And as mentioned in references, Hindu scriptures who mention Kayastha primarily mention it as Shudra. Though Chitragupta is the character identified by these communities to relate with, Chitragupta himself appears to be a Shudra in Hindu scriptures. See the details with references to Hindu scriptures in page 36 of [Asok Mitra,11].

Courts in British India also passed judgment on status of Kayastha within Hindu caste system since Hindus were governed by Hindu laws. In a 1916 case, Calcutta High Court judged that Kayastha of Bengal are Shudra. Interestingly, issue of its status was again later considered by Justice Jwala Prasad, himself a Kayastha, in a 1926 case and he held that Kayastha of Bihar are not Shudra but Ksatriya. (See [4].The online available page of this article at the link starts with mention of the memorial of Kayasth protesting their classification as low-caste). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rollynigam1980 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Rollynigam1980 (talk) 19:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC) Hello man no worry .Today's world all brahmins are Sudra and Kayastha also sudra is they behave like sudra.Just remember Lork Krishna said 'Chaturvarnam moyasristam gun karmavibhagashya' so sho is guni and who is doing right karam is either brahmin , khestrita , vaisa or sudra.If a Bakshi annouce hard in the open street that he is brahmin does it make different? He will go back home and take up job of Cook in the house of Sudra or Kayastha.So just ignore these people and if you like to be a brahmin then follow vivekanan.Many brahmins tried to maligned him while he was on world tour but that Bamans become dwarf and vivkananda becomes Might BRAHMINS.

South Indian Kayasthas

Kayasthas are only called as such in North India (including East and West India). However, there are Kayastha-like communities in South India, such as the Pillais of Tamil Nadu, the Menons of Kerala, and the Reddys of Andhra Pradesh. Is there any evidence to link these castes with the Kayasthas of the north? 71.124.55.53 (talk) 01:10, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you 125.17.142.34 16:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes! Like the above views, my view is same. This article, rather than a description, looks like a praise notice. It on many occasion also insults other castes. For instance, what do they mean by saying "This gave them an edge over Brahmins". The authority responsible for composing this text must be careful regarding this.

It is also advised that some of the references made by the page are not correct. The reference made by "Gour" under the classification of Kayasthas part directs towards a city, not a surname. Wikipedia needs to take actions for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhi32 (talk • contribs) 11:09, 24 August 2008 (UTC)