Talk:Khatri

/archive1

YOU ALL ARE PATHETIC...this is wikipedia anyway, it has no academic or historical integrity or authority...people will believe what they want to believe...you can't change their opinion, especially not on a site where anyway can come and edit anything and try to make it fact...this site should be taken down for it misguides and confuses a great mass of people...may the creators of this website go straight to hell.

This is getting ridiculous, SERIOUSLY

"In Hinduism, the Asura (Sanskrit: असुर) are a group of power-seeking deities, sometimes misleadingly referred to as demons. They were opposed to the devas. "

Khatri's and Asura's? Get real. The fact is that this article is now no longer being disputed, there is enough evidence here to conclude Ksatriya/Khatri equivalence. None of the evidence provided has been successfully refuted or counter-citated. Put this dispute to rest; lock the article for a while and BAN vandals. Seriously - I'm getting sick and tired of all these people that change the article without providing any evidence whatsoever. Seriousy..

I agree the article has been victim of disruptive activities.All of us must analyse facts only.Bad faith editors,who seek propaganda through wikipedia articles should be banned.Holy -- + -- Warrior 09:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

In Desperate Need of Help

I have not committed any act of vandalism yet i was banned by user:Can't sleep, clown will eat me for "repeated acts of vandalism". I have not gotten back my right to edit, and I would like some explanation/justice (i tried to appeal but it was futile). user:Ragib also banned me for vandalism (only 1 act, admittedly, i commited (out of frustration). Both bans were without warning.

Please PROVIDE EVIDENCE OR REFUTE BEFORE MAKING CHANGES

No one has refuted or provided other evidence AGAINST the evidence that supports ksatriya/khatri linkage. PLEASE do not blatently make changes without any evidence/refutation - this is vandalism and i encourage any honest person to refer vandal usernames to admins.

I can see why most Indians hate us Khatris

If i read this reactions here.

Moderator is no Special Admin

While you guys are having a revert war, I wish to get one thing perfectly straight. Why do you expect Moderator to do everything for you? Is it because of his username. You need to get one thing very clear, as far as I know, Moderator3000 is not an admin, he has no powers the rest of us don't have and he may not have full knowledge of Wikipedia policies. I suggest you ask User:Nichalp, or User:Gurubrahma, who are respected admins. Here's a list of Indian Admins. Nobleeagle (Talk) 08:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

It has shown what a name can achieve.I am thinking of having Administrator2000 as my ID.surely people will respect me.Holywarrior 09:37, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Respect has to be earned. Using titles does not gain you respect here. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:01, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't bet on it. "Moderator3000" has been banned indefinitely for his confusing and misleading username. That's not the way to go. --Cyde↔Weys 06:02, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Prominent historical figures

Article on Bedi clan has been created.

The following text regarding has been restored. It is quite significant.

Many prominent historical figures have emerged from the Khatri. All ten Sikh Gurus were Khatri, belonging to the Bedi, Trehan, Bhalla and Sodhi subcastes. Raja Todar Mal was a Tandon Khatri who codified the revenue collection system as Revenue Minister for Akbar. Haqiqat Rai was a Puri Khatri whose martyrdom was celebrated on Basant Panchami in Lahore until independence. Hari Singh Nalwa, an Uppal Khatri, was a prominent general under Maharaja Ranjit Singh. The father and son pair of the Diwans Sawan Mal and Mul Raj Chopra were successive governors of Multan under Ranjit Singh. The former instituted vast improvement in agriculture, while the latter was instrumental in leading the revolt against the British to prevent the annexation of the Sikh kingdom into the East India Company territory.

--ISKapoor 22:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Please be civil

Please be civil. In a discussion people will have differing views. Please respect that and try and potray your viewpoint in a cogent and mature manner. All articles should conform to the neutral point of view, and not have a pro- or anti- bias. Please also do not indulge in name calling. See Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Wikipedia policy states that articles contributed should not be original research. To include material here, please cite credible sources. Thank you, =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Please stop messing with this page....

MODERATOR AND SYSTEM ADMIN........PLEASE UNDERSTAND, THERE HAVE BEEN PEOPLE OF NON-KHATRI ORIGIN MAKING EDITS AND COMMENTING OUT FACTUAL INFORMATION ABOUT KHATRIS..........WHICH WE WILL NOT APPROVE OF..........THESE PEOPLE NEED TO BE BANNED FROM COMING TO THIS PAGE AND MAKING EDITS.....I WILL PROVIDE YOU IP ADDRESSES IF YOU NEED THEM...

THANKS, JAY3 (A TRUE KHATRI/KSHATRIYA)

Administrators

Hello, there seems to have been some confusion over who is and who is not an administrator here. To check whether or not someone is an admin, type their username in Special:Listusers. If "sysop" appears next to their username, then they are an admin. If it does not, they are not. (example) Prodego ^talk 00:41, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I CAN DO THIS ALL DAY....

I CAN KEEP CHANGING THE PAGE BACK TO THE WAY IT SHOULD BE ALL DAY ALL NIGHT....NO PROBLEM

.......YOU HEAR ME """ONESTONE"""....QUIT MESSING WITH THE PAGE

-JAY3

You belong in a mental institution. Onestone.

ACTUALLY ONESTONE, I AM IN A MENTAL INSTITUTION.........HAHAHAH!.....I WRITE ALL MY INFORMATION FROM MY ASYLUM CELL....

-JAY3

The Indian Diaspora in Central Asia and Its Trade 1550-1900.

I recommend "The Indian Diaspora in Central Asia and Its Trade 1550-1900". By Scott Levi. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2002.

A reviews of the book appears at [1]

Diaspora Khatris had migrated to central Asia, but did not originate there.

--Vikramsingh 16:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Problem with edits by 156.80.102.158

The aryan invasion theory etc. belongs elsewhere. This article is about the Khatris, based on well-known documented facts.

I have seem claims of people claiming to be superior because they came from elsewhere or have a lighter colored skin. These views have no place in this article. The following are not appropriate.

were scattered in the northern areas of Afghanistan and southern Tajikistan (in ancient times these areas were known as Bactria and Sogdiana.

All Kshatriya/Khatris and Brahmins are descendants of Aryan people originating in Central Asia (related to Iranian Aryan tribes of Persia/Iran). They migrated/invaded the Indian subcontinent around the year 3000-1500 B.C., often referred to as the Aryan Invasion).

This article is about Khatris, but it not about claiming that they have exclusive authority to rule.

Khatris were for many centuries the only group that made up the government administration roles including the rulers, kings, landlords, and governors, as well as the civil administration officials.

Aroras and other similar communities are brothers and friends of Khatris. Aroras are a distinct group, with their own unique history. There is a separate article on Aroras.

Finally Brother 156.80.102.158 - why did you insert the POV tag?

--Vikramsingh 21:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

VIKRAM SINGH, WHICH POV TAG ARE YOU REFERRING TOO?.......I AGREE, I WILL TAKE OUT THE STATEMENTS ABOVE, SINCE THIS IS SOLELY ABOUT KHATRIS, BUT THE FACTS REMAIN TRUE ABOUT THOSE STATEMENTS ABOVE....LOOK AT THE ROLES OF KHATRIS, AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO BRAHMINS....WHY DOES NO OTHER CASTE/GROUP HAVE THAT RELATIONSHIP TO BRAHMINS? OBVIOUSLY THERE MUST BE SOME DEEP SEEDED HISTORY WITH THESE TWO GROUPS, CORRECT?

-JAY3

Yes, the relationship between Khatris and the Saraswat Brahmins is well documented. It is also referred to in the article. --Vikramsingh 20:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The tag: "The factual accuracy of this article is disputed"

Please let us know which specific facts are disputed. Please note that there is a list of references at the end.--Vikramsingh 21:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Have you read the talk page archive, when there is a revert war like what's going on now, the article is considered disputed. Nobleeagle (Talk) 01:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I think there is a good list of references. Is there something you question and want referenced? --Vikramsingh 20:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I looked at Nobleeagle's recent version. It looks like the appropriate one, I have restored it. It seems that there is some feeling of rivalry that is behind the revert war. I think for India, and for the Hindus, it is time for people to respect each other regardless of the caste we may belong. The article should be factual and based on hard information. That is what I and several of the other contributors have worked for. --Vikramsingh 20:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Reversion

You guys revert everyone without even thinking about what you're reverting. Read WP:LEAD at least, read WP:3RR. The article needs a lead section and you guys are removing it. I inserted the Caste Infobox onto the article and was reverted...this is a pointless waste of time if you guys maintain this attitude. Nobleeagle (Talk) 01:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Like I said.....

I can do this all day.........none of you guys can change the facts that Khatris/Kshatriya are the same........

For the a**hole who posts as "Rajputs will destroy you", I would like to see what you are made of.......you can talk to the 'talk'....but can you walk the 'walk'.....your bark is loud, but your bit doesn't seem vicious....so I would suggest you just keep to yourself....

ASK YOURSELVES THIS.........WHY DID BRAHMINS INTER-MARRY WITH KHATRIS THROUGHOUT MANY CENTURIES?....WHY WAS THERE A TIME THAT BRAHMINS WOULD ONLY EAT FOOD OR BE GUESTS AT A KHATRIS HOME, AND NO OTHER GROUP WAS ALLOWED THIS PRIVILEDGE? WHY DO BRAHMINS ALLOW ONLY KHATRIS TO READ FROM THE VEDAS?

IF ANY OF YOU CAN GIVE ME FACTUAL INFORMATION TO TELL ME OTHERWISE ABOUT WHAT I JUST STATED, I CHALLENGE YOU TOO......OTHERWISE IF CANNOT, YOU ARE JUST WASTING EVERYONE'S TIME COMING TO THIS BOARD AND CHANGING INFORMATION TO SHOW KHATRIS BEING OF A LOWER CASTE, OR SHUDRA, WHICH YOU KNOW, DEEP IN YOUR HEART ISN'T TRUE, BUT YET IT MAKES YOU FEEL GOOD FOR THAT SPLIT SECOND WHEN YOU CHANGE IT ON THIS ARTICLE....

AND IF YOU GUYS CHOOSE TO IGNORE MY QUESTIONS, AND STILL REVERT TO CHANGING THE PAGE, THEN WE KNOW THAT MY POINT WAS PROVEN, AND YOU GUYS ARE JUST BORED IN LIFE TRYING TO CLAIM KHATRIS AS BEING NON-KSHATRIYA

FOR THOSE WHO DENY THE KHATRI/KSHATRIYA RELATIONSHIP..........GET A LIFE!

-JAY3 (A KHATRI/KSHATRIYA)

I know this discussion longer than you are around boy. Maybe you can fool the Americans telling them you are warriors, you certainly cannot fool any Indian. Onestone.

---

WHATS UP BOY BOY!.....YOU GOT SOMETHING TO SAY TO ME DIRECTLY BOY BOY! GO ON WITH YOUR FANTASY THOUGHTS OF THINKING I'M FOOLING AMERICANS AND WHAT NOT, BUT ONE THING YOU CANNOT DENY IS THE TRUE STATUS OF KHATRIS/KSHATRIYA OF THE PAST. LIKE I HAVE ALWAYS SAID, THIS NO LONGER APPLIES SINCE EVERYONE IS EQUAL IN MY EYES.........DON'T SAY NOTHING, THERE WON'T BE NOTHING...STEP UP TO THE PLATE BOY BOY!

How much white powder did you sniff now? Go jump from your flat.

DUDE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE WORST CUTDOWNS EVER........MAKE SOME SENSE AT LEAST WHEN YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH.....YOU SEEM TO BE A BORING, DULL, AND VERY LONELY GUY MAN.......BUT ANYWAYS, YEA I DID SNORT SOME OF THAT YEYO.......LOLLLLLLLLLL.......

JAY3

Khatri....Kshatriya

I do not actually believe in caste and my interest is only from an anthropological point of view, but the continuous editing and re--editing of this page is quite ridiculous and the continous vandalism quite pathetic, one version actually says "khatris are an actor caste" for God's sake come on...

Khatris throughout the middle ages were always considered as Kshatriyas and the difference in the spelling is simply the Prakrit/early punjabi spelling, just as just as Raksha becomes Rakha. Take away the s and y from Kshatriya and you have Khatriya. At some point in the post-Gupta era they took to commerce.

I am from a saraswat Brahmin family and there is indeed a close relationship between the two communities, i HAVE TRIED TO ADD TO THE ARTICLE but it has been changed. Hence my discussion here as i will no longer bother taking "the bate". Regards Sarsut -( punjabi way of saying Saraswati, as in Sarsut Brahman)

AND STILL..........

NO ONE HAS ANSWERED MY QUESTIONS ABOVE, AND ARE STILL EAGER TO CHANGE THE PAGE...........

FOR THOSE WHO DENY THE KHATRI/KSHATRIYA RELATIONSHIP, ARE ANY OF YOU GOING TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS ABOVE OR WHAT? OR ARE YOU STILL DOING YOUR RESEARCH?

JAY3

Please don't use capital letters to make a point, it's pretty much the online equivalent of shouting at people! Please stay cool when discussing articles. It's much easier to get your ideas across when others don't think you're being hostile. Have a great day, — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • 04:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Khatri/Ksatriya Citings + Refutation Against Manushmritis Citings

Firstly, the admin "Ragib" has banned me for apparently vandalism. I admit, I got frustrated with the revert war and wrote quite blatently in the main article (only that the Khatri's are indeed Ksatriya). I don't believe that the family one is lucky/unlucky enough to be born in defines much at all about their character, it is action that does. All men (and of course, women) are equal unless their character is perturbed by their action - regardless their rights are always equal.

Secondly, I must say it is quite ridiculous how everybody bought into the Manushmritis citings. Here is a nice and quick way to put them to death (re-post):

The nepalise warriors are called 'Chetri' (in fact, Chetri redirects to Ksatriya in Wikipedia) which is linguistically just as close as 'Ksshatri'. Hence there is a contradiction in the logic behind the citation (Manushmritis citation) that is heavily based on the linguistics of "Ksshatri", rendering it invalid. Let alone, a whole community being spawned by a very vague and RARE occurance of events; probabilistically and statistically approximately 0, as this event would have to occur over thousands of times. Here 'event' refers to the event that results in a Ksshatri, as defined previously to be a situation where a Ksatriya female mates with a Sudra male, their child becoming a 'Ksshatri'. Can anyone here provide any solid historical evidence of these events occurring thousands and thousands of times? Thus although it may or may not be valid to refer to Khatri as Ksatriya, it is certainly not valid to refer to them as Sudra.

Here is an arguement posted by someone else that actually favours Khatri/Ksatriya linkage linguistically:

"Khatris throughout the middle ages were always considered as Kshatriyas and the difference in the spelling is simply the Prakrit/early punjabi spelling, just as just as Raksha becomes Rakha. Take away the s and y from Kshatriya and you have Khatriya. At some point in the post-Gupta era they took to commerce."

Thirdly, breif mentions of citings which one VikramSingh has also referred to, please check the articles listed in "References". Also check articles via clicking the names available in the list of Khatri surnames. One in particular has references to the history of Burdwan, where Kapoor ruled for a long time period. Although Burdwan is part of Bangladesh, the ruling Kapoor family undoubtedly trace their origins to Khatri - and hence the HISTORY OF BURDWAN MUST BE REFUTED if anyone is to say otherwise to Khatri = Ksatriya.

Jay3, I don't argue against your Khatri origins, but to call yourself a Khatri is to call yourself a warrior - are you?

Also, there was a very nice section on this article a long time back on Muslim Khatri's. Does anyone know why that was removed?

Also althought Khatri and Ksatriya are one and the same, citation is definately needed when whoever wrote "The Khatris are the original members of the Kshatriya caste" must citate this... that they are indeed the ORIGINALS.

Enough said.

All men have equal rights, all men are equal until their character is perturbed by their actions.

IP: wateva, go check

Restoring this after vandalism got it blanked. Nobleeagle (Talk) 08:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

NOBLEEAGLE, YES I AGREE, TO CALL MYSELF A KHATRI, IS TO CALL MYSELF A WARRIOR......BUT IT IS ALSO RIGHT TO CALL A KHATRI/KSHATRIYA A LEADER, AN ADMINISTRATOR, GOVERNOR, MILITARY OFFICIAL, LANDLORD, KING, RULER, CIVIL ADMINISTRATOR, GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATOR, ETC.ETC....BASCIALLY, ANY ROLE IN AN ARISTOCRATIC POSITION......AND THIS WHAT THE MAJORITY OF KHATRIS ARE IN.... -JAY3

Maharajas of Burdwan

Actually Burdwan fortunately remained a part of India. Yes, It's Maharajas are Khatri. See the article Kapoor.

The ruling family of Burdwan was responsible for numerous contributions to what is now known as the Bengali culture, many of them in turn, influenced all of India.

--Vikramsingh 23:36, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

AND STILL.........AS OF 6/29/06

NO ONE HAS ANSWERED MY QUESTIONS ABOVE, AND ARE STILL EAGER TO CHANGE THE PAGE...........

FOR THOSE WHO DENY THE KHATRI/KSHATRIYA RELATIONSHIP, ARE ANY OF YOU GOING TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS ABOVE OR WHAT? OR ARE YOU STILL DOING YOUR RESEARCH?

JAY3 JAY3 infact it was I who had written citation from manusmriti which you persistently removed.You are encouraged to write about your refutations of Mnaushmriti even on my talk page if you prefer.I just wonder what makes people hate the word Shudra.Holywarrior 08:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for those citings Holywarrior, but they were easily refuted if you read above. No need to refute any more.

I DON'T HATE THE WORD SHUDRA, INFACT, I ONLY HATE WHEN PEOPLE FABRICATE AND MISINFORM PEOPLE ABOU HISTORY AND FACTUAL INFORMATION about KHATRIS, OR ANYONE FOR THAT MATTER.....ALSO, SHUDRAS PLAYED AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE ANCIENT SOCIAL STRUCTURE OF INDIA, NO ONE CAN DENY THIS....BUT I WILL SAY, BECAUSE OF PEOPLES NATURE, THE HIGHER CASTES WOULD OFTEN CORRUPT OR TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEIR POSITIONS AND EXPLOIT LOWER CASTES....WHICH WE ALL KNOW, WAS TOTALLY WRONG THING TO DO! -JAY3

Hi Jay I read your refutations which are actually countercharge on nepal kings.Yes they are called chettri but actually they are from Mewar Guhilot dynasty whose Kshatriya status is also challenged by Gen.Todd linking them with sasanian sakas /Guebras .This is not the way to refute something.Holywarrior 14:44, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

It should be noted that James Tod wrote in 1829-1832 when most of the archaeological information was not available, and many manuscripts had not come to light. The Kings of Nepal are certainly Rajput, and are thus not immediately related with the Khatris. It should be kept in kind that in ancient times, India was a very large country, with different clans of Kshatriyas ruling different kingdoms in various parts of India. Thus it cannot be claimed that only a certain set of clans from a specific region are the only descendants of the ancient Kshatriyas.--Vikramsingh 16:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Later findings and works have attested James Todd's work with seal of trust.Holywarrior 10:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

....

Hey Holywarrior. Those citings and the refutation against your citings wasn't done by Jay, it was done by none other than I (no username). The fact remains that the implications you wish to draw from your citings can only be true under the heavy assumption of a linguistic connection between 'Khatri' and "Kshatri". "Kshatri" is also just as close to "Ksatriya". Also your citings are still refuted regardless of the assumption.

Infact, "Khatri" and "Ksatriya" linguistic connection has been well cited already above. You have also not counter-citated or refuted any of the other citings of ksatriya/khatri linkage posted above.

Can we stop refuting on refutation now?

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)

Kshatri

Kshatri was also the name of the famous character from the mahabharat "Vidura" who was half brother of Dhritarashtra and cousin of Pandu. "Please check mahabharata." Kshatri also denotes one who is intelligent just fair and strong; qualities that were possessed by Vidura ( supposed incarnation of lord yamaraja, whose son was yuddisthira. )

I would suggest.....

that you a-holes stop messing with the page, and putting bogus information up that Khatris are not Kshatriya.....

No one can deny that Khatris/Kshatriya are the same people, so get over it!

KHATRI = KSHATRIYA........simple as that!

will you answer Kshattri=?,I am going to start an article Kshatri.Holy -- + -- Warrior 15:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Kshatri page will include most of the deleted part of the articles.It has got references in scriptures and should not be contended.Yeah it will be a separate article without referring to any existing community.Holy | Warrior 15:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

........HOLY COWARD, stop being such a loser with that whole 'Kshattri' idea!.....I mean come on, does it not go to prove that you are trying so hard to prove the Khatri/Kshatriya relationship is not true, that you are desparate and looking for anything you can find? And it just goes to show how much you want to dissociate Khatris from Kshatriya. No one can deny or change the fact that Khatri/Kshatriya are the same!.....I bid you good luck on your research! -JAY3