User:LukeEmily/sandbox

This is the user sandbox of LukeEmily. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. Create or edit your own sandbox here.

Other sandboxes: Main sandbox | Template sandbox

Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request review of it by an experienced editor for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review!

Ekdalian has been a hard-working editor fighting against POV on caste pages for years. That being said, I do not agree with Ekdalian's aggressive choice of words in edit summaries, personal attacks and canvassing. The comments by Sitush to Ekdalian on Bengali Kayastha talk page are also a little disturbing. Also, I wish Ekdalian had provided some diffs for some allegations he made. Here is a more complete story. Ekdalian filed a complaint late last year here against the same editor who had returned after TBAN was lifted and but the complaint got sidetracked. There was a discussion about filing another one later here but we were told to not try something silly as it would boomerang.

Below is the POV pushing as pointed out by Fowler and Fowler, Sitush and admin Abecedare earlier. Comments by these senior editors would all be irrelevant now in 2025 since action was already taken against the editors at the time(and later the TBAN was removed). However, the problem now is that the same POV pushing is going on - that resulted in the earlier ban in the first place. The first section(discussing rajputra, thakur etc) currently gives a very different impression than "a community of armed peasants before the 16th century" as mentioned by F&F below. Please see admin's comments below about the "subtle" POV effort to move puffery at the top of the page. Later sections on the page are giving correct details(mostly) - also the age of the caste has been back pushed to 7th century in the lead although scholars have explained that the usage of Rajput for earlier clans is anachronistic.

Rajput/Rajputra POV pushing comment by admin Abecedare to falsely indicate Royal origin here

Comment by Sitush about POV pushing Rajputra : here

Fowler and Fowler (2021) cites several sources and says Rajputs were basically a community of armed peasants before 16th century here more here and here

Here, despite all the above and warning, the Rajput page is going back to square one before the TBANs. I suspect this is what triggered Ekdalian's (unacceptable) reaction.

I do not know why he suspected meatpuppetry but I can only assume that might be because multiple editors involved (at times) in Rajput related caste articles seem to support each other. I am not accusing anyone of meatpuppetry. But this is one example that I found strange here, Timovinga(a suspected SP), is told "I will not let (you) get away with this comment". Then Timovinga(probably scared) backtracks but he again finally disagrees with the editor who warned him two days later. here and calls it his final response(at 14:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)). Within 12 minutes of Timovinga giving his final answer, two editors add a lot of behavioral evidence for his sock puppetry on other pages and get him banned here amd here. Again, I am assuming good faith but the 12 minute timing is a little coincidental given that the sockpuppetry investigation against him was open for more than a month. Please also see these edits here here and the identities of the editors involved in october 2024. The original page was this. Please check the page now. The separate important section on Mughal(Muslim)-Rajput(Hindu) alliances is gone. I don't know if Ekdalian was watching this page, but if yes, it would also explain the meatpuppetry suspicion.

There is a undoubtedly a history of WP:PUFFERY in the Rajput related pages in the previous years, an attempt to rewrite or whitewash history, a facebook group being formed etc -@Adamantine123:, do you have the diff for the FB page?.

In summary, I can understand why Ekdalian was upset. But I disagree with his reaction. Editors should be polite, stop aggresive/rude communication, canvassing admins and focus on content only and provide evidence(diffs) for any accusations. Doubling down on this page itself was also unacceptable. Ekdalian, I say this as a well wisher as it will help you in the long term - and I like working with you - and you are very competent. But I agree with the concerns raised by all admins in this section - not because they are by admins - but because I feel their concerns are accurate, based on facts and impartial. sections to improve:(pending)

Vairagya Shatakam of BhartrHari

Rajput/Rajputization/Sanskritization

Kshatriatization

work

Hi Kautilya3, I am writing an article and for that I need to write some Sanskrit verses. Is there a way to type in Sanskrit on wikipedia?How did editors type ऋग्वेद in Rigveda in Devanagari? (Here I copied and pasted). Is there some easy way? Do I need some special keyboard? Thanks 10:24, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't really know how to type any Indian scripts. But on English Wikipedia, it is better to use IAST. There are also some tools mentioned at the bottom of that page, which might be helpful.

Do any of my talk page watchers know some good solutions? -- Kautilya3 10:43, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Best I can do follows:

You could try transliteration at easynepalityping.com (Type "rigwed" then press space to get "ऋग्वेद", press backspace to get a list if the transliteration is not the one you are looking for). Should work most of the time but some characters or symbols may be missing since Nepali system is more or less simplified Sanskrit. In Windows OS, you can get Sanskrit keyboard by adding Sanskrit to your language preferences and then use on-screen keyboard to type in characters as you see them, slowly. The second method should provide all characters and symbols, speaking theoretically of course, not having tried it myself.

Best, Usedtobecool 11:42, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Vedic duties of twice-born Varnas^[1]
	Adhyayan (Study Vedas)	Yajana (performing sacrifice for one's own benefit)	Dana Giving Gifts	Adyapana Teaching Vedas	Yaajana Acting as Priest for sacrifice	pratigraha<br<(accepting gifts)
Brahmin	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Kshatriya	✓	✓	✓	No	No	No
Vaishya	✓	✓	✓	No	No	No

TimeLine

^[2]

work

Ananya Vajpeyi discusses the Rajputs in the context of Hindu Sanskrit Dharmashastra texts and shows the dissonance between the meaning of Rajput in the practical political arena versus the literal meaning of rajaputa in Hindu religious texts and how both meanings could coexist.^[3]

Vishvambhara Shastra states that :"An Ugra (Śūdra mother, Kshatriya father) makes a living by the arts of war. Skilled with the sword and bow, he is expert in combat. He stands apart among men as the mighty Rajput".^[4]

Similar view is held by the Jatinirnayaprakaranama of Sudrakamalakara, an early 1600s Dharmaśāstra text written by Kamalakarabhatta (uncle of the notable Brahmin scholar Gaga Bhatt) for a rajaputa. Vajpeyi clarifies that although ugra literally means scary or fierce, in this context the medieval writers only used this term in the context of his qualities as a warrior. Seshasakrishna's Sudracarasiromani, a text that predates Sudrakamalakara also supports this definition for a rajaputa.^[5]

Vajpeyi notes that Kamalakarabhatta makes a professional and religious distinction: a rajaputa may fight, however, he has to follow the duties similar to sudras or sudrasamana. She says Ugra or rajaputa is listed as one of the six types of a sankarajati(mixed caste) given in the text, whose father's varna is higher than that of the mother, and are thus an anulomajas or "one born in accordance with the natural flow". There are five other types of anulomajas unions given by Kamalakarabhatta. Thus, as per the medieval Brahminical Dharmashastras, Rajputs are a mixed jati.^[5] In the practical political context, the word meaning edges towards Kshatriya although in Hindu religious texts rajaputa is closer to Shudra.^[6]

Some emigrant Brahmins may have been involved in Rajputising tribes to the Rajput status.^[5] Despite this, Vajpayi states that, periodically, Brahmins have characterized Rajput as self-seekers, and stated that they are not real Kshatriyas.^[6] Other than establishing marital ties with already established Rajput families, constructing false genealogies and adopting titles such as "rana", Rajputising also involved starting the pretensions of rituals of twice-borns ( wearing sacred thread etc.).^[7] However, one ritual that was not given much significance was the Abhisheka. When a clan leader was made king by the Mughal emperor, the Tika mark on the head of leader by the Muslim emperor confirmed his Royal status and the Hindu ritual of Abhisheka was only of secondary importance. Aurangzeb eventually stopped the custom of Tika and the custom was replaced by bowing or taslim to the Mughal emperor, who would return the salute. According to Vajpayi, this possibly implies that it was still up to the Mughal emperor to ultimately give or deny the Rajput status to the clan leader.^[8]

The description of Rajputs in the Hindu Dharmashastras, self image that the Rajputs presented, and the Mughal view of the Rajputs was disparate. This incongruity, according to Vajpayi makes the Rajput identity Polyphonous.^[6]

Baidya page cleanup

From Baidya Caste status and contestations

Scriptures from Bengal vary over the varna classification of Baidyas. The Vallal Charita of Ānanda Bhaṭṭa^[a] and the Chandimangal of Mukundaram Chakrabarti (c. mid 16th century CE) classed the Baidyas and Kayasthas among Satsudras however the relative ranking of these two castes varies. The former places the Kayastha higher but the latter places the Baidyas higher.^[9]^[10]^[b]^[c] The other scriptures indicating similar varna for the Baidyas are works by Raghunandana (c. mid 16th century), Caitanya Caritāmṛta of Baidya Krishnadasa Kaviraja. Bharatamallika, in Chandraprabha (1675 C.E.), and Ratnaprabha, a summary of the former text claims a mixed-caste/Vaishya status for the Baidyas. In 1653 C.E., Ramakanta Das wrote the oldest available Baidya kulanji — Sadvaidyakulapnjika which skips varna discussions.^[11]^[12]^[13]^[d]^[14]^[e]

Citations

^ Ludo Rocher (2014). "9.Caste and occupation in classical India: The normative texts". In Donald R. Davis, Jr (ed.). Studies in Hindu Law and Dharmaśāstra. Anthem Press. pp. 205–206.
^ Schwerin, Kerrin Griifin (2005). "The Cow-saving Muslim Saint: Elite and Folk Representations of a Tomb Cult in Oudh". In Hasan, Mushirul; Roy, Asim (eds.). Living Together Separately Cultural India in History and Politics. Oxford University Press. p. 182. ISBN 978-0-19-566921-3. Muslim sultans east of Delhi generally relied on intimate alliances with Rajput warlords with their Hindustani peasant infantry, recruited in the east (purab). Rajput chiefs served as brokers. 'Their [the sultan's] overriding interest in recruitment alliances and consensus with Rajput chiefs were expressed, ideologically, in the syncretist, conciliatory idiom that dominated their courts.'³⁸ Rajput warriors converted to Islam without necessarily giving up their way of life. These pre-Mughal Rajputs were not the Rajputs of the seventeenth century Great Tradition but, rather, 'an open status group of warrior-ascetics in search of patronage and marriage'.³⁹ Via a process of Rajputization, peasant castes (like Bhar and Ahir) of eastern Hindustan (purbiya) were integrated into the open status group of warrior ascetics, adopting Rajput values. The warrior hero's death in the battlefield represents the values of kingship.
^ Ananya Vajpeyi 2005, pp. 257–258.
^ Theodore Benke (2010). The Sudracarasiromani of Krsna Sesa: A 16th century manual of dharma for Sudras (Thesis). pp. 96, 97.
^ ^a ^b ^c Ananya Vajpeyi 2005, pp. 257.
^ ^a ^b ^c Ananya Vajpeyi 2005, pp. 258.
^ Ananya Vajpeyi 2005, pp. 254.
^ Ananya Vajpeyi 2005, pp. 251.
^ Cite error: The named reference :7 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ ^a ^b Yazijian, Edward M. (2007). From performance to literature: The "Candīman˙gala" of Kavikan˙kana Mukundarāma Cakravarti (Thesis). University of Chicago. pp. 25, 27, 233–234.
^ Cite error: The named reference :1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Cite error: The named reference :14 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Cite error: The named reference :12 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Dimock, Edward C. "Adi Lila". In Stewart, Tony K. (ed.). Caitanya Caritamrta of Krsnadasa Kaviraja: A Translation and Commentary. Harvard Oriental Series: 56. Cambridge. p. 239.

Bibliography

Ananya Vajpeyi (2005). Supriya Varma; Satish Saberwal (eds.). Traditions in motion:Religion and Society in History. Oxford University Press.

Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).

[1] Ludo Rocher (2014). "9.Caste and occupation in classical India: The normative texts". In Donald R. Davis, Jr (ed.). Studies in Hindu Law and Dharmaśāstra. Anthem Press. pp. 205–206.

[Schwerin-2] Schwerin, Kerrin Griifin (2005). "The Cow-saving Muslim Saint: Elite and Folk Representations of a Tomb Cult in Oudh". In Hasan, Mushirul; Roy, Asim (eds.). Living Together Separately Cultural India in History and Politics. Oxford University Press. p. 182. ISBN 978-0-19-566921-3. Muslim sultans east of Delhi generally relied on intimate alliances with Rajput warlords with their Hindustani peasant infantry, recruited in the east (purab). Rajput chiefs served as brokers. 'Their [the sultan's] overriding interest in recruitment alliances and consensus with Rajput chiefs were expressed, ideologically, in the syncretist, conciliatory idiom that dominated their courts.'³⁸ Rajput warriors converted to Islam without necessarily giving up their way of life. These pre-Mughal Rajputs were not the Rajputs of the seventeenth century Great Tradition but, rather, 'an open status group of warrior-ascetics in search of patronage and marriage'.³⁹ Via a process of Rajputization, peasant castes (like Bhar and Ahir) of eastern Hindustan (purbiya) were integrated into the open status group of warrior ascetics, adopting Rajput values. The warrior hero's death in the battlefield represents the values of kingship.

[FOOTNOTEAnanya_Vajpeyi2005257–258-3] Ananya Vajpeyi 2005, pp. 257–258.

[4] Theodore Benke (2010). The Sudracarasiromani of Krsna Sesa: A 16th century manual of dharma for Sudras (Thesis). pp. 96, 97.

[FOOTNOTEAnanya_Vajpeyi2005257-5] Ananya Vajpeyi 2005, pp. 257.

[FOOTNOTEAnanya_Vajpeyi2005258-6] Ananya Vajpeyi 2005, pp. 258.

[FOOTNOTEAnanya_Vajpeyi2005254-7] Ananya Vajpeyi 2005, pp. 254.

[FOOTNOTEAnanya_Vajpeyi2005251-8] Ananya Vajpeyi 2005, pp. 251.

[:7-10] Cite error: The named reference :7 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[:Yazijian-11] Yazijian, Edward M. (2007). From performance to literature: The "Candīman˙gala" of Kavikan˙kana Mukundarāma Cakravarti (Thesis). University of Chicago. pp. 25, 27, 233–234.

[:1-14] Cite error: The named reference :1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[:14-15] Cite error: The named reference :14 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[:12-16] Cite error: The named reference :12 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[18] Dimock, Edward C. "Adi Lila". In Stewart, Tony K. (ed.). Caitanya Caritamrta of Krsnadasa Kaviraja: A Translation and Commentary. Harvard Oriental Series: 56. Cambridge. p. 239.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[a]

[9]

[10]

[b]

[c]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[d]

[14]

[e]