Talk:Bengali Brahmin


 * A little tidying up is required. --Bhadani 08:35, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Stupid and non-sense interpretation
How culture and Happlotype became related? Wow wow wow wow wow 3rd world! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.197.10 (talk) 03:27, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

placed appropriate tags
due to lack of citations and other appropriate tags are placed, kindly try to improve the article by placing necessary citations and/or rewrite it according to wiki. regards : --@ the $un$hine . (talk) 19:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Baidya
Hi, Can anyone provide more details about Bengali Baidyas and how they are a part of Brahmin community? I want to know more.

this article says that kayasth clan was formed by the servants of Brahmins. Historically, this is wrong. The history of Kayastha community can be veiwed in its wikipedia entry.

Hi some user named Sourav421 is trying desperately to add Amartya Sen as brahmin who belongs from Baidya caste. Kindly protect the page from Vandalism.

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/1998/sen/facts/

The official Nobel prize website clearly saying amartya sen is a brahmin.he is also a bengali so thats why I added him.the fact is Baidyas are also brahmins.traditionally baidyas are Ayurvedic Doctors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sourav431 (talk • contribs) 14:05, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Vaishya Sudras
Vaidyas are vaishya sudras I think but after the British Govt. advrtsed for caste mobilisation, they applied for higher status like Ayurvedic Brahmins.117.194.199.64 (talk) 13:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Tags
The article Bengali Brahmins was in a bad shape. I added a lot of well referenced material, although I was not able to get as many sources as I would have liked, because most of modern scholars are not interested in such topics. I think present tags are too strict to implement, and may induce some less informed editor to destroy this article partially or wholly. Instead of placing tags, one should ask editors to improve this article. I fear one will not get editors to one's liking, because relevant academic sources are hard to find, as far as this article is concerned. If one pushes the matter, he/she will attract only chauvinists who will destroy this article. -VJha (talk) 10:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

yup i agree, hope these tags will attract bengal members so tht it may take a good shape , its a good work from ur part. regards:--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 13:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Added 'Genetics' Heading
Mr. Fylind Brahmin and Bengali Brahmin are not same.The zonal and local character is most important.Many mysterious things are there.117.194.202.227 (talk) 12:53, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I added a section on genetics of the caste group. Hope that is beneficial for the article... --Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:13, 2 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The reference of Haplogroup percentages under Genetics section is absolutely as per wikipedia guidelines listed PSTS.

''Policy on Primary Source-

Primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them.''

Took Sengupta et al as the primary source. I did not misuse the data provided by it. Check the references. ''Policy on Primary Source-

A primary source can be used only to make descriptive statements that can be verified by any educated person without specialist knowledge.'' ''Policy on Secondary Source-

Articles may include analytic or evaluative claims only if these have been published by a reliable secondary source.''

Any educated person may calculate the percentages as such. Besides it is a norm to present the data as percentages. Check any article on Haplogroup in wikipedia or outside sources.

As far as the analytic and evaluative claims are concerned, I’ve taken the "….as a founder lineage for this caste group." line from Sharma et al which is a significant secondary source for the Sengupta study. Besides these Sengupta et al has been referenced in 19 articles listed here which according to WP guidelines provide plenty of secondary sources for the published Sengupta Data. --Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:50, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Genetic Data Doubtful
Hindu Genealogy

The 49 established gotras are clans or families whose members trace their descent to a common ancestor, usually a sage of ancient times. The gotra proclaims a person's identity and a "gotraspeak" is required to be presented at Hindu ceremonies. People of the same gotra are not allowed to marry.

One company says it can use a 37-marker Y-DNA test to "verify genetic relatedness and historical gotra genealogies for Hindu and Buddhist engagements, marriages and business partnerships." This has not been supported by independent research. Any Y-DNA test can be used to compare results with another person whose gotra is known.

Doubts and drawbacks Genealogical DNA tests have become popular due to the ease of testing at home and their supplementing genealogical research. Genealogical DNA tests allow for an individual to determine with high accuracy whether he or she is related to another person within a certain time frame, or with certainty that he or she is not related. DNA tests are perceived as more scientific, conclusive and expeditious than searching the civil records. But, they are limited by restrictions on lines which may be studied. The civil records are always only as accurate as the individuals who provided or wrote the information.

The aforementioned Y-DNA testing results are normally stated as probabilities: For example, a perfect 12/12 marker test match gives a 90% likelihood of the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) being within 23 generations, while a 67 of 67 marker match gives the same 90% likelihood of the MRCA being within 4 generations back.[5]

As presented above in mtDNA testing, if a perfect match is found, the mtDNA test results can be helpful. In some cases, research according to traditional genealogy methods encounters difficulties due to the lack of regularly recorded matrilineal surname information in many cultures.(see Matrilineal surname).[7] [edit] Drawbacks

Common concerns about genealogical DNA test are cost and privacy issues (some testing companies retain samples and results for their own use without a privacy agreement with subjects). The most common complaint from DNA test customers is the failure of the company to make results understandable to them.

DNA tests can do some things well, but there are constraints. Testing of the Y-DNA lineage from father to son may reveal complications, due to unusual mutations, secret adoptions, and false paternity (i.e. the father in one generation is not the father in birth records.) According to some genomics experts, autosomal tests may have a margin of error up to 15% and blind spots.[citation needed]

Some users have recommended that there be government or other regulation of ancestry testing to ensure more standardization.[24] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.207.244 (talk) 15:13, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

The Phenomenological Anthropology does not support the statistics. Different groups reported different proportions.The data shows an intentionality towards establishment of an old system.The high percentage in a far away valley from its origin at central Asia is really astonishing. Hands of Brahma should be kept aside first.117.194.199.201 (talk) 03:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Analysis of only 39 individuals cant say more than that r1a1 and r2 presence.It is also without chi-square test.And also that ISI Calcutta analysis changed the % from below 40 to more than 70.All data changed but mysteriously maintaining the Caste gradation.And that Bengali Brahmin have % equal to the Turkies but more than Pakistanis and Afgans.Very funny research scholars India. This is also not clear How Indo-European culture got related with this.Which stupid or idiotic theory does conform to such conclusion.Are you trying to build the basis of another Apartheid .117.194.202.227 (talk) 12:48, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The jewish data a popular Gossip

he Cohanim (or Kohanim) is a patrilineal priestly line of descent in Judaism. According to the Bible, the ancestor of the Cohanim is Aaron, brother of Moses. Many believe that descent from Aaron is verifiable with a Y-DNA test: the first published study in genealogical Y chromosome DNA testing found that a significant percentage of Cohens had distinctively similar DNA, rather more so than general Jewish or Middle Eastern populations. These Cohens tended to belong to Haplogroup J, with Y-STR values clustered unusually closely around a haplotype known as the Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH). This could be consistent with a shared common ancestor, or with the hereditary priesthood having originally been founded from members of a single closely related clan.

Nevertheless, the original studies tested only six Y-STR markers, which is considered a low-resolution test. Such a test does not have the resolution to prove relatedness, nor to estimate reliably the time to a common ancestor. The Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH), while notably frequent among Cohens, also appears in the general populations of haplogroups J1 and J2 with no particular link to the Cohen ancestry. So while many Cohens have haplotypes close to the CMH, many more of such haplotypes worldwide belong to people with no likely Cohen connection at all. According to researchers (Hammer), it is only the CMH that is found in J1 that is to be attributed to the Aaron lineage, not the CMH in J2. Jews with the CMH in both J1 and J2 cannot all be descended from one man who lived approximately 3,300 years ago, because J1 diverged from J2 10,000 years ago.

Resolution may be increased by the testing of more than six Y-STR markers. For some, this could help to establish relatedness to particular recent Cohen clusters. For many, the testing is unlikely to distinguish definitively shared Cohen ancestry from that of the more general population distribution. So far no published research indicates what extended Y-STR haplotype distributions appear to be characteristic of Cohens.

Although some high-resolution testing has been done, to date the results have not been released. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.207.244 (talk) 15:15, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Brahmins and Slavs have high proportion of R1a1a. Genetics don't lie. These groups are closely related to each other. 77.9.5.240 (talk) 04:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

In "Bengali Brahmins" article about "Kayastha Bengali Brahmins" are not mentioned. why?
In "Bengali Brahmins" article about "Kayastha Bengali Brahmins" are not mentioned. why? According to the "Kayastha" article in wikipedia Kayastas are Brahmins and holding dual cast status Brahmin and Kshatriya. So kindly mention all "Bengali Kayastha Brahmins" peoples name and there titles in the "Bengali Brahmins" Article. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.227.130.233 (talk) 03:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Caste Mobilisation and Demand of Higher Status
After the British India Govt. gave notice for application for Higher cast status then only different cast started demanding higher or in most cases having some proximity with the Brahmins.Even a section of one caste-group started wearing sacred thread.This custom later spread to many communities in different states of India.

But neither ever The British Govt. changed any status nor ever the Brahmin acknowledged any community into their sect. In Bengal they were always very rigid to the status of Sudra status for all and the lowest part beyond consideration. Any one can find the documents of Mahafejkhana( Govt. Archive) .Any demand or forceful inclusion is vandalism .Everyone knows in Brahmasamaj also such demand was turned down and never ever acknowledged.We find some vandalism .117.194.201.134 (talk) 07:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Modifications and Reorganization
Hi Everyone,

I have made edits/ modifications to the History section which I am listing below: --- Organized the section in a verifiable chronological sequence (earliest to latest) --- Added description of a copper plate of Dhanaidaha and provided reference --- Then talked about literary sources which may not always be chronologically verifiable (llike Mahabharata, Ramayana, etc) --- Updated the classification of Bengali brahmins to the scholarly format as described in various texts like "Hindu Catse and Sects", "Banger Jatiya Itihaash" etc --- Have cited multiple references wherever possible including specifying page numbers wherever possible.

The Traditional Accounts section needs to be organized properly and chronologically as the traditional history of each type of Brahmins are different:

--- Sapta-shati's are pre Adisura and migrations of some are linked to Chandravarman (4th century C.E) --- Shakdvipi related to Shasanka (7th century CE) --- Radhi and Varendri - migration related to Adisura (possible Jayanta of 750 C.E) - ref to Kalhanas Rajatarngini esp the exploits of Jayapida (contemporary of Jayanta) grandson of Lalitaditya --- Paschatya Vaidik - migration during Muhammad Ghaznis invasion (1000 C.E) --- Dakshinatya Vaidiks during 1050 C.E during Chalukya king Vikramaditya VI reign

Subdivions like Pirali, Patati need to be treated under each section. We should finalize a basic template which we may discuss.

Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (talk) 06:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Attitude Problem
I feel there is an attitude problem in the presentation of the article.Mythological identity can't be substantiated.Indians have destroyed there tribal identity or had been so, and adopted instead ,the profession based caste identity [ preceded by colour based ( fare, dark and very dark )] and subsequently these were justified in the name of religions though it would have been better if they could have preserved their tribal identity.

This article basically a bad mixture of so many mythological hypothesis.Then there is an effort of substantiation through genome analysis.But the decision has been pre-meditated ; At least some people must have remembered the "Volga To Ganga" by some Rahul Sankrittayan ( is he an Indian ? ) .Most probably he was influenced by the German Jewish Haters and thought of huge Aryan World.

India is a miserable admixture of everything like the Latin America. So to interpret the Genome data of a community which is spreading over a large geographical extension like Bengal a large number of data is necessary.Over the regions the phenomenological anthropology varies sharply for every caste. Only those spreading over a small region show uniformity.I may be wrong but so far my knowledge goes about India ( as their last British monarchy had documented), this is the reality. And the interpretation becomes a ugly fiction.

Genome identity is like Quantumgenesis theory .Both Y-clad and Mitochondrial dna- clad are two imaginary functions determined statistically with respect to a standard reference   and the product of these two is the reality .If you see an r1a1 Russian and an Indian ,you will feel like comparing a hell and heaven.So this is an absurdity.

Biased and Full of Discriminatory Attitude and Interpretation : Worst Article
The harappadna.org ,paper or gobbledegock, what it is , does not contain any specific information ,What is other Bengalis? There is no data of Bengali Kayasthas or Vaidyas .This private financed research had no credibility.The research of Cohanim ancestry had revealed the fact. I think the crude data and the detailed analysis has to be given. 30 - 40 rich people managed a sample analysis that gives no reliability. It is extremely insulting and demeaning to use terms like other Bengalis. A Govt survey of at least 50% of a community population can give such credibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.205.219 (talk) 02:21, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

About Panchavedic Brahmins
Sources need to be cited for "Panchavedic Brahmins". Original research is not as per wikipedia policy - plus the neutrality of the section was questionable as user Anionmission used terms like "greatest" / "highest" which is not as per Wikipedia usage policies.

He/ she needs to: a. Remove capitalization and use proper cases b. Cite verifiable sources / articles/ scholarly articles/ peer reviewed research c. Desist from original research d. Use proper formatting — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subhodeep Mukhopadhyay (talk • contribs) 13:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

The R1a and Proto-Indo-European connection
R1a has been variously associated with:
 * the re-colonization of Eurasia during the Late Glacial Maximum.
 * the expansion of the Kurgan people from the Pontic-Caspian steppe, which is associated with the spread of the Indo-European languages.

The Modern studies for R1a1 (M17) suggest that it have originated in South Asia and have found its way initially from Western India (Gujarat) through Pakistan and Kashmir, then via Central Asia and Russia, before finally coming to Europe"..."as part of an archaeologically dated Paleolithic movement from east to west 30,000 years ago. so its clear that R1a has clinical connections to the PIE people. Nirjhara (talk) 14:50, 30 August 2011 (UTC)


 * What is your source for the words "found its way initially from Western India (Gujarat) through Pakistan and Kashmir, then via Central Asia and Russia, before finally coming to Europe"? This very specific itinerary does not appear in the Underhill et al article you cite.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:19, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

References in Bengali Brahmins
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Bengali Brahmins's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Semino2000": From Brahmin:  From Haplogroup R1a (Y-DNA):  From Haplogroup H (Y-DNA):  

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 22:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC) Here is the reference link: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/290/5494/1155 I guess the parents are found.Nirjhara (talk) 03:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The Brahmin and R1a references you cite are using a "harvard citation" template which takes you down to another part of the article, where you can see the details and check properly...


 * R1a has Semino, O.; Passarino, G; Oefner, PJ; Lin, AA; Arbuzova, S; Beckman, LE; De Benedictis, G; Francalacci, P et al. (2000), "The Genetic Legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in Extant Europeans: A Y Chromosome Perspective", Science 290 (5494): 1155–59, Bibcode 2000Sci...290.1155S, doi:10.1126/science.290.5494.1155, . Copy can be found at http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/ConciseMacedonia/Y_Hromosomes.pdf.
 * Brahmin seems to show signs that the "harvard" reference was copied from another article, incompletely. In order for these references to work properly you need to have a references section below, using a citation template. See R1a for examples.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:24, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Can any member from any of the Tribes of Bengali Brahmin confirm whether Vaidyas are Brahmin or  ? ? 117.194.195.242 (talk) 06:29, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2014
Bengalibrahmin22 (talk) 05:34, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Actual history Of Bengali Brahmin : Original- to- Sanskritized -to- English (anglicized)

Barujjye (original) -- to -- Banerjee (anglicized) Bandoghati (original) to Bandopadhay (sanskritized) to Banerjee Mukhoti (original) to Mukhopadhay (sanskritized) to Mukherjee (anglicized) Gangal (original) to Gangopadhay (sanskritized) to Ganguly (anglicized) Chatto/ Chattoraj/ Chattokhandi (original) to Chattopadhay (sanskritized) to Chatterjee (anglicized) Bhatto/ Bhat (original) to Bhattacharya (sanskritized)

Explanation-1. Shandilya clan (gotra) had three varieties- Barujjye, Batabyal and Bandoghati. Banerjee (anglicized) has distinctly come from Barujjye (like Banaras came from the Baranasi). Bandoghati (original) became Bandopadhyay (sanskritized). Later they also started using Banerjee in English. However Batabyal remained and continued the same.

2. Gangal (original) became Gangopadhyay (sanskritized) then Ganguly (anglicized). Some say why Gangopadhyay is not Gangerjee like Benerjee or Mukherjee. It is because symmetry was drawn from Gangal (original). Some mistakenly think that the term Rarhi is derived from Rarh region of western Bengal. But that Rarh is derived from Ruksha (dry). It is a modern geographic term while Rarhi is a traditional term. The term Rarhi (shreni) is derived from Gaudiya (shreni). Gaud (Malda) was a place of Sanskrit studies later shifting to Nabadwip. Hussain Shah was also a patron of Gaudiya pundits and invited Rup, Sanatan and Srijiv Goswami in his royal court.

The Gaudiya pundits established a distinct philosophy and rituals in Bengal. Many followed the path of Gaudiya pundits and came to be known as the Gaudiya shreni Brahmans and later Rarhi Brahmans (Gaudiya = Rarhi) by alternative accent. The sect established by Sri Chaitanya Dev is called the Gaudiya Vaishnavism and he is often called the Gaud. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is revered by devotees as an incarnation of Krishna and Radharani as avatars of the Parmatma, or Supreme Godhead. He was born in an Bengali Hindu Brahmin family (Mishra).Some denied the newly originated path of the Gaudiya pundits and claimed to be follower of original Varanasi pundits later known as Vaidik shreni.Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is not known to have written anything himself except for a series of verses known as the Siksastaka, or "eight verses of instruction",[23] which he had spoken, and were recorded by one of his close colleagues. The eight verses created by Mahaprabhu are considered to contain the complete philosophy of Gaudiya Vaishnavism in condensed form. Chaitanya requested a select few among his followers (who later came to be known as the Six Gosvamis of Vrindavan) to systematically present the theology of bhakti he had taught to them in their own writings.The six saints and theologians were Rupa Goswami, Sanatana Goswami, Gopala Bhatta Goswami, Raghunatha Bhatta Goswami, Raghunatha dasa Goswami and Jiva Goswami, a nephew of brothers Rupa and Sanatana. These individuals were responsible for systematising Gaudiya Vaishnava theology. Later the term Rarhi became popular to distinguish from the Barendra Brahmans. It is to note that Barendras are homogenous but Rarhis are heterogenous. The Rarhi Brahmans (not all) are presumed to have migrated and come from north India. It is from the Ananda Bazar matrimonial advertisement that the term Rarhi became popular forgetting its origin from Gaudiya. Rarhi—Gaurhiya  Gaurh-- Rarh

4. The origin of Barendra Brahman- Barendras are known as the Brahmans of the Five (later Seven) ancient villages (5 Gramer Bamun) of Bengal. First they developed and spread in Five (5) ancient villages (Adi Janapad) of Bengal along lower Ganges and later on extended to 7 villages. The term Barendra has come from the king (landlord) Birendra of Pabna. Some say that Birendra was one of the 12 great landlords of Bengal (Baro Bhuniya). Birendra hailed in the Pabna district of North Bengal. He was patron of his own community and encouraged their migration from the Five ancient villages (lower Ganges) to his territory (Pabna). The migrants continued their village names to distinguish among themselves. The village names later became their surnames. The Barendras use Five (5) different surnames associated with original villages. These are. 1. Bagchi from Bagcha village presently located near Barrackpur of 24 Parganas 2. Bhaduri from Bhadur village presently located near Bangaon of 24 Parganas 3. Lahiri from Lohori village presently located near Jessore district of Bangladesh 4. Moitra from Mohit village - mohitra –then- moitra – presently unknown 5. Sanyal from Sen Lal village – senlal – then-sanyal

The 5 ancient (later 7) villages can still be traced along lower Ganges in Hoogly and 24 Parganas districts. One is Adi Saptagram on Ganga in Hoogly district. Bhadur village is presently located near Bangaon of 24 Parganas. Bagcha village is presently located near Barrackpur of 24 Parganas. Barendras are indigenous Brahmans of Bengal while the Rarhis have come from outside, north India. Both are different in physical structure. (Senlal was a landlord. The village was named or called after him. This tradition is found in many other cases. Bogura, a district of Bangladesh is from Bogra Saheb, commander of Hussain Shah and also Mymen Singh, a commander under Ruknuddin Shah)

Baidya Brahmin in Bengal : Baidya or Vaidyais a Hindu caste community of Bengal. Baidyas are regarded as the highest Hindu castes along with Brahmins and Kayasthas in the caste system of Bengal During historical times, Brahmin, Baidya and Kayastha together formed the next elite group apart from rulers, in the power structure and all the rulers of Bengal - Palas, Senas, Pathans and Mughals, had to rely on their support. Baidyas shared the knowledge of Sanskrit with Brahmins.[10] These three castes held major landholding and control over education and major professions. Vaidyas hold surnames like Sengupta, Dasgupta, Gupta, Sen-Sharma, etc. The term 'Baidya'/'Vaidya' also literally means a physician in Bengali/Sanskrit,which further corroborates that the caste may have traditionally been named after their profession.
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. -- Mdann 52   talk to me!  14:32, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

History
This article does not have much on the history of the community through the Islamic and British eras.The community was probably the first one in india to take up western education, and played a prominent part in struggle for social reforms and independence struggle. Adding this information to article will greatly enhance the quality of the page.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 15:02, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Raja Krishnachandra
The page was semi protected by some admin while I was trying to add Raja Krishnachandra of Nadia Raj family as a notable people. The Nadia Raj family is a descendant of Bhatta Narayan like the Thakur or Tagore family. Original surname of Krishnachandra Ray was Bandyopadhyay as mentioned. He belonged from a Shakta Bengali family. He is revered as he started Jagadhatri Puja in Bengal. He was a patron Sanskrit learning. Kindly add him. If needed find more relevant sources. http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article5882.html Dasgupta R. Maharaja Krishnachandra: Religion, Caste and Polity in Eighteenth Century Bengal. Indian Historical Review. 2011;38(2):225-242. http://nadia.gov.in/district%20gazetteer/Ch15%20-%20THE%20NADIA%20RAJ.PDF https://www.getbengal.com/details/did-you-know-nadia-s-original-capital-was-matiyari
 * Your edits were problematic, especially since you tried to include Shaktism as a Category. It may be mentioned as a Category under Hinduism, but why did you add it here? Are all followers of Shaktism considered as Bengali Brahmins? No, right! Now, coming to Krishnachandra, he was an elite and a notable in his own right. We are not sure whether we can mention him here as a Bengali Brahmin merely because of their original surname. Please provide a WP:RS where it is clearly mentioned something like 'he was a Brahmin' or 'was born in a Brahmin famiily', or some equivalent statement, and mention the same here, so that we can include his name. Do mention the page number, etc. so that it can be verified as per WP:V. Most of the sources are simply saying they were followers of Shaktism; therefore you need to come up with reliable & verifiable sources supporting that he was indeed considered as a Brahmin. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 16:24, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Kindly check this article http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article5882.html Part 1 of the above article where it is clearly written that his surname was Bandyopadhayay. As I mentioned earlier that Nadia Raj family is a descendant of Bhatta Narayana.


 * Why are you citing the same article again & again; can't you find a proper text by a reliable author. Anyway, I have found one, check this. I am adding his name based on this. Don't engage in unconstructive edits like inclusion of a Category, which is not supposed to be here. Ekdalian (talk) 20:23, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

This article is full of unsourced information, myths and legends
Bengali brahmin being a socially, economically and politically dominant caste in Bengal has been subject of many scholarly studies. But this article consists mainly traditional accounts which have been debunked by many scholars and historians such as RD Banerjee, RC Majumdar , Lokeshawar Basu etc. I am working on adding real history , instead of traditional accounts which are basically myths and legends. I am inviting for some suggestions from experienced editors. Dear Debasish (talk) 08:26, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I do not have any objections but what is the explanation for this edit? TrangaBellam (talk) 08:47, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * "I do not have any objections"

This article has been allowed to stay on Wikipedia with unsourced, poorly sourced or mythical data for long. I want your co-operation to improve this article. "What is the problem with wikilinks?" No problem. I have explained the problem. Please let me know if it's a valid concern or not. Dear Debasish (talk) 09:54, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * As already explained by TrangaBellam in the talk page on Baidya, this is not a valid concern at all. As far as Bengal is concerned, the caste structure is completely different from other parts of the country; therefore, the information & wikilinks are pretty much relevant to the article. You are most welcome if you can come up with other constructive edits or improvements. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 05:57, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * One editor has just made two reverts, then a talk page discussion has been opened regarding improvement of this article, and this page has already been protected from editing ! How would you explain this ? You said you had no objections! Dear Debasish (talk) 13:40, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Indent your posts. You can work on the content in your sandbox and propose it to get included. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:46, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your suggestions.But I think I will wait till I get Extended Confirmed User status. It was too early to get this article protected. Dear Debasish (talk) 14:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)


 * You're late. This page had already been protected before you have replied. Looks like There's disproportionate amount of members of particular castes among influential and senior editors here ! Subjectivity, Bias, and prejudice is very much active in this types of articles. But if you want add citations to unsourced contents, remove unsourced and poorly sourced contents, add real history instead of traditional claims and myths, you surely can. Thanks Dear Debasish (talk) 13:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Your mention of "disproportionate amount of members of particular castes among influential and senior editors here" is a nasty assumption of bad faith, Dear Debasish. Who is it directed at? EdJohnston, who protected the article? Or who? Bishonen &#124; tålk 14:09, 25 September 2021 (UTC).


 * I think is not Indian.So I was surly not directing towards him nor any particular editor. It was too early to get this protected.Thanks. Dear Debasish (talk) 14:19, 25 September 2021 (UTC)


 * You tell me that you're not talking about anybody when you call people here biased and say it's because they favour their own caste? That's not convincing. Don't attack your fellow editors. Bishonen &#124; tålk 14:41, 25 September 2021 (UTC).
 * It's saddening to see that that You're ignoring the whole thread, terming a "deduction" as just "assumption", and reframing my logic. I am not trying to convince you. But please review the article once. It's missing citations and real history,but containig traditional claims (many of which have been debunked by Scholars and historians) and British raj era sources. I think it's a waste of time for a novice editor to touch caste articles. I don't face that much challenge in other articles. Thanks . RegardsDear Debasish (talk) 15:55, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Nobody is objecting your noble goals of basing our article on modern scholarship. Propose your inclusions and exclusions using this template.
 * What is being objected to, is your (a) throwing of un-subtantiated aspersions and (b) edit-warring. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:30, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * You're late. This page had already been protected before you have replied. Looks like There's disproportionate amount of members of particular castes among influential and senior editors here ! Subjectivity, Bias, and prejudice is very much active in this types of articles. But if you want add citations to unsourced contents, remove unsourced and poorly sourced contents, add real history instead of traditional claims and myths, you surely can. Thanks Dear Debasish (talk) 13:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Dear Debasish, your advice would be more helpful if you would propose specific changes. As in 'Change A to B'. If you care about the topic of this article you must have some knowledge about the Bengali Brahmins and hopefully you also have some references to propose. Advice with no specifics will not help us make progress. EdJohnston (talk) 18:16, 25 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your suggestion. I will try to be more specific next time. I was actually talking about traditional accounts to be removed or explicitly mention it's falsehoodness(It has been removed), add citations to history section(which has been given, but it's too short now, more contents can be added), and maintaining the uniformity in lead section with other caste articles (which has been opposed by two editors here).In my first comment I have mentioned about some scholars whose works can be referred too. Further I have read works of Atul Sur, Nihar Ranjan Roy, BS Guha etc regarding history of bengal and anthropological study of bengalis, which can be referred. But I want to gain some experience before touching cast articles, because it is often bringing troubles. Thank you. Regards, Dear Debasish (talk) 13:56, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Traditional accounts
Why are traditional accounts regarding Rarhi, Varendra, Paschatya Vaidika, Dakshinatya Vaidika removed from this page?Mikemarssss (talk) 18:37, 26 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Please See WP:HISTRS . Best Regards. Jiggyziz 🇮🇳Any Help🇮🇳? Contact Me. 09:34, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Brahmakshatriya
The Senas and their descendants probably merged into the Kayastha or Baidya caste groups as Bengal adopted Maithili caste system. So please remove it.Mikemarssss (talk) 04:53, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Regarding deletion of Alpine Aryans theory
Hellow viewers the speciality of the author, who proposed this theory is in the field of Political Science. see here. The theory should be given by Historians or Anthropologist see WP:HISTRS.Thanks; Satnam2408 (talk) 10:46, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Prof. ‪Razia Akter Banu is a political historian in her own right, author of several books, and a scholar at the University of Dhaka. Being a Professor in the Department of Political Science, University of Dhaka, doesn't mean they do not qualify as a historian. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 12:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Quoting from WP:HISTRS "Historians carry out original research, often using primary sources. Historians often have a PhD or advanced academic training in historiography, but may have an advanced degree in a related social science field or a domain specific field". Ekdalian (talk) 13:01, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

He is partially correct. I have sources, would add them later. Thanks Satnam2408 (talk) 13:20, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

I have added. Thanks.Satnam2408 (talk) 14:19, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Satnam2408 (talk) 14:18, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 February 2022
Nitish Sengupta is not a historian. remove his book and the contents regarding his theory. Nobita456 (talk) 14:57, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. It appears he has a Master's degree in history. I suggest you raise your specific concerns at WP:RSN. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:18, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Sengupta is not a historian he is a Economist not a hitorian.Even he dont have any master digree in history. see

Adisura
The whole migration part is a myth where brahmin kulajis mention king Adisura as a vaidya supported by Baidya kulajis but opposed by Kayastha kulaji(which hardly make any sense over historians). The cited source, Inden, and the other two sources which Satnam provided mention Adisura as a vaidya. please give your opinion on why Adusura as a vaidya king should not be added. Nobita456 (talk) 04:40, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * What is the necessity of same discussion again ? TrangaBellam explained to you on Kulin Brahmin talk.Chanchaldm (talk) 08:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * TB raised question regarding that source which was an oral history. but this source which is present in this article also mentioned the same. Thats why I raised another quary. we have four sources that mention Adisura as a Vaidya but we have nothing against it except that Kayastha kulaji claim(undue). Nobita456 (talk) 08:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The whole thing is a fabricated story, better to put under a new section - "Origin myth". If you put Baidya claims, Kayastha claims also need to be mentioned. But is that necessary?Chanchaldm (talk) 10:09, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The kayastha claims are definitely not supported by historians so that makes it WP:UNDUE. But many historians branded Adisura as a Vaidya. this is undoubtedly a myth but we should provide the detailed myth to the readers. Nobita456 (talk) 10:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Since there was a long discussion about this on Kulin brahmin talk page, you better put your counter argument there if you have something new to say, and get consensus.Chanchaldm (talk) 10:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Adisura is also present here. Your suggestion was also good. But please give your views here. Nobita456 (talk) 10:35, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Sena kings and the Nidhanpur Copper Plate
Sena kings were not Bengali brahmins neither became so after coming to Bengal. How does the content relevant here? Please explain.Chanchaldm (talk) 10:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Don't know. But they were Brahmins who had a major contribution in Bengal and almost spend their whole life here. So if we go by this, this should be added here. Nobita456 (talk) 10:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)


 * The sena kings were Brahma-Kshatriya not Brahmins. It is possible that they might have been abosrbed into the Brahmin fold, but would require sources for that. Anecdotally, they might have been absorbed into the Vaid caste since Sen is a Vaid surname now.
 * This copperplate thing is much more relevant since those were actually V'aidik Brahmins that were given land grants per Shin 2018. Doesn't matter if the surnames they had were speculated to be found among Kayasthas now, since old clan names have been replaced with Sanskritised titles in most Brahmin communities of India. These Brahmins settled in Nidhanpur region of Sylhet which is considered to be part of Bengal. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Brahmmakshatriyas are also Brahmins but in a warrior role as far I know. Your given source is reliable, I added it, please check it,Thanks. Nobita456 (talk) 13:50, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks and welcome. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:40, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello Chanchaldm, edit warring is always a matter of concern. As rightly pointed out by Fylindfotberserk, "Doesn't matter if the surnames they had were speculated to be found among Kayasthas now, since old clan names have been replaced with Sanskritised titles in most Brahmin communities of India. These Brahmins settled in Nidhanpur region of Sylhet which is considered to be part of Bengal." Why are you edit warring on relevant content, when you have a clear lack of consensus on removing the same?? Ekdalian (talk) 18:14, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Ekdalian, you still wanting to include that racists contents? and why you are are giving wrong interpretation of Fylindfotberserk? His source is reliable not like yours,which TB also raised concern. Kayasthas use this surname is WP:UNDUE. Chanchaldm did right to revert your POVs. Nobita456 (talk) 18:50, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Nobita, as mentioned in the other talk page, will ignore your disruptive comments till you get a clean chit from the serious allegations against you by multiple experienced editors at WP:AE.
 * Chanchaldm, will wat for your response. Thanks! Ekdalian (talk) 20:09, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Fylindfotberserk's suggestion has been incorporated and that has been acknowledged by him. Please share your opinion about Sena kings. Thanks.Chanchaldm (talk) 07:02, 28 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Ekdalian you don't need to repeat that everywhere. ongoing AE and fake allegations by you on me is not relevant to this discussion. Nobita456 (talk) 20:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Chanchaldm, I completely agree with you; the Sena kings were never considered as Bengali Brahmins. Thanks! Ekdalian (talk) 12:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Food issue
Can we have section on food practices…namely a comment on why Bengali Brahmins eat fish counter to some other Brahmins in India ? 192.184.133.221 (talk) 16:28, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Can you add something about the food habits of Bengali Brahmins? Mikemarssss (talk) 08:54, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Islamic aggression in lead
Ekdalian, CharlesWain we should also do the same in English article. What do you guys think? কবির চৌধুরী ১১ (talk) 08:08, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * What is this all about?Chanchaldm (talk) 16:11, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Related Ethnic Groups
Also add Assamese brahmins in the section. Mikemarssss (talk) 16:05, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Edit Request
In the article’s infobox, can West bengal (uncapitalised b) be changed to West Bengal? I’m unable to edit it myself due to the ongoing block.

Kind regards AllfadrOdinn (talk) 14:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Done ✅. Chanchaldm (talk) 04:00, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Can you add Assamese brahmins in related ethnic groups please? 2405:201:8016:DA22:FDE7:2638:CF3D:2061 (talk) 14:47, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I propose merging Kulin Brahmin into Bengali Brahmin. These two articles are so identical. I think we can just add a seperate section in Brahmin Brahmin article to describe the Kulin Brahmins who are just a sub-caste of Bengali Brahmins.JudeB5 (talk) 19:24, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Wrong info: Bhattacharya is a title, not a surname, unrelated to gotra
The fifth surname for Rarhi Kulins is Ghoshal, not Bhattacharya. Bhattacharya is a title given to a senior teacher and can be any one of the Bandyopadhyay, Chattopadhyay, Gangopadhyay, Mukhopadhyay or Ghoshal; even Shrotriya Brahmins can have Bhattacharya a title. 111.93.130.157 (talk) 08:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Bhattacharya is mentioned as per reliable source! Please provide a reliable source (modern scholarly work by reliable author) supporting your claim! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 08:54, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 March 2024
The five Brahmin clans, which later became known as Mukherjees, Chatterjees, Banerjees, Gangulys and Ghosal/Ghoshal, were each designated as Kulina ("superior") in order to differentiate them from the more established local Brahmins. Sovanwd (talk) 07:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Please provide reliable and verifiable source (modern scholarly work by reliable author) supporting your claim! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 07:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Kulin Brahmin
The five Brahmin, which later became known as Mukherjees, Chatterjees, Banerjees, Gangulys and Ghosal/Ghoshal, were each designated as Kulina ("superior") in order to differentiate them from the more established local Brahmins. Sovanwd (talk) 07:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)