User:LukeEmily/sandbox

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)

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.

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".

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.

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. In the practical political context, the word meaning edges towards Kshatriya although in Hindu religious texts rajaputa is closer to Shudra.

Some emigrant Brahmins may have been involved in Rajputising tribes to the Rajput status. Despite this, Vajpayi states that, periodically, Brahmins have characterized Rajput as self-seekers, and stated that they are not real Kshatriyas. 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.). 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.

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.

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 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. 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.