Jump to content

Talk:Nair/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

The material refered as copyrighted is quoted from public domain work by Dr B Nair and is not subject to copyright. Thanks

In this case you may restore the text, but you must indicate source and the fact that it is public domain. Otherwise someone else may remove it. Mikkalai 05:26, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
By the way, please do not interfere with votes for deletion. Please read wikipedia policies. You may be blocked from editing for destructive actions. Mikkalai 05:26, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

OF THE ORIGIN OF NAIRS there are many theories as regards the origin of nayars.apart from those discussed in the main page some scholars have sought to relate nairs to the nayyars of rajaputana and have tried to put forward a theory of north indian origins for these people.but majority of the scholars are of the view that nairs are an indigenous(well are any people indigenous?)population related to other south indian populations.

Jāthinirnayam

Jāthinirnayam was written by Sree Narayana Guru in the year 1914. He was an Ezhava.

I think Sree Narayana Guru wrote Jathinirnayam with the idea "one caste, one religion, one God for all" and because of that he mentioned many non-Nair castes as Nair it that book. Many other fake stories are given the book called 'Nairezhava Charithram' by Kumaraswamy. Who are these people to make changes Nair community? Who are these people to decide how Nairs should live and whom Nairs should marry?

Nayarakhanda

From Journal of Indian History, Volume 43 (1965): "The term Nayarakhanda is the Prakrit form of Nagara- khanda and denoted the territorial division of the Nagas."

From Semiotics of culture by Irene P. Winner and Donna Jean Umiker: "In India the river Nairanjana was considered to be the abode of Nagas and bore the epithet Naga-nadi (Edgerton 1953)."

Sambandham in Nair community

From Castes and Tribes of Southern India, Volume 1 by Edgar Thurston, K. Rangachari: "The better classes among the Nayars revolted against the degrading custom thus sprang up, especially in north Malabar, of making Sambandham more or less formal contract, approved and sanctioned by the Karnavar(senior male of the Tarawad) to which the lady belonged. The Karnavan, "Mr.Raman Menon writes, "and the women his household choose the Bride, and communicate their choice to intending bridegroom through the third party; they may not, dare not speak personally to him in the matter. Sambandham ceremony all over the Keralam are in the main the same. As there are different local names denoting marriage, so there may found local variations in the performance of the ceremony."

From Pacific Affairs, Volume 63: "They passed a resolution affirming that the act will materially add to the self-respect of the Nairs generally and Nair ladies particularly. The Nayar Act of 1925 got similar support from Nair women."

From Proceedings of the ... Annual Conference ..., Volume 18: "Many of the Brahmins had no objection to recognizing the logical consequence that inheritance must follow marriage and the desirability of conferring a statutory right of inheritance on the wife and children of a Nair woman. But the difference of opinion was regarding the time when the right should begin to operate. Raman Thampi replied that "I admit that the state of affairs is a great convenience to Potti's community. But this is more disgraceful to Nairs and also an inconvenience to them. The Nairs allowed the system for a long time and we are not to allow it anymore. My community will not allow its women to be sacrificed for the convenience of Potti's community. It should be better for Potti's community to meet the requirement in some other way. It would not be compatible with self-respect and future well-being of my community to allow Nair women to be wives of the members of Potti's community. My community feels it degrading that its females should accept the position of wives without a chance of inheriting the property of their husbands."

From Caste and Territory in Malabar by Eric J.Miller: "Special ties linked with military subcastes of Nairs and castes above them. Among Nambuthiris, only the eldest son was permitted to marry within the caste. But he and his younger brothers could take wives from Royal families or from superior Nair subcastes. The Royal castes were all exogamous: their women were married to Nambuthiris, while their men took Nair wives. Such hypergamy was practiced on a restricted scale among upper Nair subcastes. Since the Nambuthiri and Royal castes were much smaller, most Nair women had Nair husbands."

Nutrality of the classification is questionable

The term Nair was synonymous with the word Shurdas in Kerala from historical times. Misusing Wikipedia to reclassify the community is unnecessary and shameful. This can only lead to incessant disputes and ill repute to our community. The views should be expressed only as differing views not a concrete "classification". The link box to Kshatriyas should be removed.

Manoj

The term was not synonymous with shudra...nair was a caste in itself...only during ceremonies and for ritual purposes they were considered sudras...when asked a namboodiri also wudnt say tht a nair was a sudra..he wud say tht the other guy was a nair...nairs were the warriors of kerala and show all the atributes of kshatriyas..the rajahs of kerala are nairs after all who perform hiranyagarbha at their coronation to become raghuvanshi kshatriyas....manu

Reply to above:

Manu, you seem to be missing the point like many here who are endlessly arguing that Nairs are (or were) Kshatriyas. Many Nairs were no doubt soldiers; however that assertion should not be confused with the 'warrior classes' of ancient Bharath. Every army has the rank and file from the lower sections of society. The armies were not comprised of Kshatriyas alone. Using that as the point of argument we cannot rewrite history here in Wikipedia and hope to henceforth call the Nairs to be a “warrior class”. If this contention is all about only of being soldiers, then so were the Tiyyas, in the folklores of Malabar. The true warrior class in ancient Kerala were different; they were called the Kshatriyar and were primarily the ruling classes (thampis/thampurans, varmas) in the three pre-independent states. Nairs are not varmas or thampi/thampurans. Nairs were commonly referred to as 'Shudrar' in the vernacular dialects of Malabar and I am sure in the south too. The true Kshatriyar were a minority group as compared to the Nairs in Kerala. Such was the royal family of Travancore for example. Were they Nairs? Or are they still Nairs? I have been educated that they are Kshatriyar.

What we are seeing here is the old ‘madampi’ style attitude being propagated by some individuals (..Nairs? I dont know) who have possibly been educated, as to be on the web, I suppose, but not enlightened enough to accept that Nairs were truly Shudras. Pity these guys who waste their time trying to reengineer our lineage using Wikipedia – possibly the worst medium to do that, because all these edits and arguments are only sowing seeds of disbelief in the reputation built by the real achievers of our community. I only wish that this time was more well spent on developing good articles on personalities from the Nair/Menon/Kurup communities who were real achievers and role models for the rest.

Manoj (Manu_Kurup)

Dear Manoj,

You are the one here missing the point please respond to the above quote which says that the Varmas themselves who claim Kshatriya status were initially feudal landlords among Nairs who underwent Hiranyagarbha to achieve the same.The Zamorins of Calicut were initially Eradi,which is a Nair surname and still is..they were the hereditary rulers of Eranad.The Samantha Kshatriyas are all Nairs.When Brahmin refer to Nairs as being Shudras it is only because they do not wear the thread and nothing else.God knows why you are so adamant on propagating hate.It is a wise thing to put forth an argument but let that be a good one..let it not be driven by any ulterior motive..answer to Manu first and say that Manu who has quoted above you is wrong!And as you said there have been true achievers for the community true..and we are proud to recognise this but let their ancestory not be deformed and placed into such a shape so as to allow room for misinterpretation form a third person who has no idea about the caste.Even the Brahmins used to consider the Samanthas as Kshatriyas..they are not known as Samantha Kshatriyas for no reason. Ancient scripts have revealed that initially there were six hundred tharas and all of these were ruled by Nairs.After the fall of the Chera kingdom the lands were slowly taken away and many of them lost their position.Others who were linked to Cheraman Perumal lingered on.. the Zamorin..Perumpaddapu..Venad..etc.If someone could throw an axe and raise some land this technology would be very useful in making crowded cities feel less crowded..we wouldn't need dykes and all that. And if i perform a ritual and distance myself from my past..i wonder if i would still be the wise guy.

Rajeev Rajendran Nair.


A new perspective Lets us go back to the Chera - Chola Wars, although the Chaver incidents are recorded, there is no specific mention of the community behind it or that Nairs were the people conducting the Chaver attacks. Nairs do not figure in history at that point of time.

Also Nair is not a caste, although attempts have been made to classify them within the Hindu Caste system. Look North and you will find the answer.

eg. 1. When Shivaji was to be coronated in Maharashtra, the Maharashtrian Brahmins refused to attend the rituals stating that he was not a Kshatriya, and a brahmin had to be brought from Varanasi to conduct the ceremony. Shivaji was called the Saka king. The Maratha clan which he belonged to had warriors, shepherds, farmers - people belonging to different professions. 2. The Rajputs of Rajasthan are not vedic Aryan - rather descedants from Hephalites (White Huns) and Scythians. 3. There are surnames similar to Nair all along the Indian Subcontinent, stretching right up to Europe. 4. The origin of this particular name could be of the tribe of Neuri (a Scythian tibe). The Scythians were forerunners of the Saxons as they split up and spread east and west. This is the reason why many Indian Surnames are similar to the Saxon surnames found in Europe. Eg. 

   Europe                      India
   Bueller (Germany)           Bhullar (Punjab)
   Mann (Germany)              Mann (Punjab)
   Mc Nair (Irish/Scottish)    Nair(Kerala), Nayar/Nayyer(Punjab)

(The list is long)


The question of Nairs being Shudras or impure Kshatriyas, who do not belong to the Varna classification of Manusmiriti. As they were assimilated like other Mleccha warrior tribes into India (where they came as conquerers), they were given the role of Kshatriyas yet not the position.

Thus I would propose the view that, far from being a caste in the Hindu social heirarchy, it is a separate community, with people of various professions included.

I object to the view of some people that the physical characteristics of the Nairs are different from the other races in Kerala due to the 'Sambhandam' with Namboothiris. This would not be as frequent or common as made out to be. I come from an excellent tharavad in central Travancore and there is no record or memory of any Sambhandams in any branches of our Families for generations. I would rather claim that the original physical characteristics of the nairs have deteriorated on mixing with Namboothiris or natives.

As a footnote to the Serpent worship of the Nairs, there is a Legend recorded by the Greek historian Herodotus that the Nueri were driven out of their northern homeland in the steppes by and Invasion of Serpents. Food for thought??

Can we go beyond the limited perception of history provided by the so called State Manuals or records like 'keralothpathi' written by "religious pseudo-historians" - hey I think i have coined a new term here.

I have some additional information on the scythian origin of Nairs; I have copied the same here:

NAGA/NAICK Another version claimed Heracles and a half serpent (mermaid like) being as the ancestors of the Scythians. Both have ties with similar stories among other Ural-Altaic legends. Starting with the serpent like mother of the Scythians, who in India was called Naga, by the local Scythian incomers. The NAK suffix and root word also has a very rich set of meanings in the Ugrian languages, including ( 4, feminine, joint-vertabra, genetive - source, navel, rule of important person.) To a lesser extent the root word is part of most U.A. and Sumerian languages. Several of the local Scythian tribes use this word for chief/ruler "Naick". Similarly the Ugrians Nay=queen, Nayer=king. Hungarian Nyek tribe. (Scythian NAICK-erde tribe next to the Aral Sea.)

Can anyone get hold of this book: 955 Raman Menon, K. ‘The Scythian Origin of the Nairs’, Malabar Quarterly Review, Vol.I, No.2, June 1902.

I have noticed that excerpts from this post was included in the main article (by someone) and then deleted again (by someone). Any one who has some constructive discussion to make can contact/mail me on prashnair@rediffmail.com/prash.nair@dbbcg.com

PRASHANT

Reply to Manoj:well u seem to have got a few facts wrong...firstly thampis are nairs...u will see in the poetry composed about marthanda varma's story..subhadra questions rmana thampi y he wants to be a kshatriya when he is a nair thampi...secondly the kshatriyas of travancore are not as thety are now...in the past only the rajah was the kshatriya..the rest ie his sisters and brother, sons , wife etc were all nairs...even he was a nair..but during his coronation thru hiranyagarbha he wud be elevated to kshatriya...

i agree with the next post that even the marathas were not considered kshatriyas...tht was cz the brahmins said that in the kali yuga there were only brahmins and sudras..perhaps this leads to the answer as to y nairs are called sudras...thirdly the armies of travancore consisted ONLy of nairs...refer to travancore state manual by nagam aiya..it was called the nair brigade....get ur facts right beofre u write them down...

thrisly as said in the next post wht the greek traveler or whtever said is also relevant..there is truth in th efact that nairs are nagas as conmfirmed by travancore staate manual by velu pillai...and that they came to kerala to a mannu-ariye- shala..they brought serpent worship with them and at their first settlement built aserpent temple..ie mannu ariye shal;a became manarshala...theirldy cheras who ruled kerala were nairs...chera is the tamil word for naga...analyse these facts. Besides historians say that the nairs were dravidians due to which they were called sudras....also u say that the rock edicts dont mention the nairs...indeed they do mention the naire warriors and also calls them keralaputras. - manu

Be factual in classification

Again somebody tried to classify Nairs as Kshatriyas. Kshatriya is part of the Varna system propagated by Brahmins. Brahmins classified Nairs as Sudras. Whether you like it or not it is a fact. But Nairs were proud warrior class of Kerala. So do not subscribe to the Brahminical hierarchy. For God’s sake do not classify Nairs as Kshatriyas. It is against the historical fact. In the early part of 20th century, social reformers fought against this classification. Nairs were Warrior class and all the time Warrior class and nothing else. Brahmins did this mischief with the Marathas and the Kayasthas also. Subhas Chandra Bose, Jyoti Basu, Amitabh Bachan, Jaiprakash Narain, Rajendra Prasad belonged to the Kayastha caste. Shivaji, Y.B. Chavan and Sharad Pawar belong to Maratha caste. But Brahmin classed them as Sudras. But they were Kayasthas and Marathas, the powerful ruling elite in their lands. The alien Brahmins mischievously classed them at a lower level in their own pet system. So why we should fall prey to their machinations. A present day classifier can never reclassify them because the documents say otherwise. So go back to the times before the arrival of the Brahmins to Kerala. So Nairs are the Warriors of the land, a fact which has strong evidence. So do not rely on Varna system. som123

It so happens that excepting the rajputs and the royal families of kerala the brahmins didnot class any other warrior clans also as kshatriya and also that these royal familes of kerala were originally derived from the Nair caste itself. and oh yes there is strong evidence to show that indeed they are the descendants of the Chera kings and ancient scriptures refer to them as 'Naka lords',if this isnt Nagavamshi then what is?Today Nairs take pride in ascribing to an Aryan lineage which is probably why the Naga was sidelined. - manu

WAIT A MINUTE....WHTEVER IS WRITTEN ABOVE WITH MY NAME UNDERSIGNED IS NOT WRITTEN BY ME - manu

Just recently, I created an article titled "List of Nair Tharavadus".

The article "List of Nair Tharavadus" is designed as a list for past and present nair tharavadus in Kerala. Assistance will be required by Wikipedia Users to help expand this list. The tharavadu listing is currently split in roughly district/ major city subheadings. In time, as the list grows, the sub-headings can be further refined, and new articles can be created for example "Nair tharavdus in Kasaragod". Furthermore, the links for articles of each tharavadu can be created in due course, providing information about the tharavadus history, origin, location, etc.

In this way Wikipedia can become a mine of information for individuals who seek to learn more about the nair heritage.

It must also be kept in mind that Wikipedia is a universal online encyclopedia, and as such, the material provided must be relevant and accurate.

NOTE: It would be much appreciated if the tharavadus listed are in fact nair tharavadus, as it has been known for families in the past to adopt the surname "Nair" even though they are not of nair caste.

Please help to update and add new tharavadus to the list.

Thankyou

Kshatriya knight 06:44, 12 May 2006 (UTC) 03:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

ÝΠ==Points on the main article==

The current article could mislead readers to believe that historically there were the Namboodiris and then the rest of the caste-ranked Hindus in old Kerala were all in general Nairs. This is an erroneous representation of the complex caste system. There were/are many castes equivalent to the Kshatriyas and Vaishyas between the Namboodiris and the Nairs. The old royal families of Travancore and Tirukochi were/are Kshatriyas. Thampis are not Nairs. Thampis are a Kshatriya clan, although they did occasionally take Nair women as brides, as did the Namboodiris, through the practice of Sambandham.

Nairs were people who were not given the right to rule by the Brahman..Ezhavas/Thiyaas are Shudras.The practise of untouchability by Namboothiris prevails also to the Iyers/Iyengars as well..and even the tulu brahmin in addition to the Nairs.The only vaishyas in Kerala are below the Nairs..Vaniya..in fact they are fallen Nairs and they wear the sacred thread .Thampi is a Nair caste and Nair is a Kshatriya caste.The Varmas where the chosen few who were conferred the right to rule By the Brahman

Rajeev Rajendran Nair 17 February 2006

You will find you are wrong there. Thampis are Nairs. The king would marry a Nair lady and as per the matriarchal system the children would belong to the House of their mother, and hence to the Nair caste. And thampis didnt "occasionaly" marry nair ladies...they married only nairs ladies. Manu

Thampi is a nair surname.It is not the equivalent of Varma. Thampi is the son of a monarch where as unnithan and valiathan are the kins of kshatriyas who have no claim to the throne. these surnmaes are almost exclusively confined to erstwhile travancore

Nair Community's Role in Caste Emancipation

The Nair community played a frontal role in the area of the emancipation of lower castes, most notably for the policy allowing all Hindus access to temples. Could somebody please chip in with details on this? I don't think the material would be difficult to find. --Lettherebelight 14:01, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

To an extent considering the role of Nairs in Communism movement and also the fact that one of the founding fathers of Dravidian movement was a Nair(T M Nair of Justice party?) Nairs did a play a major role in movement against caste/feudal hierarchy. However, so did some of the Namboothiris. And the people they fought against were feudal Nairs, Namboothiris and Iyers. So things are bit intermixed here. -Manjunatha ( 18 Sept 2005)

I beg you not to confuse the caste emancipation movement with the Communist and Dravidian movements. Communism's impact was felt much later in Kerala, and the Dravidian movement had very little impact in Kerala. Maybe, Namboothiris helped in caste emancipation too, but this page is about Nairs, not Namboothiris. There may have been (and there still may be) feudal Nairs opposed to caste emancipation. But that does not mean, the contributions of community stalwarts like Mannathu Padmanabhan should not be included. --Lettherebelight 05:46, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Bhagat Singh was a proud atheist but he is the pride of religious/fundamentalist Sikhs too. A person rejects caste identities but he's the pride of that caste. Nobody sees the irony here. I'm not confused. If you are expecting somebody to write about Nairs role both in the regidity of caste system and the emancipation thereafter then you are just echoing my thougts. But if you want to show only the good side, well, I beg to differ. --Manjunatha (21 Sept 2005)

Nobody is preventing you from writing about the negative side. --Lettherebelight 10:34, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I would prefer the person who writes positive things also write about negative things. Atleast that way, the article would sound more NPOV. Don't you see some people indeed get frustrated with one-sided article and try to vandalize it with only the opposite side? Anyaway, I'm certainly not an expert when it comes to Nairs, however, I do know few things. --Manjunatha (28 Sept 2005)

Okay, I get your point. Though NPOV is a requirement, it may so happen that a person may have knowledge only about the positive aspects. As long as the article stays objective, a postive comment will not affect the NPOV of the article.

--Lettherebelight | പ്രകാശമുണ്ടാകട്ടെ | Talk 09:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Mannadiars

Mannadiars of palghat follow patrilineal system of inheritance. Malabar manual by William Logan may be referred to

Are Nairs the Descendants or Ancestors of Newars?

nairs like rajputs of northindia come to the political and military areana in 5th and 9th century AD, AD 1st centuries north india as well as southindian politics changed, budiisam and jainisam got upper hand .shiva vaishnava sect lost their power and good percentage of vedic ksatriyas became followewrs of sreebudha and jina(both were from ksatriya clans).and we can see the power strugle between the brahmanas and kshtriyas in vedic time it self, story of vishamitra maharshi and parasurama are example.then lot of forigen figthers comes to india and they became hindus.huns ,sithiyas,yavanas,shakas etc.some of them accepted hinduisam in mount abu and became rajputs.thus we can see that early ksathiryas not actualy from vedic kshtriyas.guptas.maruyas are some example.we can see that all the royals of kerala comes from nair clans except 3 brahmin naduvazis(ambalapuzha devanarayanan,edappaly nambiyathiri,vegndu nampidi).and all high sub sect nairs have closs blood relations with namputiris.and we can see that not only casts even sub sect also keep strict polution rules.there were some namputri sects that have no right to eat and bath with some high class namputhiris. and certain nairs dont allow some lower sect to touch their kinnaru" and "panthibhojanam" also not allowed, therewere more than 100 nair subsects in olden days kiriyathil, swarupikal, illathu etc have high status.some lower sects got nair subtitle to avoid untouchability.but most of the nairs did ksthirya duties and they allways carried swords(british forcefully stopped this practies and clossed all the kalaries.but like their rajputs brothers they fought aganist all the inveders . they lost to british only because of their suppirer armss like canon. I would be inclined to think that they are descendants, since the Newars settled the Kathmandu valley in the 3rd or 4th century AD. However, it could be possible that the Nairs or Newars had a common ancestral group, which split - one group remaining in the north, and the other moving south. I am inclined to think that architectural traditions would only happen once a group has settled in one area for a long time. In this case, Nairs can only be descendants since Nair architechture closely resembles Newar architecture, and could only have developed from already existing Newar architecture. These are just musings, if anyone can find concrete sources, it would be helpful. --Vivin 05:09, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It appears that no one has information on the above? :) -- Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

The better proof would be Y-chromosome test of Nair men(without Namboothiri ancestry). I don't have much data on this. But the one I have shows haplogroup H, a Dravidian stock. This haplogroup is mostly found in South India. I suppose Newars are Mongoloid or East Asian. -Manju

Interesting. Do you have more information? Better yet, is there any way I can get in touch with you? Are you a wikipedia user? --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

Of course you can contact me with my wikipedia user id. -Manjunatha Arpalmane

To manjunath

I have another chart showing the haplogroup distribution among indian populations. The H haplogroup distribution does not clarify the racial origin neither IndoAryan nor Dravidian. it is the R1a1 and R1b3 that are better indicators. I have the chart, but could not load it to this talk page.

Can somebody advise

Prashant

To Prashant That was a year old assumption. Many genetic studies have come out after that. That has ruled out Indo-Aryan/Dravidian exclusive Haplogroups. Haplogroup H, along with R1a1 is observed across caste and across regions throughtout India. There is no Dravidian or Aryan lineage. In fact, all Indians belong to the same gene pool. By the way, R1b3 was never part of the pre-historic gene pool. No studies have found any R1b3 among Brahmins(supposed to be the least mixed with outsiders) but only among non-Brahmin castes and among Lambadis. And one needs a great imagination to dub R1b3 as Indo-Aryan as it's the predominant lineage of Western Europe and not that of Eastern Europe/Central Asia(supposed to be the homeland of Indo-European people). In fact, predominant R1b Basques are not even Indo-European speaking people but supposed to be the oldest population of Western Europe, so you can figure out how much R1b and Indo-Aryan(An IE people) related.

Now, nobody talks about "race" when it comes to IE speaking Indians and Dravidian speaking Indians. Anyway, what is your point?

Manjunatha (7 Jul 2006)

This is another crazy christian theory.Nairs are Nagas..'Naka lords'.They are the sons of Rishi Kashyapa and Kadru.The Nagas were themselves pretty much Aryan.Many Rajput houses like the Ramgarhia claim descent from the Nagas.The kings of Kashmir were Naga.This is probably the origin of Chera..meaning snake in Malayalam.The similarity in Architecture is because of the spread of Buddhism toward the South as Buddhism did influence every piece of architecture at the time.Also remember the Nagas themselves were ruling for quite a long period in the North.Only later did so many other elements come in..Islam,Christianity etc.

Rajeev Rajendran Nair 17 February 2006

Incidentally the Nagas are NOT aryans....nagas are mongloid people manu

Nairs brought to Kerala from Orissa

I couldn't find any basis for this theory. The text also talks about a war between the "Northern" and "Southern" kingdoms in Kerala (as two separate kingdoms). There has never been such a classification. The kingdoms that ruled Kerala (around the sangam age) were the Ays, Cheras and Cholas. There has been no record of any kingdom "importing" people from Orissa. Also, it seems highly unlikely - why would they want to go all the way to Orissa? What connection did they have with Orissa? Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്) 23:19, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC) Well maybe they mean the Nairs migrated from Orissa. Bringing them from such a distant land as Orissa seems very unlikely as u pointed out. Maybe they just migrated. And there are theories they came from Bengal as well.Manu

This is another crazy christian theory.Nairs are Nagas..'Naka lords'.They are the sons of Rishi Kashyapa and Kadru.The Nagas were themselves pretty much Aryan.Many Rajput houses like the Ramgarhia claim descent from the Nagas.The kings of Kashmir were Naga.This is probably the origin of Chera..meaning snake in Malayalam.The similarity in Architecture is because of the spread of Buddhism toward the South as Buddhism did influence every piece of architecture at the time.Only later did so many other elements come in..Islam,Christianity etc.

Rajeev Rajendran Nair 17 February 2006

Kalaripayattu

The page for that martial art has become embroiled in a major POV over whether it can be regarded as an ancestor to the various Chinese arts. However that controversy ends up being resolved, the tone taken in this article on this subject definitely takes a non-neutral POV. 165.247.175.182 03:18, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

I think the current version is more NPOV. It says that "some people hold the view". --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്) 01:31, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
From Wikipedia:Neutral point of view:

There's a temptation to rephrase biased or opinion statements with weasel words: "Many people think John Doe is the best baseball player."....By attributing the claim to a known authority, or substantiating the facts behind it, you can avoid these problems.

JFD 05:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Thetruth/209.86.122.188

Please stop deleting information from this article and vandalizing it. If you have issues with the information listed in the article, please discuss it here. At the very least, please provide an explanation for your changes. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

Nairs were Sudras?

220.238.122.135 02:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)The only factor which indicates that Nairs are Sudras is the case of untouchability. However, Namboothiris were considered the most orthodox brahmins in India, and they seldom associated themselves with even other brahmins. They considered anyone who wasn't a Namboothiri to be subordinate to them in the Caste system, even other brahmins, who couldn't enter their illam (house). Furthermore, Nairs were the pioneers and practitioners of Kalaripayattu, a form of martial arts. It cannot be disputed. I repeat, it cannot be disputed, that Nairs were warriors, who served kings by controlling and protecting large areas of the kingdom. They ruled the towns and villages that were under the kings control, and fought invaders from abroad. This was the duty and profession of the Nairs. This was the duty and profession of Kshatriyas. Nairs also considered Ezhavars and Tiyas to be untouchable, since they had jobs as workers in those days, occupying a subordinate position to Nairs. The worker caste is considered to be the sudra caste in the North Indian caste system, whilst warriors were considered to be Kshatriyas. All in all, it is correct to say that Nairs were Kshatriyas, given their position in society as rulers and warriors. The fact that Nairs could not touch Namboothiris (although Nair women could wed Namboothiri males) is due to the strict and orthodox beliefs and values of Namboothiris, rather than as being a sign of Nair subordination.

Yes, it's even difficult to believe Tiyas were untouchables once. However, it's upto you to decide whether you are a shudra or some other caste. My wife thinks, a Nair herself, that Nairs are Vaishyas. The reason being there are distinct Kshatriya families. However, some of other Nairs and perhaps you too, consider themselves Kshatriya considering they were the soldiers(So were Ezhavas especially in northern Kerala). However, what about Brahmins? What did they think about Nairs? "Pure Shudras".
Let's see the technicalities. "Manu Smriti", the supreme authority over caste divisioins, declared that all Dravidians were Shudras(degraded from their Kshatriya position). In the initial days of caste system, the farmers were also considered as Vaishyas. However, as time passed only traders have remained part of Vaishyas. So you can see a proper division of castes along Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra(farmers, cowherds, artisans etc) in North-India. The division of castes in South India was entirely different. Keeping with the spirit of Manusmriti it was divided along "Pure Shudras" and "impure Shudras". In this way, Nairs were higher above other Malayali castes.(Mind you, many merchant castes of Kerala may not agree with it, so do Tiyas who have theoritical knowledge of castes and consider Nairs as their equals).
More over, Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya castes were called 'twice born' or 'dvija' castes. These three castes were required to undergo "sacred thread" ceremony. I'm not sure even the Kshatriyas of South India had this system.

--Manjunatha 4 Aug 2005 (16:16 IST)

I have added a section to the article, called "Kshatriyas or Sudras?", that highlights the issue. You are welcome to add to it, or change it. I've tried to keep it as NPOV as possible. One major thing that I've noticed is that it's nearly impossible to compare the caste system of Kerala to the rest of India, because it was so different. Nairs seem to have some elements of Sudra (Namboothiris considered being touched by a Nair to be polluting), and Kshatriya (they were a ruling and martial class) castes. I have added points supporting both views. Also, in future, please sign your posts with the tildes, since it helps to know who I'm responding to. Also, you can indent by using one or more colons. It makes it easier to followe the discussion. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)
Yes, it's difficult to compare our caste system with that of North-India. Well, not only Kerala but whole South India. We don't come under the normal definition of caste system as in North-India. Of course, caste itself was never part of South Indian society until the arrival of Brahmins. However, it's possible that we had classes.
In Europe, any able bodied man could fight. However, the influence of caste is such that we are prejudiced to think that whoever fought in the past were Kshatriyas or only Kshatriyas could fight and nobody else. But there are many exceptions to these sacred rules. India's so-called golden age was 'Gupta Period' and Guptas were/are declared Vaishyas. Shivaji was actually part of Kunbi community(farmers and thus declared shudras) but declared a Maratha during coronation. I think there was a Nair who became king of some region in Kerala after undergoing 'HiranyaGarbha Kriya' to become a Kshatriya(I forgot the region and name of that king).
Considering these facts and hopefully understanding the absurdity of the caste system, I would expect the tone of the article should be dismissive of the caste identity. I would prefer to use the term 'declared'.
What I'm observing the favoured communities of the past(with 100% reservation in education or with 100% reservation in administration) taking pride and deprived communities taking pride in the victimization(by default, it makes them GOOD) and suitably appropriating loose historical findings to claim a past greatness. Well, it's possible these prejudices give these people a kind of superiority complex or positive outlook and help them to live with confidence. However, Wikipedia is not a place to achieve it.
Here we would like to see a more objective analysis. The issues of superiority and inferiority of any caste/race/sexes must be suitably weighed against the cultural prejudices and geographical boundaries. There is a beautiful anecdote in Hinduism, 'Koopa Mandooka' or 'Frog of a well', for narrow minded people or views. This should be applied to Hindu customs and society too.
Well, I'm not going to edit or add anything to the article. You should be able to do it. I've noticed that you have modified the origin of Kalaripayat. I really appreciate it. I apologize for not signing the previous post.

--Manjunatha (17 Aug 2005 11:57 IST)

I didn't come back to this article until a few days ago, and that's when I noticed the message about "Nairs are not sudras" and your response to it. That's why I went ahead and added that section, because I thought some sort of perspective is necessary. Also, I really would like you to add more information to this article. I also detest any sort of perceived caste/class superiority or arrogance. I've tried my best to make this article NPOV, but if you feel some parts are POV, you are welcome to edit them. In the article, I was merely trying to state that Nairs seem to have attributes of both classes, but ultimately, it is comparing apples and oranges since the south indian caste system was wholly different from the north indian one. And as you said, South india was a classless society until the arrival of the Brahmins. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)nairs were kshtriyas but to avoid untouchability certain serving class also got nair title that degraded all nairs. one another thing all the royals/naduvazis of kerala comes from nair clans except 3 namputhiri naduvazis(edappally,ambalapuzha,veganad nampidi).all the venad rajas doing "hiraniyagarpham" so namputhiries give them titles like sooryavamsha etc(ofcourse after receiving golden "gomathava" as fees).


Panicker is only a title that is used in combat to identify a person by his location as having to represent an army.For example, Raghava Mannadiar becomes Chandothu Panikkar etc.Similarly Meledath Raghavan Nair can be Meledathu Panikkar.Lets cut the crap and someone learn some history.Again what Sudra jobs did Nairs do?The Nairs who did SUDRA JOBS ARE ALL veenu Nair(fallen nairs) and therefore they all have reservation today Chakkala,Velethedathu,Villakithala.There are also Nairs who probably fell to the vaisya varna in between...Vaniya,Vaniga Vaisya(and they also wear the sacred thread!!)weird..again the thread is worn even by vishwakarmas etc who come in between Nairs and ezhavas.Where does that place us.

Rajeev Rajendran Nair.

hey only certain vishwakarmas are allowed the sacred thread...it was a sort of 'avagasham' given to them. it is like the ancient custom that oil for the uise of the temple cud be bought only from a christians shop- manu

Chuttran

68.192.203.65 insists on adding the following line:

"Nairs are Sudras ... they are known as Chuttran in the south". I couldn't find the term "Chuttran" anywhere. Plus, the "Kshatriyas or Sudras" question is being addressed later in the article. --71.104.193.32

Which Namboothiri house do you belong to??


Panicker is only a title that is used in combat to identify a person by his location as having to represent an army.For example, Raghava Mannadiar becomes Chandothu Panikkar etc.Similarly Meledath Raghavan Nair can be Meledathu Panikkar.Lets cut the crap and someone learn some history.Again what Sudra jobs did Nairs do?The Nairs who did SUDRA JOBS ARE ALL veenu Nair(fallen nairs) and therefore they all have reservation today Chakkala,Velethedathu,Villakithala.There are also Nairs who probably fell to the vaisya varna in between...Vaniya,Vaniga Vaisya(and they also wear the sacred thread!!)weird..again the thread is worn even by vishwakarmas etc who come in between Nairs and ezhavas.Where does that place us.

Rajeev Rajendran Nair.

Vegetarian

I couldn't find any documentation to prove/disprove that Nairs were originally Vegetarian. It's true that many Nair families were/are vegetarian, but some say that Nairs were originally non-vegetarian and became vegetarian after the arrival of Brahmins. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്) 02:53, 4 October 2005 (UTC)well nairs were nonvegitarians but they ate only fish and among the lower nairs ,fowl..but the statement they were beef eaters is very wrong as they also considered the cow sacred- Manavendra Varma

Kiriyathil and Illathu Nairs are or Nagavanshi Nairs are non-vegetarians. Shaiva Vellala Pillais, Ambalavasi Nambiars etc are vegetarians. Malayali, Tamil and Tulu Brahmins of Kerala are vegetarians. Malayali Royal Kshatriyas are vegeterians and Ambalavasis are also vegetarians because they are Temple servants. In the book 'Nagas: The ancient rulers of India' it is given that their was sect called Ajagiri in Nagavansha community who used to eat mutton. The origin of Nagavansha is from Kashmir. Like Bengali Brahmins Kashmiri Pandits are also non-vegetarians. But they don't eat beef, pork, rabbit, crab, etc. Same is the diet of Nagavanshi Nairs.

Are nairs related to NAYAR in punjab / NEWAR in nepal / NAIKs in Kanara / Nairs in Turkey / Scottish McNair?


Some examples if turkish nairs I found on the net are like this line: "Sara Nair was born in Edirne, Turkey, in approximately 1925. She moved to Istanbul when she was young. She is known as Madame Sara, the renowned spirit medium of Turkey"

Excess quotes, terrible formatting, etc. etc.

Someone (I haven't tracked) has added a bunch of excess quotes about Nairs, essentially making the article unreadable and of lower quality. I am going to try to consolidate that information in to the last "readable" version. Until then, I'm presenting an (older) readable version. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

Excessive quotes and personal marketing etc.

However, the sudras in the rest of India were never a martial class, since warfare was the profession of the Ksyathriyas. According to this interpretation, Nairs would seem to be more like Kshatriyas since they were a martial class as well. Similar to Kshatriyas, they were only second to the Brahmins (Namboothiris). Furthermore, many Nair families were aristocratic. They owned large feudal estates and in some cases, even took part in the ruling of Kerala. An example is the Paliam family from Chendamangalam. The oldest male of the family, the Paliath Achan, served as the Prime Minister to the Raja of Cochin.

Would be a service to our community's reputation if stuff such as the above is also removed, as I see it is, it is mostly hot air and personal family image projection. Not the stuff fit for an universal encylcopedia! This what prompts others to throw garbage into the article.

I agree. Also, those assertions are factually incorrect. Mauryas, Guptas, Shivaji, and all the South Indian royal families before the emergence of caste system in South India were not Kshatriyas.


You are welcome to edit, and please sign your comments. You are arguing with a one-sided burden of proof. You have presented one half of an argument that talks about whether Nairs are Sudras or Kshatriyas - it doesn't assert either one, but provides similarities to both - the main point being that the caste system in Kerala was rather different from the rest of India, and that no one can say that Nairs ARE Kshyatriyas, or that Nairs ARE sudras. That's the point being discussed. If you feel such information is not "encyclopaedic", either change it, offer suggestions to improve it, but do not delete it entirely. Also, please sign your comments - that helps us know who we are talking to. --Vivin Paliath (<font color="green">&#3381;&#3391;&#3381;&#3391;&#3368;&#3405; &#3370;&#3390;&#3378;&#3391;&#3375;&#3364;&#3405;</font>) 16:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


Just recently, I created an article titled "List of Nair Tharavadus".

The article "List of Nair Tharavadus" is designed as a list for past and present nair tharavadus in Kerala. Assistance will be required by Wikipedia Users to help expand this list. The tharavadu listing is currently split in roughly district/ major city subheadings. In time, as the list grows, the sub-headings can be further refined, and new articles can be created for example "Nair tharavdus in Kasaragod". Furthermore, the links for articles of each tharavadu can be created in due course, providing information about the tharavadus history, origin, location, etc.

In this way Wikipedia can become a mine of information for individuals who seek to learn more about the nair heritage.

It must also be kept in mind that Wikipedia is a universal online encyclopedia, and as such, the material provided must be relevant and accurate.

NOTE: It would be much appreciated if the tharavadus listed are in fact nair tharavadus, as it has been known for families in the past to adopt the surname "Nair" even though they are not of nair caste.

Please help to update and add new tharavadus to the list.

Thankyou

220.238.223.47 20:19, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Think Logically

Some one recently changed my article calling the Namboodiris "cheats" and the Nairs servants.To them I would like to say that this is an international site and donot play ur nonsense here.Historical sources tell us that the Nairs were indeed Lower than the Brahmins. No one is sure about calling them Sudras but let us assume that they were Sudras.Even in that case it is proved that they have been in the profession of warriors since the 7th century BC. So after these thousands of years calling them Sudras would be baseless. Secondly the Namboodiris are India's highest caste. It was these Namboodiris who made them warriors and also married their women folk.Although these Sambandhams were not considered marriage by them the so called lower blood of the Nairs would be enriched by the "high" Namboodiri blood.Thirdly even the kings of Kerala are Nairs. It is true that many of them were servants in the palaces and illoms and big tharavads but even in north India the poorer Kshatriyas do the same work. I feel that logically the Nairs are Kshatriyas and not Sudras. Upto you now. And those wanting to make it sound asthough the Namboodiris are cheats and Nairs untouchables clearly have no idea about history and therefore kindly enter ur comments in another paragraph rather than spoil this one. Thanks Manu


Panicker is only a title that is used in combat to identify a person by his location as having to represent an army.For example, Raghava Mannadiar becomes Chandothu Panikkar etc.Similarly Meledath Raghavan Nair can be Meledathu Panikkar.Lets cut the crap and someone learn some history.Again what Sudra jobs did Nairs do?The Nairs who did SUDRA JOBS ARE ALL veenu Nair(fallen nairs) and therefore they all have reservation today Chakkala,Velethedathu,Villakithala.There are also Nairs who probably fell to the vaisya varna in between...Vaniya,Vaniga Vaisya(and they also wear the sacred thread!!)weird..again the thread is worn even by vishwakarmas etc who come in between Nairs and ezhavas.Where does that place us.

Rajeev Rajendran Nair.

Kshatriyas and Shudras

Some have mentioned previously that Nairs may be of Shudra background. This fact seems to be false....since Namboothiris would never marry a Shudra. Indeed Nairs were Kshatriyas, being Naduvazhis and military commanders, the practitioners of Kalaripayattu. Those who claim that Nairs are shudras base their opinion on the fact that Namboothiris do not touch Nairs. However Namboothiris are considered to be the most orthodox brahmins in India, and indeed, they do not associate with even migrant brahmins like Iyers, who are also not allowed to enter into the illam of the Namboothiris. Furthermore, if Nairs are shudras, then who are the Kshatriyas in Kerala?? Varmas, and kings were in fact a type of Nair caste, and Nairs followed the occupation of the Kshatriyas, as warriors and rulers. Shudras were workers by caste, working on the lands of the lords (the Nairs). Nairs were not Shudras. Furthermore, there has also been some controversy about the origin of Nairs. Nambiars and Kurups from North Kerala, were considered to be the traditional protectors of the Namboothiris, and many believe that they were Aryans who came to Kerala along with the Namboothiris. They may or may not be of the same race as South Keralite Nairs, who are generally more darker than North Keralite Nairs. However Nambiars and Kurups are classed as Nairs because they follow the same profession as the Nairs, being warriors and naduvazhis.

Hi,I fail to understand why some are hesitant to accept themselves as sudras.What is the problem yar. any way lets go to the point.If you asked your granma she would tell you that she was a sudra nair.My granma does.Some one has even mentioned that nairs are not sudras becoz a namboothiri would not even dream of marrying a sudra. Well they never did,you know!!!! i dont know how one can take pride in being a nair,knowing their legacy . no wonder they went the matrilinear way.i dont want to say anything more on that.as for a brahmin not touching a sudra, well vyasa was the son of a sudra woman.there is no problem in claiming the kshathriya status as long as the claimants are prepared to share that title with other martial communities.

Could someone please list some evidence (scientific or genetic if available) to prove that Nairs were either indigenous or migrant Aryans, or whether Nairs where a generic term used to describe people from a variety of races who pursued the same profession.

dost, there is no such thing as a nair race. can you conclude, by yourself, from a photograph the caste of the person in question.you can find people of all hues and colors, build etc. among the nair population as in the case of ezhavas though they tend to be shade darker on average.


220.238.219.112 00:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

The new genetic studies show(Sengupta et al. 2005 and Sahoo et al. 2006) light skin and dark skin mean nothing in Indian context. Most of the time it represented the migration of the people carrying the same Y-chromosomes at different points of history from Central Asia/West Asia/ North-West Indian subcontinent(By the way, even the dark skinned South Indians also took the same route to enter South India -Out of Africa). So if one finds light skinned South Indian then most probably it represents the migration at a later time but still could be pre-historic before any "Aryan" migration or invasion also could be much later too. So one should get over the stereotypical idea of darkskinned Malayalee = the original Malayalee, light skinned Malayalee = Namboothiri/European/Arab/Aryan contact(Aren't dark-skinned brahmins there in Kerala?). A Nair could be light skinned because there was a Namboothiri in his/her lineage also he/she could be light skinned because his/her lineage was light skinned since pre-historic times. Ideally, one should use Aryan and Dravidian terms strictly in linguistic context.
Manjunatha (24 Jan 2006)


I suppose not many genetic studies have been conducted on Kerala population. This study claims, three Kerala population groups(Nairs, Ezhavas and Muslims) form a single distinct cluster compared to two Marathi population(Konkanastha Brahmins and Marathas). http://muse.jhu.edu/cgi-bin/access.cgi?uri=/journals/human_biology/v074/74.3das.html

Manjunatha (25 Jan 2006)

Reverts/Deletes

I would appreciate it if the person(s) deleting and reverting the article would post a summary of their changes, and their reasons for reversion and deletions. This article is not here to spread a particular kind of opinion or point-of-view. We are trying to present facts. I find the sections about the origin of Nairs being constantly edited to present a more ostensibly "favourable" point-of-view. --62.68.75.2 14:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

As somebody else mentioned in the discussion, caste system in Kerala is/was very different from rest of India. In all the discussions that i have had with any elders, nairs (at least in Malabar) are Shudras. In general, castes are divided into Varnas and Avarnas, with Namboodiris and Nairs belonging to Varnas and Thiyyas and every body else is considered to be Avarnas - essentially outside the caste system.

Nairs are also an umbrella caste (especially in Malabar) with almost all professions included in the list. Thus you have veluthhedans, chaliyas etc sub-casts amongst the nairs. I haven't heard of any instances of inter-marriage between these cases and haven't heard of any instance of untouchability either.

Nairs were also not the only warriors, Thiyyas were also warriors, Aromal Chekavar one of the heros in Vadakkan Pattugal is supposed to be a Thiyya.

Another amusing tidbit is on the royal family. Most of the royal tharavads in Kerala have a Varma surname except for the Zamoothiri who were nairs (Eradi). The royal families were supposed to be "Kolayan" (Murderer) Nair and were considered to be lower in the hierarchy compared to the plain vanilla nairs. So the plain vanilla nair womenfolk were not allowed to be married into the royal families. This might be a case of sour grapes, but is an interesting perspective since being a warrior wasn't necessarily considered to be a good thing. Morever royalty (along with money) didn't gurantee status in the caste hierarchy.

Most of the nair surnames were titles that eventually ended up being heriditary. Thus in malabar one has Nair, Nambiar (mainly in Kannur), Nayanar, Nedungadi, Adiyodi, Eradi, Menon, Unni, Kurup etc. Another point to note is that Nambiar in north malabar is different fron Nambiar in south Malabar. Kunchan Nambiar was an amabalavasi not a nair. Panikkar is an ambiguous surname since it is used by Nairs, Ezhavas as well as Christians. In north Malabar, you also had 1/2 and full nairs (ara-kutti, muzhu-kutti) etc based on the standing with the naadu vaazhi (Kolathiri?). Of course, the full nairs will not allow their womenfolk to be married into 1/2 nairs.

Caste system in Kerala

I wonder if anybody has given thought over or written about

1. The evolution of caste system in Kerala

As far as I know, the naduvazhi based caste system was imposed on Kerala around medieval times(13th century onwards). I wonder if that means people were free to marry anybody before that(of course, with exceptions of tribes/clans).

2. Few surnames are common between Tiyyas and Nairs. Does anybody have idea how old they are? If one considers that northern Tiyyas had Kalaris of their own, those surnames look belonging to pre-caste system Kerala.

3. In South-West Indian states except Kerala, the combined SC/ST population is around 20-25% and in North-East and Central India it's around 30-35%. However, in Kerala it's just around 11%(SC=10%, ST=1%). Does this mean late imposition of caste system in Kerala gave enough time for major chunk of population migrated at various points of history to assimilate? Or does that mean advent of Islam and Christianity absorbed most of these people(but that doesn't explain Punjab,UP and Bihar with around 20-30% of SC population but also a huge muslim population)?

4. I suppose being one of the oldest society there might have been many clans/tribes in Kerala. I wonder how much of these affinities diluted being part of the same caste. Were all Tiyyas and Nairs open to marry any person from their own caste in the past or were there exceptions? The groups though belonging to the same caste but never intermarried had any cultural differences?

Thanks for any inputs.

Manjunatha (24 Jan 2006)

The answer is very simple.There was a policy of extermination followed with regard to SC/ST's in the past and this led to the extermination of a large number of them probably during the initial period from 1000 AD to 1500 AD.Anyways this is a possiblity.In places like Bihar and Orissa the greater number of SC's is again probably because of invasions in later periods.Many mongloids etc are also SCs.

Rajeev Rajendran Nair

Thanks for your simple speculations. In Bihar(Jharkand) and Orissa the biggest chunk are tribals(STs). Tribals are supposed to be the oldest inhabitants of India. The so-called Mongoloid or South-East Asian genetic markers are found in these generally Astro Asiatic speaking people and rarely among Scheduled castes. In fact all the castes, from Brahmins to Dalits derive their lineages from the same gene pool.
The later invaders(whatever that means) until the advent of Islam mostly joined Shudra(mostly landed castes in North-West of India) and Kshatriya hierarchies. However, even becoming Brahmins can not be ruled out.
"The policy of extermination", I suppose that is really interesting. Do you have sources?

Manjunatha (7 Apr 2006)

Accept the TRUTH

Are you trying to Glorify Thiyyas as a Forward caste? Thiyyas were not even allowed to walk on the roads. User: NP Nair NP Nair,you seem to take much pride in your nairhood. one question. do you know the name of your great grand father or his father...... it was for no fault of theirs that the tiyyas were not allowed to walk on roads.

I suppose I was talking about Malayalees before caste system. Do you have any idea how those two sentences of yours sound? Funnily, at Ezhava, people think I'm their biggest enemy.

Manjunatha (25 Jan 2006)

caste has nothing 2 do today.if you have u live. don't forget today's date.it is not 18th century. afterall today castes are getting mixed 2day. so stop such rubbish discussion and talk something useful

The rules of Manusmriti and the Nairs

The Manusmriti defines a Kshatriya as a warrior who always carries arms.The Nairs always carried a sword with them. Besides it says that if a Brahmin ever imparts any kind of knowledge to a Sudra he becomes equal to a Sudra.But the twenty one disciples of Parasurama from whom the Nairs learnt the Kalaripayattu were Brahmins.Then wouldn't they also become Sudras?And would Parasurama,the great, instruct them to teach the Nairs if they were indeed Sudras?Also the Manusmriti says that the Kshatriya brides must carry an arrow in their hand during the wedding.Nair women had Kettukalyanams before the age of 12 and during these they carried an arrow. Besides would Indias highest and most orthodox Brahmins have marital relations with them if they were Sudras? The Keralolpatti which calls them Sudras is full of contradictory statements and so we must understand that it is not very reliable.Manu

o my god , i am very much impressed by mr manu who it seems was there when parasurama imparted the knowledge to the nairs. now that seems to be plain truth for the great manu can not be wrong where as keralolpathi could be. one more thing if india's highest and most orthodox brahmins have had marital? relations with nairs well then manu you can follow the footsteps of your foreuncles.............. and renovate this wonderful practise which some clumsy nair leaders, unwittingly, sought to bring to an end.


Manu Smriti also says all Dravidas are Shudras degraded from their Kshatriya position. Perhaps, that explains why there is so much controversy about any South Indian's caste position. Okay, not only Parashurama created Kerala, his disciples taught Malayalees to fight! I wonder if any non-brahmin Malayalees had read Keralolpatti until British arrived and brought Western education.
Anyway, you are contradicting brahmins by not accepting Keralolpatti. I completely support that. I'm sure, you understand that that also means you are completely rejecting caste system since theoritically caste doesn't exist if you don't agree what brahmins have to say about your position in the caste.
I'm really impressed with rational debates about validity of caste position here.

Manjunatha (4 Feb 2006) Thanks for ur comments. Anyways i donot believe the Keralolpati due to this basic reason. It contradicts its own statements. Besides, as someone mentioned before,the Namboodiris didnot touch Iyers and other brahmins.So its only natural that they call a non brahmin a sudra.Well call it reasoning of a seventeen year old, but the keralolpati is not entirely true. I am currently trying to obtain an english version of the book since i cant read malayalam and am also preparing a research paper on the Nairs.Any information,please send it to me at dark_voldemort2000@yahoo.com.Thanks Manu

Marumakkathayam

Some historians believe that the Marumakkathayam system started after the Chera-Chola wars during the second Chera empire, as Nairs lost most of their men during the war.

But this statement is not true because, then how come a brother look after his sister, when most of them died? The actual fact is that Namboothiries had sambandam with Nair ladies which produced "father less" children, gradually these children was looked after by there uncle.

Sambadams were marriages between Namboothiris and Nayar women, thus the children had a father who was a brahmin. The children of such marriages are considered to be of Nayanar caste, not specifically of Nayar (warrior, kshatriya) caste, since they also practised vegitarianism and non-violence like their paternal ancestors. Also please sign your comment. 58.105.39.43 07:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Well i am not so sure about the Nayanar thing and i also agree that these Sambandhams were not proper marriages. In the poor families it was very much like concubinage. But in about 50% atleast it was a long term relation. I hate to give a personal example but my ancestor was actually taken to his Mana by her husband.This was not a Sambandham was it?Manu

Sambadams were marriages between Namboothiris and Nayar women????

As 58.105.39.43 was stating "Sambadams were marriages between Namboothiris and Nayar women", actually its not a marriage, If a Namboothiti likes a Nair girl he just give her a "Pudava" and make love with her, ironically this is called a "marriage" or "Sambandam". Usually most of the Namboothirs will have many Sambadams, and the Nair woman will have "father less children". If the woman is smart and the Namboothiri is rich she some how makes money or land out of it. and these children will get a good 'administrative post' if the namboothiri is a land lord or a king. Modern Nairs are forgeting these factors and just polishing the truth and considering ther are forward cast.

I however donot stand by this statement entirely.It is true that many of the Nair women had casual relations with the Namboodiris but if u notice,in the higher, aristocratic and more Aryanized and Kshatriya type families of the warlords and royals,this was more like a wedding.Sambandhams used to take place but they were long term relations in aristocratic families and the Namboodiri used to actually stay and father his children.Besides there was no such thing as "fatherless children".If a woman did not get the biological father to pay the delivery expenses, she would be expelled from her family.The kind of sambandhams you are talking of did exist but there were no children who didnot know their fathers.Manu

Hello mulavelil_cheriyanadu, but its true that "Marumakathayam" in Nair tharavadu was actually based on the fact above (Sambadams), but now a day Nairs wont admit it, now they are saying that marumakathayam came in existance because they lost there men in the chera-chola war, which realy is foolish and ill-logic, Chera-chola war was not in Nort Kerala! Regarding your statement "If a woman did not get the biological father to pay the delivery expenses, she would be expelled from her family". If that is the case around 80% of them get expelled.

The Chera kingdom was very much in north Kerala by the way. You say that the Nairs losing men in the war is totaly illogical.Kindly point out the so called lack of logic in that concern.The Marumakhatayam emerged to keep the wealth in the female line. Men among the Nairs ususaly didnot get much of the wealth in the family and anyways when they died it went to their maternal nieces.Their children used to get their share from their mother's house.The marumakhatayam didnot emerge because of Sambandhams. It was a part of the Nair matriarchy. And if indeed the Nairs were not a forward caste like the Ezhavas, how do you explain why the government has not placed them in reservation? On the other hand, the Ezhavas do have reservation. This is because the Nairs were rich on a general basis and were the only Savarnas other than the Namboodiris.The Ezhavas were untouchables. The only factor that could possibly call a Nair a Sudra is the Keralolpati. Other than that all their customs are seen in the Kshatriyas.This again brings us back to my point that they lost men, made their caste matriarchal, broke a major Manusmriti rule, and got called Sudra.Manu (and kindly refer to me as Manu.Thats my name)

Hello Manu, So you say marumakhatayam was a result of Chera-Chola war? Then if all men died what is the role of uncle in a house, was't he a man? If you deny Keralolpati you have to deny Manusmrithi, because we hindus belive all the text is based on Vedas. Also dont mix cast system with modern Government.

Well although Nairs were matriarchal,the matriarch always almost shared her power with the Karnavan or male head.Since the young husbands and brothers used to be away either in battle or in the Kalaris, the male head was the uncle who was generally old.The Keralolpati is NOT based on the Vedas. Infact the Vedas are far above the Manusmriti also.The vedas are true knowledge but the Manus rules are not entirely true. Besides Manus rules are Smriti and vedas are Shruti.The Keralolpati is the only book that states that all women but Namboodiri are created for the Namboodiri men. Now would you say a true Hindu would write a Book like that if he believed in the Vedas which respect women?Manu

Are you trying to Glorify Thiyyas as a Forward caste? Thiyyas were not even allowed to walk on the roads. User: NP Nair

Hello NP Nair?? (Who dont even like to display his name, thinking Nairs are great). My boy regading Nairs and Ezhavas both the cast are actually Sudras. Knowing or practicing martial arts does not mean that they were Kshatriya. Nair, Nambiar etc were only Sthana peru (Job title) which by time desended to ther offsprings.

Well the statement you have in the bracket was totally unecessary but anyways. Nairs are not Sudras sir and they were only called Sudra because they were non Brahmins.This is because the Namboodiris didnot even touch other Brahmins and considered them lowly.It is only natural that they would regard a non Brahmins as a Sudra. Besides if you read the Manusmriti you will find that there is not a single rule that the Nairs dont follow which was prescribed for Kshatriyas, except the thread ceremony.This thread ceremony is not followed by any south indian Kshatriyas.Anyways one is entitled to ones own opinion but the rational thought would be this Manu

Manu, The above statements that kshatriyas in Kerala does not have thread cerimonies is absurd and baseless. Refer Perumpadapu Swaroopam, then Other Varmas like Kilimanur, Poonjar and Thirumulpad. They are all Kshatriyas and Have Sacred Thread. Ramavarma

I am sorry abt tht...i didnt express my self clearly...when i say kshatriyas of south india dont wear the thread, i dont mean the rajahs...dont worry..rajahs n varmas do wear but other kshatriyas who are not twice born like the marathas, reddys, etc dont have this ceremony...the kings have...sorry abt tht Manu

Calling a Nayar a shudra would be like calling a military commander and ruler a menial servant. Such comments are not only absurd but a blatant disregard and even disrespect of their (the Nayar's) rich and illustrious history. I am not a Nayar myself, but I do not deny that they were Kshatriyas, and to say otherwise would be to ignore the truth. 58.105.39.43 07:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Role of uncle in matrilineal society

I was talking to my collegue otherday. He mentioned about an anthropology study based on structuralism on primitive populations. The anthropologists were trying to find out "invariants" in the societies all over the world. One of the findings of the study was that the role played by uncle in a family. Those primitive societies hardly changed since the dawn of the civilization. I think the greater role of uncle in those primitive societies perhaps gives us an interesting insight into the present matrilineal societies. Unfortunately, I don't have the full study and name of the anthropologists. I'll try to find out them. If somebody has heard about that study please share your thoughts.

In my opinion, seeing matrilineal societies in Kerala and coastal Karnataka as recent developments( only 1000 years old) is inaccurate.


Manjunatha (7 Feb 2006)

I think it's Claude Levi-Strauss. From the article;

A proper solution to the puzzle is to find a basic unit of kinship which can explain all the variations. It is a cluster of four roles--brother, sister, father, son. These are the roles that must be involved in any society that has an incest taboo requiring a man to obtain a wife from some man outside his own hereditary line. A brother can give away his sister, for example, whose son might reciprocate in the next generation by allowing his own sister to marry exogenously. The underlying demand is a continued circulation of women to keep various clans peacefully related.

Perhaps, the major role of 'uncle' might have been only during marriage of sister and then extended to many other spheres. I guess in matrilineal societies it's the uncle who plays a major role in the marriages of his niece and nephew.

Manjunatha (7 Feb 2006)

Manusmriti rules

The following rules of the Manusmriti clearly tell us that the Nairs are not Sudras. The Namboodiris who are the most orthodox Brahmins of India would have followed these rules had the Nairs been Sudras. They only called the Nairs Sudras because they were orthodox to the level that they didnt even touch other Brahmins, forget a non Brahmin. I – 91. "One occupation only the Lord prescribed to the shudra - to serve meekly even these other three castes." X – 129. "No collection of wealth must be made by a shudra even though he be able to do it; for a shudra who has acquired wealth gives pain to Brahmana."(then how do u explain the rich Nairs and the kings?)VIII – 270. "A shudra who insults a twice born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin."(In Kerala this was the punishment given to all below Nair, namely Ezhava, Thiya etc)XII. 4. "If the shudra intentionally listens for committing to memory the veda, then his ears should be filled with (molten) lead and lac; if he utters the veda, then his tongue should be cut off; if he has mastered the veda his body should be cut to pieces."(Nair women used to study the ancient scriptures and Sanskrit.) Well one can only assume that the highly orthodox Namboodiris only called Nairs Sudras because they were non Brahmins.However one more explanation is possible.This theory is mine and its only a probability.The Nairs,like all Kshatriyas fulfill the requirements of the Manusmriti except the sacred thread ceremony which none of the south Indian Kshatriyas right from the Marathas of Maharasthra follow.I believe they were indeed considered Kshatriyas but due to the continuous warfare between the Cheras and others, where many of their men died, they decided to make their caste matriarchal and female dominated.This is strictly prohibited by the Manusmriti which says that a man who gives power and independence to a woman is a Sudra himself. Maybe that is why the Namboodiris call the Nairs Sudra, because they broke a major rule and apparently degraded themselves.Manu

WE Hindus follow Vedas, not "Manusmriti". We all know that Manusmriti is made by a Brahnmin for Bhramins. If you realy know the subject you come to know that it is written in favor of Brahmins. Dont take Manusmriti as a basis to compare Nairs and other casts. Study Vedas and write here.

"II-32. (The second part of) a brahmin’s (name) shall be (a word) implying happiness, of a kshatriya’s (word) implying protection, of a Vaishya’s (a term) expressive of thriving, and of a shudra’s (an expression) denoting service."

from these quoting from Manusmrith, then Nairs should be Shudra!!

Nayar comes from sanskrit "Nayaka" meaning leader, one who offers protection. Please do not dishonour their ancestry.

Very well. Can you kindly enlighten me with a Nair name that denotes service? As far as i know, they were the only people who were allowed the names of Gods other than the Namboodiris. Besides you seem to be forgetting the first part of that very statement very conviniently. It says "let the name of a Sudra express something contemptible. Kindly inform me about a contemtible name.Manu


The Manusmriti may profess certain unacceptable rules and also project Brahmins as the best but still the entire caste system is based on this Manusmriti and we are discussing the Nairs with relation to that. That is why I have mentioned everything with relation to the Manu's rules.The entire caste system being based on that I have but little option than to relate to that. And kindly sign ur statements.Manu


Hello Manu, First of all you should know that since NAirs knew Martial arts, does'nt mean they are Kshatriyas, also they are not Sudras, Nair is a "stana peru" given by the rulers, gradually desented to their offsprings. If a person can be called Kshatriyas based on there Martial arts knowledge or practice then Even Ezhavas are Kshatriyas, since there were lots of Kalari gurukals in Ezhava families. Can we call Sri krishana can be called Vishya? All the cast system is "bullshit" especially in Kerala. Another factor to note is since some of the nairs were rulers does'nt mean they were again Kshatriyas. Be practical, a man having "Strenght" always tried to become a leader, either in good way or bad.


Please sign your comments Nair rituals and activities described above by Manu clearly indicate that Nairs were Kshatriyas....otherwise I would be very much inclined to believe that all non-Namboothiris in India are shudras...and that no caste such as Kshatriya or Vaishya exist. By stating Nairs are Kshatriyas, we are implying that other brahmins like Iyengars and Iyer are also Shudras....why? because we have concluded that anyone who is considered untouchable by a Namboothiri is a shudra....therefore they must all be sudras....workers and labourers by caste...although they were anything but that. I hope I have demonstrated how ridiculous that argument is. 58.105.46.196 19:25, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

What I don't understand is why the Ezhava article shows Ezhavas as being "quite aristocratic and powerful", when in reality they were suppressed to undertake labour till recent times, whereas in the Nair article, one receives the impression that they were sudras, or somehow inpure or incomplete Kshatriyas, described as "untouchable" in the "Kshatriyas or Sudras?" subsection. The Ezhava article has little mention of Ezhava untouchability or historical subordination.

Why are people trying to degrade the Nair race? Speculation such as Nairs- "Kshatriyas or Sudras?" is just as farce as saying bananas-"fruit or vegetable?". The Nairs were rulers, Naduvazhis, upon whom the Varmas (a type of Nair!) and other kings were totally reliant on. They were military generals, commanders and valiant warriors. If they were not Kshatriyas, then the term Kshatriya has no meaning.

220.238.223.47 10:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with that.True that many Ezhava families were aristocratic but on a general basis they were not and besides aristocratic or not,they were untouchables. Also i donot agree with the statement 'Nairs are Sudras' because it is highly illogical.One may say that the caste system in the recent past has never been logical.Even that way the Nair's cant have been Sudras because then they would not have been allowed to rule and govern by India's highest and most orthodox Brahmins, the Namboodiris. I feel,logically, that they are indeed like any other Kshatriyas in south India, excepting that they are matriarchal, and they were just called Sudras because they were non Brahmins. The Namboodiris didnt touch even other Brahmins, leave alone a Non Brahmin Manu

That is true....and i suggest that one refrains from posting the subsection Nairs-"Kshatriyas or Shudras?" since it is not only historically incorrect but very offensive to the Nair caste to be associated with Shudras when they were anything but that. How would the Rajputs feel if they were classed as Shudras. It is a total disregard of their history and role in society.220.238.153.121 10:02, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Polyandry?

I have read that Nairs practiced polyandry. I was wondering why this is not mentioned in this article

58.104.61.195 09:22, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

For all of you conributed to the above crap. Please leave the nairs to live in peace. As a Nair I don't give a damn what all these so called pudits say. I know my history and it is in my blood. All I know is that my community had an illustrious past and has given birth some of the very best in India in all fields of human endevourand is still capable and doing it. As in all communities, there may be exceptions that a woman might have resorted to polyandry or some one had called some one names like Sudra etc. In the age of even same sex marriages what relevance these has? The problems with Nairs is that they are a straight forward people either ignoring or not understanding the machinations of others trying hard using put downs and name calling etc. It is sheer desperation.

I am not trying to disparage Nairs, as I myself am also a Nair. However it is important to understand one's past irrelevant of whether it was good or bad. Personally i know that Nairs were Kshatriyas and a major ruling class in Kerala, with an illustrious history. What i would like to know however is whether polyandry was ever a custom in nair communities, since i have heard accounts of it. Today however such practices are not in use. Also the practice of sambadham has been recounted above. Did this process include marriage to a Namboothiri? I have ancestors who married namboothiris, so is it fair to say that my ancestors took part in the sambadham process? I have been confused by the various opinions circulating here, and i would like to have them clarified. 220.238.194.249 21:28, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I have read that non-fraternal polyandry of Nairs discontinued by 19th century. However, fraternal polyandry of Nairs, Ezhavas and artisan castes continued well into 20th century.[1]

If that helps....

Manjunatha (25 Feb 2006)

This topic is quite new to me.....fraternal and non-fraternal polyandry? Do you have a website about this?58.104.10.245 21:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


Non-fraternal polyandry in a matrilineal system is hardly surprising. However, fraternal polyandry is bit news to me too. Unfortunately, that is the only link that I have. I thought fraternal polyandry is a feature of patrilineal society. I mean, I have heard about North Indian families where brothers sharing a single woman.

Manjunatha (28 Feb 2006)

Kshathriya/Shudra debate

I have a section (which is being consistently deleted) about Nairs being Kshatriyas or Sudras. In it, I have stated the reasons why Nairs could be considered both, or why they can be considered neither. The fact remains that the caste system in Kerala was radically different from anywhere else in India. However, I have seen people here who want to promote their own view as Nairs as Kshatriyas for sure (not borne by fact, since Kshatriyas weren't untouchables) and that Nairs were Sudras for sure (not borne by fact, since Sudras didn't perform Kshatriya duties like warfare and ruling). We are trying to fit the Kerala caste system with the caste system in the rest of India, and we are trying show it in as fair a manner as possible by talking about both sides. Please don't try to spread your own POV here. Thanks --62.68.66.42 16:35, 9 March 2006 (UTC)


User:62.68.66.42|62.68.66.42, the debate is highly illogical and misguided. Were Nairs untouchable? Then I wonder why a large proportion of Namboothiris married Nair women, and why they would ever serve in the temples owned by a "shudra". Brahmins would never allow a "shudra" to rule over them and protect them. Personally, I have never heard of shudras in ancient times being military commanders, warriors and rulers by caste. The manusmriti says that shudras should be restricted from learning the vedas, yet Nairs have always been a learned caste. Kshatriyas traditionally wield enormous power like the Nairs did, and were honour bound to darma. Namboothiris do not associate themselves with other brahmins, considering them to be of an inferior status. They would consider all Kshatriyas and other brahmins to be "untouchable" and subordinate to them. If you wish to express your view that Nairs were shudras, I suggest that you include that view for every other "Kshatriya" caste in India, considering that everyone apart from Namboothiris must be shudras according to your view. Even the Rajputs and Marathas would be classed as shudras, and if you wish to mention that Nairs may have been shudras in this article, then you may as well also do the same for the articles about other "Kshatriya" clans. 58.104.105.54 10:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest that you actually read the section before making your statements. The argument presents both sides of the issue. Nairs were viewed as untouchable by Namboothiris since the Namboothiris believed they were superior to every caste in Kerala. However, this was obviously suspended in cases of sambandham. I haven't said Nairs are sudras; I have stated that they show certain attributes, while also showing attributes of Kshatriyas. So please, once again, read before you jump to conclusions. Thanks --217.26.84.76

To even suggest that Nairs are remotely associated with Sudras is in itself a blight on their race, heritage and caste. 58.104.38.155 00:27, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I feel the Caste System in Kerala is not as simple as it seems else where in India and you cannot Just classify cast base on the clan. I think if I remember correctly from Ithihyamala some Cochin Kings like Shakthan Thampuran used to employ ezhava body guards. Does this mean they were also Kshatriyas? Then regarding Surnames like Kaimal, Pannikar etc.. these were postions given by the Kings. For Eg Tachodaya Kaimal for Irinjalakuda Temple and Panikkar Kapithan (a pirate) army chief of Shakthan Thampuran. At later date familes continued to use this as their Surnames.


User 58.104.105.54, I disagree with you that Kshatriyas were considered Untochables by Brahmin. Perumpadapu Moopil,Kshatriya was considered the political head (Decission of punishments / elevations / Brashtu etc to be given to brahmins) of all the Brahmin families in Kerala. Their Religious Head Being Azhuvanchery Thamprakal. Venad and Samoothiris did not have this right eventhough they were rulers. Among all the other kings like Samoothiri and Venad only Perumpadapu Moopil had the Right to Serve Food personally or Have food with Brahmins. Olden days it was considered if Perumpadappu Moopil visits a illom for some function then the eldest member of the family should first serve him water for Kulkuzhutal (Ritual that Kashatriyas with ponool and Brahmins do before having food) before even serving food for any other member of the guest irrespective of guests status. Ramavarma

Nairs

I'd like to post the following points. 1. I've seen the 'Nairs being classified as Kshatriyas, vaishyas and shudras. I, for the life of me wonders who made that classification. In fact, there are no native vaishyas in Kerala. The chettis migrated from tamil nad and ARE NOT NAIRS though they try to pass for nairs. The title Karnavar and thampis were given to nairs of royal lineage. I wonder how the learned controbutor could classify them as "Vaishyas"??? Of course, the first point not to be missed is the idea of "Vaishya"nairs is factually wrong, to put it mildly. Similarly Achan and kartas are given to commanders. How could they be classified as shudra????The paliath Achans used to be the hereditory diwns of Cochin rajas.. 2. The nairs even from ancient times could marry each other without regard for title. a menon could marry a pillai or nambiar. A pillai could marry a thampi and so on. in fact the father a menon could be a nair or pillai, since the title was handed to next generation in a matrilineal fashion. Thus the famous writer kamala Das is a menon through her mother eventhough her Nair is VM Nair (former editor of Matrhubhumi newspaper). The father of sankunni Menon is a nair. Of course, titles were a mark of prestige, but did not stand in the way of martial alliance. 3. Nairs do not have RESERVATION. Castes like Villakithala nairs, Velluthedathu nairs , Chakala nairs, Itacheri nairs are not true nairs. They are not members of Nair Service Society (NSS) and have their own associations. Matrimonial alliances with these castes are not at all preferred by true nairs. RAKSH


Ambalavasi

Hey can anyone tell me what caste the Ambalavasi belong to?Some say they are all very low brahmins. Some say they are the caste under brahminms and above the nairs. and some yet say they are high nairs. whts the truth?Manu

As far as i know ambalavasi s are warriers and they are indeed above the nairs.lakshmi

A piece of info i got from a site says this... There are many Brahmin sub-castes like Ilayatu, Muttatu, Unni, Pisharoti, Nambiti Gurukkal many of whom belong to the Ambalavasi class. A Pisharoti does not wear the sacred thread and so also Warrier. Elayatu is the traditional purohit (priest) of Nayars who conduct the after-death rites for them. They wear the sacred thread and do the puja in the temples, but they are not aristocratic as the Nambootiris. Pushpakas and Warriers are temple employees mainly engaged in making flower garlands for offering to the deity. lakshmi

well amabavasi isnt just variars.....marars,poduval,some nambiars,pishroti,etc r also in them....anyways thanks fr ur info...- manu

namboothiris dont marry ambalavasis...neither do nairs since they consider them to be lower. however namboothiris marry nairs. whats the explanation for that? Kshatriya Knight

Namboodiris indeed marry Ambalavasis...my mum is ffrom such a family of marayars...and their women were only given to namboodiris in the past...however it is noted that nairs in travancore dont marry ambalavasis as they consider them a low caste....infact the only ambalavasis in travancore are the marars....variers etc are entirely absent....if u go to malabar u will see the ambalavasis refuse to marry nairs and nairs consider it a great thing if one marries them...in the southern part of kerala its opposite...but namboodiris did marry them..and in my moms family unlike sambandhams the women have been taken and housed with the antherjanams of the illom. They werent allowed in the kitchen tho...besides they have gothram....marayars and variars are of kailasa gotram,giving reverence to the Namasivaya Manthram Manu

Manu, The question of taking women to household is different from Kudivyppu. Normally Kudivyppu is done after veli where in the lady is made the member of husbands family. Also at the time of Veli a chadngu (ritual) is performed to break all the relations of female to her family. From there on Veli (also used to represent female after Veli/marriage) has a different system of pollution observing for death of birth. Once these 2 rituals are done females and all the offsprings are consided part of Male's family. This is the difference between Matrilineal and Patrilineal systems. Some questions to clarify your doubt is -> Did you perform Shodasha kriyakal after birth? During your mothers marriage did your Maternal Grand Father or Maternal Grand Uncle tie the Thali or your father? What kind of thali does you mother wear Nair Thali or Namboothiri Thali? If you had to perform Sodasha Kriyakal then you are a brahmin. If your maternal Grandfather / Grand Uncle did tie the thali for your mother then it was a veli and you and your mother is a namboothiri. Other wise you still belong to you mothers side (Marumakkathayam). Just by taking women to the household does not mean a Veli or Proper Marriage it is still a sambandam till the above said 2 rituals are performed. Namboothiri's used to have Sambandham with Amblavasis (Example is Famous Kunjan Nambiar, his father was a namboothiri) ramavarma


'if u go to malabar u will see the ambalavasis refuse to marry nairs and nairs consider it a great thing if one marries them' this is false. i am a nambiar....and we consider it bad for us to marry a marayar or ambalavasi....we do so only in financial or other difficulties....furthermore namboothiris had sambanthams with ambalavasis but not often....they rather preferred their kshatriya couterparts (nambiars). as far as i know in the politicial caste system the order was nambiar, namboothiri (since they were aristocratic...but not as much as nambiars), ambalavasis, half nambiars (mukakutty and kaakutty nairs), thiyyars, vishwakarmas, and other labourer castes. in the spiritual caste system....the order was namboothiris, nambiars (for their aristocratic power and ownership of the temple) and ambalavasis (for their role in the temple), then those who where not allowed to enter the temple in those days.

Kshatriya Knight

i am not saying it wasnt a sambandham....but as far as i have heard frm the old ladies in my family, nair women were never taken to the namboodiris house...in the rare cases tht they were they were housed in a separate building..but as far as ambalavasisi were concerned since caste wise they were above the nairs, this wasnt much of a taboo..they werent allowed in the kitchen thats all....as for kshatriya knight...as far as i have read, and my relatives in malabar tell me, ambalavasisi are highly respected there....but ur saying tht namboodiris didnt marry em is wrong.....but ur probabl;y rite abt the nambiars coz even in south kerala , their counterparts the unnithans didnt marry ambalavasis...i believe the unnithans consider themselves higher than the rajahs itself...thts y in the old days even the queens used to have the title of amma..eg rani umayamma of travancore...while unnithans preferd a different one namely kunjama...since the nambiars n unnithans r equal it is possible they didnt marry ambalavasis..but when i say nairs i dont really mean em coz they are both kshatriyas rite....manu (ps my moms thali consists of a triangle shaped one and a rectangular one with a serpent on it but i think thts a family custom as we r a mixed caste of unnithans and marayars with the title of panicker)


I never said that Ambalavisis werent respected in North Kerala, just not as much as Nambiars and Namboothiris. I know for certain that Namboothiris didnt marry ambalavasis, and that nambiars avoided such marriages. please sign ur comments as well

Kshatriya Knight tht was me manu/...frgot to sign..neways i disagree with the namboodiri thing...namboodiris married a lot frm the ambalavasi community...again as i have heard since the ambalavasis were poor n simple people who lived at the expense of the temple, high nairs and nambiars n unnithans prfered not to associate with them..but namboodiris did marry ... - manu

Nair weddings

It must be noted that the following passage from the article is incorrect in historical terms: the bridegroom received Thaali (wedding jewel) and placed it round the neck of the bride The Thaali was an Ezhava tradition and has been implemented around Kerala in modern times, however historically Nair marriages were not known as a "Kalyanam" and did not involve a Thaali, but rather the exchange of a ring and the presentation of fine clothes. 58.104.6.224 07:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC) well ur wrong, the thali is indeed used even by the ezhavas but is not their tradition only...at the age of twelve every nair girl has a great thali wedding...but the other weddings where there is the custom of giving fine clothes are called sambandhams..the thali is always worn by nair women...manu

My great grandmother and her ancestors never wore a thali, their marriage involved exchange of clothes and a ring only....i have been told that the exchange of the thali was borrowed from ezhava practices. 58.104.63.67 21:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Well even my great grandma n all didnt wear...but she had it safe with her....as i said at the age of 12 a namboodiri is invited to tie the thali around her neck making her eligible for sambandhams...this is the ritual namesake wedding...it is called kettukalyanam...Manu Dont be crazy none heard of Mangalsutra WE HAD THAT TOO>>IT WAS ALTERED IN BETWEEN AFTER THE COMING OF NAMBOOTHIRIS>>"ALL WOMEN EXCEPT NAMBOOTHIRI WOMEN ARE MADE FOR NAMBOOTHIRIS>>

Rajeev..nothing has ever been altered...the thali ritual was the ritual tht made a lady eligible for sambandhams...read the research papers of the top historians and u will find they agree unconditionally...the thali is a nair custom....Manu

I do not know about Nairs, but I am a Nambiar, and my great grandmother and her ancestors never received or possessed a thali. The ceremony was called a Pudavamurri, not a Kalyanam. No thali was given, but simply a dress like a sari and a ring. Now in recent times, many have adopted the practice of lower castes and a thaali given. I think it was because Nair and Nambiar women never had permanent husbands, and since they practiced polyandry, especially with Namboothiri men, an exchange of a thaali would not be viable. Imagine a Nair or Nambiar women with about 8 thaalis around her neck! It just wouldnt be practical. 58.104.63.67 21:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Trivia: Thali is not Just Ezahava tradition. Kerala Brahmins (Namboothiris) too have Tali. In this case it is the Girls father who ties the Thali and not the Boy. In entire India thali for Namboothiris is called as Kantthasoothram as it is tied by girls father and in remaining India for all other families including non namboothiri brahmins like iyers, iyengars etc... it is called as Mangalyasoothram. For ladies in Makkathayam Kantthasoothram is better as it enables them to perform the above said rites and rituals of her own parents, without help from her husband. --Ramavarma

As it is written in the main article, the thali was given only during the ritual wedding...and immediately after the wedding the guy wud go back (initially during times of war he wud return to the batllefield..later it became a ritual)...and the wife never meets him again...during tht time she had samandhams without a thali and as u said just by givin clothes.....i am an unnithan, unnithans are south kerala counterparts of the nambiars...and my great grandma didnt wear a thali but we know it was tied at the age of 8. You are confusing Kettu kalyanam wid sambandham...wht u speak of is sambandham.thali is there in the major groups of kerala. Manu

what exactly is sambandham...is it polyandry? If it is....and u mention the husband going to battle.....did polyandry come about because the husband wasnt at home most of the time and he culd be killed at any moment? 58.105.211.231 08:24, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I am a nair, i have heard that giving the podava in front of a lamp legalised the marriage there was no question of tying a thaali about 3-4 generations back.Maya Also can someone tell me something about the Thottekat family

Thottekat family in Cochin was one family like Paliam who used to have Chief Ministerial/ Divan Post for Cochin.User:ramavarma

Man u all confuse the thali with pudavakoda....have u ever asked whether these great granmas ever recieved a thali? even mine didnt wear one but she always had it with her till her dyin day ..... it was the kettu kalyanam tht initiated a lady into wedlock and allowed her to start her pudava sambandhams..infact chatampiswamigal and narayana guru were agaisnt this becauseit was meaningless and expensive...manu (read kaleidoscope ethinicity- it clearly mentions that only after the girl underwent the "expensive mock wedding" called thali kalyanam was she allowd "sambandhams called pudavakudas")

Nambiars and Unnithans

The Nambiars and Unnithans have always considered themselves to be descended from the Kshatriyas who accompanied the Namboodiris from outside Kerala. It is true tht Unnithan and Nambiar are caste names and not titles like Kaimal, Krtha, Panicker etc...but they have been included among the Nairs....now let us consider that they were Kshatriyas....had the nairs been sudra the kshatriyas would never be placed with them....sudra was jus the term the nairs got because the namboodiris considered any below them a sudra...this later led to the comon belief tht the nairs are sudra...besides the nairs are clearly mentioned as savarna in the keralolpathi...but savarna itself implies non-sudra....

well, factually incorrect. these are indeed nair surnames.unnithan is the son of a kshatriya who has no claim to the throne as opposed to thampi who is the son of a monarch.

Nagavanshi

The Nairs belong to the dynasty of Nagavanshis . But the statement that they are Kshatriyas and Sudra can be taken correctly. They are Nagavanshis who did sudra works also. here of course the Unnithans and Nambiars are excluded from the topic. So what do u say..Nagavanshi dynasty. The Rajkputs are Suryavanshi i belioeve Manu

The Rajputs of Sisodiya(or Sissodiya) are Naga and also suryavanshi..just some info..some Rajputs are also Naga!

Naka Lords

Recently i asked one of the tamil people i know to read the word "Naka" and with their tamilian accent and all what they said was "naga", This has caused me to think about the theories of Nair origin and mostly about the Naga Theory. I believe the word Naka isnt a derivation of Nayaka but is Naga. The Newars of Nepal are also Nagas. And ofcourse all the customs of the Nairs are seen among the Nagas also. and Nagas are Kshatriyas as they are mentioned many times in the Mahabharata , "...he married a Kshatriya Naga maiden"....Nagas also happen to be the only Kshatriya clan tht entirely survived the Kurukshetra war. so i strongly feel Naka stands for Naga and not Nayaka and this also proves the Nairs are of Kshatriya origin. I have also read articles saying the land was in control of the Nairs till the 1200's (abt 800 yrs back) and it was only then that the namboodiris secured it. Also teh Keralaolpathi is written around the 1400's so by then the Namboodiris had succeeded in replacing the nairs as the top class Manu

Please we have nothing to do with the newars..it is true that we are nagas but we have nothing to do with the newars.This is on hell of a crazy theory and its got to go.We are Nagas true...that is all.there is absolutely no genetical semblance with the newars.

Rajeev Rajendran Nair How did Namboothiris replace the Nairs as the top class? Werent Nairs a martial nobility, and werent Namboothiri peaceful priests? I wuld think that the Nairs wuld be able to retain control. 58.105.211.231 08:22, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

we are talking about sumtime in thw 1100s or 1200s....the great wars between the cheras and cholas had jus ended and the chera kings and warriors were nairs.....it is possible, as i have read, tht due to great losses and problems and also death of too many men, they were forced to accept tthe wealthy namboodiris above them....besides if men were dead, their widowed women could be easily manipulated by the namboodiris to secure land.... Manu

So you people believe around 1000 years ago Malayalees had all these caste identities. In fact, do you believe the males could have had some kind of community identity since the tharavaadu identity was propagated by the females? And what all these nonsense about matrilineality among Nairs due to Chola-Chera wars. If you want extensive examples for communities that were martilineal please go through this article. It was practiced by the so-called upper castes to declared lower castes. I wonder if people in Karnataka coastal region fought against Cholas.

Manjunatha (17 Apr 2006)

I doubt matrilinearity arose due to dead soldiers. Since the Nairs practiced polyandry, it wuld have been extremely difficult to correctly distinguish who the biological father was, therefore to which family the child belonged to. This most likely led to the matrilinear system, since it wuld have been easier to associate the child with the mothers side. Kshatriya Knight

What about non-polyandric matrilineal communities in coastal Karnataka and Kerala?

Manjunatha (18 Apr 2006)

Nair products

I think we need a disambiguous link for Nair hair removal products 58.105.211.231 08:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

WE NEED A DISAMBIGUOUS LINK

Nair is a hair removal product!!! 08:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. Haizum 09:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Straight From a Namboodiri

I had a Namboodiri scholar and astrologer clear certain doubts for me recently. Suresh Namboodiri, Kollam told me various things regarding the nairs. He told me that parasuram got a group of brahmins and settled them at madhya thiruvidhamkur...later they migrated to the north and south..of these only 64 families were given the right to be priests as they were the elite among those brahmins....the remaining were to assist them and were called ambalavasis...they are semi brahmins....similarly the people associated with military, ruling, and administration were called nair, similar to nayak, naik, naikar etc...he also clarified the sudra doubt about the nairs....he said that the nairs were sudra only for the orthodox namboodiri...and tht the term doesnt indicate they belong to the sudra caste...the namboodiris considered themselves so high that for them the nairs were sudra....but he said the nairs are not of sudra caste and would be members of the kshatriya militia....so much for that....straight from a namboodiri scholar. Manu

Manu, Can you Elaborate? I think you have misrepresented the facts here by breaking down to small incomplete sentences. When you elaborate try to elaborate on Migration of Brahmins from North India to Kerala and Tulu Nadu, How is Tulu Nadu Brahmins Different from Namboothiris, What was Manmakam (Not the Mamankams after Zamorins gained Prominance) and pupose? how was Perumal Appointed? Who used to Take part in Mamankam? Did Nairs figure in those Mamankams? If So what were their Roles? Was nair ever appointed a perumal? What is the condition for a South Indian Ruler to be a Perumal? How do you track the lineage and Blood lines of the Last Perumal to Present Day Royal Families. These are some of the points on a big Jig-Zaw puzzle. There are much more to the Puzzle. Correlate all those stuff before you make statements or discuss with scholars.

Suggested Reading 1--> Malabar Manual By Logan (You should find this in D.C. Books). 2--> Cochin State Maual By Achytha Menon(out of print, maybe you can find it in Govt. Archieves) 3-> TVC State manual (out of print, maybe you can find it in Govt. Archieves) 4--> Kerala Mahatmyam (out of print, maybe you can find it in Govt. Archieves) 5--> Keralolpathi (out of print, maybe you can find it in Govt. Archieves)

Some Misrepresentations in your text 1-->"He told me that parasuram got a group of brahmins and settled them at madhya thiruvidhamkur" It is not Madhya thiruvidhamkur it is 32 settlements North of Prumpuzha in Tulunadu and 32 south of Perumpuzha to Kanyakumari. 2-->"64 families were given the right to be priests " Traditionally not all members of the 64 settlements had right to be priests, brahmins were further classified as Adhyans, Asyans, Othulla Brahmins, Othilla Brahmins, Bhattathiri, BhattathiriPad, Brahmins with right to do Yagam, Brahmins without this right, Othikan, Brahmins with Temple priesthood, Brahmins who can do only cooking, etc... 3-->"nairs were sudra only for the orthodox namboodiri" how do you classify an orthodox and unorthodox namboothiri? User:ramavarma


well i didnt ask him all tht coz im not much into malabar...neways he said the namboodiris were generally orthodox...and so as far as they were concerned the nairs were sudra...he said tht is not to be taken as "belonging to the sudra caste"...anyways he said only these 64 gramom people were called namboodiri and the rest were ambalavasisi...no idea abt tht keralolpathi coz i havent read it completely...jus a few paras frm here n there...


This article calls Nairs Sudra, a forward class [2] --64.124.144.10 14:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Nayars, Nambiars, Namboothiris and Ambalavasis

As far as I know.....in the past.......the political caste system was thus: varma...nambiar/unnithan and nayar....closely followed by namboothiris who were aristocratic but not as much as nayars nambiars and unnithans......ambalavasis.....half nayars....ezhavas...some who were quite aristocratic....other labourer castes....followed by untouchables. the spiritual and religious caste system however was thus: namboothiris...ambalavasis....many of whom wore a poonul.....varmas nambiars unnithans and nayars.....who owned the temples followed by those who werent allowed in temples. I personally wuldnt consider namboothiris or ambalavasis to be of a higher social class......since they wielded far less political clout than nambiars unnithans and varmas.

Kshatriya Knight It isnt a matter of wealth and power only...ur rite tho..but the main ideaolgy of placin em higher in the scale was coz their work was associated with god...which was considered a great thing....thts y they were held in high regard altho politically they wud be sumwhere at the end...it was their work which was closer to the temple tht placed them high in the scale....yes politically speakin it wud be the unnithans, nambiars, and nayars tht wud cum first....but we must remember tht in those days all activity revolved around the temple....even the greatest kings needed the sanction of the temple to rule...and ur rite abt the unnithans n nambiars not preferin to marry ambalavasis...coz i know for a fact they practised aitha or untouchability when it came to the ambalavasis altho they were socially of a higher caste....same wid the nambiars i guess..Manu

Yea thats y i cant imagine how namboothiris were still able to have a great impact....bcos the military power obviously lay in the hands of nambiars and unnithans.

Kshatriya Knight as i said bfore more than all tht the temple was considiered the highest authority...and so they cud influence the nambiars n unnithans immensely....with the political stalwarts wid them, the namboodiris bcame the most powerful people....and much of the land was theirs...Manu

Hey i jus read this new book. It cleasrly mentions that even politically Nambiars and Unnithans were not high. Til the late 1700s there were sanketams or regions under the rule of a namboodiri. They had under them the unnithans and Nambiars and yes, even the kings. till then the lands in kerala were divided among the namboodiris of different temples. this was banned in late 1700s and also the land owned by the kshatriyas (nambiars and unnithans) and all the nairs was under tenantship...it belionged to the namboodiris...but the pattom act in the earky 1800s said that all the land held by a family was theirs...so what the namboodiris had dircetly under them became theirs while wahat was ubnder their tenants became the tenants...similarly the lands of the temple under various ambalavasis became their only due to the pattom acy,...also the statement that the thali was borrowed from the ezhavas (some did say that rite?) uis wrong because thali weddings were introsduced among the ezhavas only by Narayana Guru..till then oly aristocratic ezhavas followed this nair style.Manu

Pictures

The pictures of Kalaripayattu were good.

Kshatriya Knight

Nair Cuisine??

I have never heard of Nayars being traditionally vegetarians.

Kshatriya Knight

Thts wht even i was wondering..i knew nairs didnt eat beef but they were non vegetarians i think..Manu

A newbie: I have read in many articles on the net, that the cheras belonged to a tribal community and that they did not worship any of the known forms of god like Shiva, Vishnu, Rama, Krishna etc. They had their own tribal dieties. The forms and classfication of god as Generator, Operator and destroyer is all coined by migrated brahmins (aryans) from up north who wanted to establish themselves as supreme and nearer to god. They were the ones who bought caste systems to kerala, putting down the Dos and Donts. They restricted people from eating meat as it was a sin, perform rituals at temple as it was supposed to be done only by a brahmin, women being given less privileges etc.

Prior to brahmins establishing these rules, people did eat meat. Animals were not considered to be associated to god. So people did eat beef.

Aryan migration

Just a question, when did the Aryans (the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas) migrate into Kerala. Was this at the same time, or did the Kshatriyas come first. From common sense, one would think that Kshatriyas would act as guards for the Namboothiris, and that the Brahmins would not travel exposed to attack or reprisals. It should make sense that the Kshatriyas arrived in Kerala first to give the all clear. Maybe this may have been done as an army moved from one area to another and they co incidentally found civilisation in Kerala. Or it may have been planned and thought out before hand.

Kshatriya Knight


Hi Kshatriya Kinght, Historical documents says that Brahmins came first to Kerala before Kshatriyas. It is claimed that there were 2 settlements of Brahmins. The first settlement was a total failure as Brahmins brought from other parts of the country went back to respective places. Due to the failure of first settlement, customs and traditions of the Brahmins were changed in the Second Settlement i.e. they are not similar to rest of India. Some of these changes are Munkudima [hair-lock in the front] where as all the other Brahmins in India has hair-lock behind, only 3 threads to poonool even after marriage while rest of India has 3+ threads and accumulate threads after every milestone in life, more tantric rituals than based on mantra i.e. if you invite a Namboothiri for pooja or visit temple you would find him doing actions with is hand and reciting mantra mostly in mind where as all other Brahmins recite mantras loud and with little hand gestures. The entire cultural change was done to make sure that Brahmins in these settlements cannot go back to place of origins. It is still accepted fact that out of all other Brahmins in India only Kerala Brahmins (Namboothiri) follow all these rituals and rites orthodox-ly.

After the second settlement there were 64 gramas, each grama had a Thamprakal (a brahmin family), position used to have the final judgment in all issues related to pooja and veda for that grama. Eventhough they had a well defined protector for their Tradition and Work, there was a vacuum on political area with no leader. So brahmins decided to appoint a political head who could protect these settlements, control temples and has the authority to finalize and judge disputes among Brahmins and punish relevant members. Since Brahmins had no right to rule they started searching for probable Kshatriyas from kingdoms in South India. They also made sure that the post (Perumal) would not be a permanent position and the selection would be based on some democratic process, mamankam (don’t take these as present day elections). The period was finalized as 12 years after which mamankam would be held to appoint the new Perumal. It seems the period was finalized in such a way that no perumal would have total control over kerala and most of these perumals used to be “Prince in waiting” for neighboring kingdoms like Chola, Chera Pandya, Vijayanagara etc. So they would go back when they have to assume throne in their respective state. Last perumal from chera won mamangam for 3 consecutive periods and became powerful. Perumpadapu Swaroopam and Travancore are nephews and sons of this perumal. Perumal got dual titles as Koviladhikari(protector of temples) and Perumal (King).

Historical documents states that Kerala had a huge influence of Buddhism and Jainism before the second settlement and emperor Ashoka’s messengers used to visit Kerala on their way to Sri Lanka. So one probable conclusion is that Brahmins could have gained power after Maurya era (321-184 BC). Historians have also stated that most of the Kavus and Temples in Kerala were Buddhist and Jain shrines and Buddhist and Jain influences were reduced by Brahmins based on Vadam (not vedam) and Tharka. Sangam literatures (3rd Century AD) mentions about Vanchi temple as one of the abode of Lord Siva. Perumals used to rule from Vanchi (propably present day Tiruvanchikulam near Kodungallor). Perumals family deity was Tiruvanchikulathappan (Lord of Thiruvanchikulam, Siva and same deity in Chidambaram, TN). So taking these facts into consideration I think the Namboothiris and Perumals had settled and were well established in Kerala by 3rd Century AD. But still I don’t know when the first settlement actually took place. Another important fact that makes us believe that Brahmins were present in Kerala and/or their Traditions and customs changed even before Chandragupta Maurya peiord is the case of Kautilya. Kautilya used to have Munkudima and not Pinkudima as mostly represented in Serials and Photos.

Sorry I could have elaborated more but, due to time constraints I am cutting it short. I think you atleast have a picture on the timelines. More information can also be obtained from foreign travlers who visited Kerala for trade. I do appreciate views, thoughts and feedback from people who read this thread. Help me to research more on this topic.

User:Ramavarma

I t hink the Nambiars and Unnithans who are Aryans must have (logically speaking) come with the Namboodiris. Because they coud\ldnmt in any case come alone without protection,...besides a bigger grp had come tp kerala in the 2nd century AD , found it uninhabitable for them and returned...they say the next grp was smaller and they eventually settled in kerala and got the perumals frm outside...manu

Thankyou Ramavarma for your contributions. There are however some questions that arise:

1) Why would namboothiris and kshatriyas want to move into this "unhospitable land" in the first place

2) Why did buddhism already spread south before hinduism

3) Why would the namboothiris make slight adjustments to their style of praying, etc. it seems pretty pointless

4) If there were no hindus in kerala before (otherwise it wuld not have been inhospitable for the namboothiris) then how culd the brahmins go there without the support of kshatriyas

5) How could namboothiris have command over the keralites if they had not been hindus

6) Where did the namboothiris and kshatriyas come from

7) Do the kshatriyas include nairs, or just nambiars unnithans and varmas

Kshatriya Knight

Although the ques isnt to me ill tell u what i can. Unnithans and Nambiars were the Warriors from outside while the Nairs were the nobility that was already here in Kerala since a longer time. They were of the Kshatriya stock. Well the Brahmins and Kshatriyas hadnt come in the 2nd century, but long bfore that./ When a smaller grp returned they found kerala in a much better condition under the Cheras. This was in the 7th or 8th century ad. And surely the namboodiris couldnt have come alone. they needed protection sply when they were venturing into an unknown land. Manu

NEW INFO

…..followed by certain tribal groups provided the model. The sanctification and controlled performance of Kalamezhuthu and songs, Vavubali among ancestral rites might be an instance of integrating the tribal elements into the mainstream. The story that Parasurama brought Deva, Gandharva and Rakshasa women as consorts to brahmana boys and that Nayars were their progeny also did the sanctifying trick. The same implication could be seen in the story that Nayars were Sudras who accompanied the brahmanas brought by Parasurama. This group got the right to mingle with the upper class society…

I got this from a book...i didnt know that nairs are descended from "Deva Gandharva and Rakshasa Women"....manu

Please note that lineages doesnot mean that you are a Sudra again....this is very funny though this isnt true...Pulastya..is the father of the Rakshasas and so many Brahmin claim descent from this muni..also many other people have moved up and down the caste system...this has got no aryan dravidian connection atleast in its later stages... anyway this is very interesting info even though it is not true and means nothing at all..in todays context. Rajeev Rajendran Nair

MIGRATION THEORY

Hi!! Iam Rajesh Nambiar. First of all greetings to all you generous people who had the very thought of sharing knowledge and information specially on topic which relates to tracing one's history.

May I too contribute some information which I had acquired over a period of time.


It was mentioned by some dear friend in the above postings,that the caste system in kerala was a very complex one unlike how it prevailed else where in India,but even though complex it is pretty evident that all upper castes purely had migrated from other regions within India and the actual sons of the soil were Pulayans,Parayans so on and so forth whom today we classify as Schedule castes/ Schedule Tribes.

The presence of 5 dominant kshatriya clans(Suryavamsh,Chandravamsh,Agnivamsh,Nagavamsh,Vayuvamsh) ruling various regions within India is very much evident through our knowledge of mahabaratha.Each one claimed supremacy over the others. They shared a bitter sweet relation ship amongst them selves. They got married in to each others clans and also waged wars among eachother. A fine example would be the marriage of Arjuna who was a chandra vamshi to Uluppi a naga vamshi princes and at the same time arjuna also with the help of krishna had also set fire to an entire place which was under the Nagas this place is now in pakistan this part of the epic has a very close relation with the legend about "Mannarshala" which says that lot of snakes had escaped a forest fire and came to a namboothiri illam where they were given abode and the name mannarshala was coined from the term Mann+aarriya+shalla transalation "where the land had cooled" The reference made to snakes is purely symbolical which meant the naga clans and their family naga deities. I feel this information sheds a little light on how the Nairs who are nagas themselves might have migrated in to kerala.

Now talking about Nambiars they were known as Samanta kshatriyas,their ladies were married into kovilakams and by namboothiries. They were territorial rulers coming directly under the King of that Nadu. The Nambiars of kannur to which even I belong, had our affiliation to The Kolathiris (Chirakkal Maharaja) and each nambiar had his territory charted out by the Maharaja and was given the title "Desvazhi" the affairs and jurisdiction of a desam was purely at the ruling Nambiar's disposal and all the nambiars of a Nadu used to be related to one another through marriage similar is the case of Unnithans in travancore....Rajesh Nambiar

That is an excellantr perspective on the migration of the nairs....infact i was told that they were called nakars which later got modigfied into Nair....excellant....thanks..well all kiriyathil nairs are kshatriyas i think...they are higher that ambalavasis too...and the rajahs were kiriyathil too...neways...Manu

thankyou rajesh nambiar for your contributions. may i ask what is the difference between Samanta kshatriyas (nambiars) and other kshatriyas? i.N.d.I.A

Samantha Kshatriyas are all Kiriyathil Nairs that include Nambiars, Unnithans and Valiathans entirely and a few Panickers and other title holders. They are non sudra, Kshatriya Nairs who are defined as Nairs with the right to partake food with the Namboodiris. All Rajahs of Kerala are Kiriyathil Nairs. Non Royal Kiriyathil Nairs were called Samanthas ie subordinate Kshatriyas. Manu

Caste Classification

Hello colleagues

A site on a caste is sure to create all sorts of irritations and rivalries. India is vexed by it. Nevertheless a page on “Nair” is welcome, since it is a very interesting sociological group in Kerala. But we must adhere to historical truths rather than on individual preferences, claims and boastings. Nairs are a very proud people. But Namputhiri Brahmins some how could subjugate them for various purposes. The whole country was protected by them, but they were not given the status of Kshatriya by them. They wanted to do Sambandhams with the beautiful Nair ladies; but they never wanted to own or pet their children born out of that relation. But Nairs were warriors and kept their heads high and managed temples and the political matters.

In fact, no caste in Kerala can be properly classified according to the Varna System. Yet, the Namputhiri settlers could impose a rigid untouchability system in Kerala which prompted Swami vivekananda to call Kerala as a Mad House.

So please do not misrepresent the facts. Nairs were never Kshatriyas according to the Namputhiri dominated system. Now that the Varna system has gone for good, why one should reclassify them as Kshatriyas. There was nothing like Nagavanshi about Nairs in any historical documents. Opinions should not be termed as facts. Yes, Nairs were intense worshippers of Serpent gods.

So while editing the page, please read some authentic history books written by Prof. Elamkulam Kunjan Pillai, or Sardar K.M. Panicker. som123

NAIRS AND ANCIENT CHERAS

Caste Classification

In spite of several exhortations some editors of "Nair" page are subjective rather than objective. They are showing their ego satisfaction on a page which should show to the world the facts and the facts only. Wikipedia is not for false ego satisfaction. Wikipedia is to represent knowledge. Caste is a controversial factor in India. Tons of false pride ooze out in casteism. But the Nair caste in Kerala is a sociologically curious group. So please do not publish controversial factors, particularly regarding subcastes and subdivisions. Some people absurdly assert certain propositions. Wikipedia is not to be a platform for such propositions Som123

well as far as the subcastes are concerned wht is written now is right...search on the google book search and u will find all foreign travellers saying that kriyathil nairs were the highest followed by the illathu and so on...but i noticed one thing...marars are ambalavasis and not nairs rite? - manu

Hello Manu! Foreign travellers never got full information. Absurd observations can be found in some of their writings. Brahmins who were supposed to be the authority in such matters were always there at hand to mislead people. In the case of subcaste hierarchy, those who call themselves, Kiriyathil Nairs are mostly found in North Kerala. In the south, Illathu Nairs (Illakkar) claim superiority. It is interesting to note that compared to the North, South Kerala do not have as many Namboodiri Illams or Madoms. Exasperated by these claims and counter claims, Mannathu Padmanabhan wanted to put a full stop to these ego clashes.

Marars are sometimes considered Ambalavasis, since they were drummers in the temples. But the common consensus was that they were an offshoot of Nairs. In North Kerala, they took the surname Marar. In the South, they took the surname of Panicker also. They were the Parikarmi for Shraddha rites for other Nairs. All these things are to be told in past tense only.

An interesting case study in the positional change of Nairs is shown in the link Mulavelil, a Nair Tharavadu listed in the List of Nair Tharavadus. They were Marars and with financial gains they got other surnames and positions in the society. So upward and downward mobility in caste is possible. som123

Reply to som123: well firstly i am from that mulavelil house. we are unnithans and ambalavasi marars at the same time. as in after the new lineage our women have married only higer caste kshatriyas or namboodiris but men amrried marasiyars...

well ur rite..foreign travellers didnt get a complete idea...for example one guy states in a book that the caste after brahmins is subia...his talk makes a person feel that subia is a special kshatriya caste itself...but it is a wrong pronounciation of sudra..so ur rite there

also true that kriya nairs are not seein travancore. i think descendants of the ettu veetil pillais are kriyathil but we have a caste even higher than kriyam nairs ie the unnithans and valiathans...eg ranis attached thampurati to their name...thampi ladies and wives of rajahs used kochamma while unnithans and valiathans also the progeny of kshatriyas used kunjamma. thus travancore has an absence of kiryams but unnithans and valiatahns are present instead.

I have heard this abt marars...old women in our family say that they are pure ambalavasis in malabar and folloowed rigid rules..one of my relations knows a family where even today non hindus arent allowed inside the padiperra...but in travancore their funeral purohita status resulted in them being a detested caste. as in they were considered a apajati or bad jati causing apashagunams or bad omens...hence they slowly went lower in the scale and became equal to the chakala and other low nairs. Manu

kettukalyanams and other things

firstly i can't help wondering why caste bothers us so much. i'd always assumed that nair=shudra, and it didn't make any sort of difference to my life. but here are people who's eternally concerned about their place in society, esp when that place is based on something as absurd as caste. seems a bit weird. but that apart, i am proud of being a nair, because i've always thought that nairs are primarily responsible for the shape of kerala today (warts and all) after all the marumakkathaayam, tho completely unjustified for today's society, was quite revolutionary for it's time. again, i can't understand people's problem with polyandry, if it meant more power to the women.

what i wanted was some clarification:

1. wanted info about this legend that i grew up hearing--ie if it's only self-glorification by the nairs, or whether it's actually recorded somewhere.. my grandaunt used to tell me when i was a kid that the nairs were kshatriyas who removed their poonoolus to excape from parashurama when he was hunting kshatriyas down.

2. and everywhere in the article, it seemed to suggest that kettukalyanams were an individual sort of thing, with the time being chosen by horoscope etc. what i understood from people in my family was that for them, the kettukalyanam was a mass affair. the kochirajavu, or some namboothiri, would show up on an assigned day (with all sort of rituals involved) an tie a thaali for all the unwedded girls in the tharavaadu. and then after a bit, all the girls would go and throw their thaalis into a well (some parts of this memory are a bit hazy--this is how i understood the story at the time... :-)..)

3. there's been a lot of discussion on kshatriyas only getting poonoolus when they are crowned. something about hiranyagarbham, etc. but the trippunithura varmas i know all seem to at least have had the ceremony. and this makes them "special" kshatriyas, for some reason, and they therefore marry only kshatriyas from certain selected other kovilakams. there doesn't seem to be any information about that sort of thing in this article, or the one on perumpadavu swaroopam. please clarify.

vk

hey vk, well i know it from schloars that the term nairs are sudras came into existence only about 500 years ago. Before that they werer just nairs as a caste.

even i have heard this statement that the nairs removed their poonool. well i am not so sure about it. as per the story i heard however it was parasurama who told the nairs to remove their poonool. anyways i cant find this story anywhere else. however i was told that it is mentioned in the keralolpathi..no idea though...will ask n tell u....but it seems quite authentic because even i have heard these stories in the past.

yup..kettukalayanam was in reality a huge afair. it was i who added that actually. but i need to make it more detailed one of these days. i mean tharavads have been ruined conducting these, such was the xpense of the whole affair.

remember...they marry from other kovilakams these days...earlier kshatriya princesses were never given to kshatriya men...they had to marry suitable nair women from respected ammaveedus of thampis or unnithans and valiathans.the princesses usually stayed with the namboodiri tying their thali at the kettukalyaman while th eguy had to have a sambandham

hope this was helpful - manu

sambandham

i'd like to question the part of the article that deals with sambandhams. i don't know if u've thought about it, but the sambandham, as the basis for the whole marumakkathayam system, is pretty much the reason why nair society was the way it was. including that the relative position of power that the nair woman has enjoyed. it's part of the reason why a girlchild is a boon in nair society. and u can't really brush that aside as a decadent practice.

now, i will accept willingly that the sambandham could work out to beng near-prostitution among the poorer nair families. but for the majority of families that did go in for it, with namboodiris/kshathriyas, it meant that the woman was the one who controlled the relationship. and that is quite refreshing when u consider the options.

and i think vaaykkurava is an exclusively thiruvithankoor thing. could someone please at least suggest that it's not a universal thing in the ceremony?


reply: well in a sambandham both persons involved could break it off...yes in poorer families it was near prostitution...but in the aristocratic families it was more permanent and long lasting and often fathers were attached to their children...n kurava is exclusively done in travancore? - manu

i think you're missing the point i'm trying to make entirely. what i understood from your reply seems to be that in the "more aristocratic" families (!) the sambandham was "more permanent" and therefore better. i think that assumption's basically false. not to suggest that it was not so--that the fathers didn't get attached to their offspring--only that i can't believe that the child whose father wasn't around lost all that much. the tharavaadu provided a huge support system, in which the loss of a father wouldn't have seemed all that much. especially in a society where the "loss" wasn't something all that significant at all. and i know of too many aristocratic families with half-brothers in them to think that that theory is even true--my great-grandfather had (a minimum of) three brothers--one was a namboodiri, one was his own brother (same father and mother) and the third was the child of his mother and someone else. and these weren't necessarily in that chronological order. and apart from the namboodiri brother, they were all brought up as siblings within the family, and never really saw any impropriety in the whole thing. i'm sorry to burst your bubble, but upto that time at least (125 years ago max) nair polyandry was quite a healthy thing. and i still fail to see any harm in it.

and yes, i know for a fact that kurava's not necessary, because i've never seen it. i've only heard of it because of the the shock one of my aunts got when she got married (to someone from down south) and suddenly there was this noise. :-)

reply: hehe that was funny./..i mean that sound thing....well even ive been alarmed at that once..i mean we had a pooja at our family temple and everytime sumthin happened all the villagers and people around would start making that noise....im laughing in all the temple videos...now back to the topic,.

see in my family the women had a sambandham with a namboodiri and they werre then taken to the namboodiri's house. my great grandma lived all her life between her father;s illam and mothers tharavad....sometimes living therre and sometimes here..

atleast we havent heard any instances of women having more than one husband at a time in my family....it was the men..for instance my great granduncle had 5 wives and they were housed together in a pathayaperra built exclusivley for keeping mistresses actually.......anyways illl change my statement and make it " in higher subcastes and among the aristocracy the sambandhams were healthier"...neways if not fathers there were always uncles....my great grandad added his uncles initials to his name....phew!!!incidentally are u frm AMANCHY tharavad ? manu

no i'm not... technically speaking i'm from angarath (there's some confusion here, because we're not patrilineal, as this site would suggest, and people in my family claim that they're not mannadiars either.. they say they're mannadi nairs, which is supposedly different. god knows how)

hey....tell me more abt mannadi nairs....im frm an unnithan family (unnithans are called samantha kshatriyas)...so newyas....whts this mannadi nairs? find more n tell - manu

Marathas

The famous Marathas of Maharastra have been accepted as Kshatriyas. But looking at their history the Nairs are even above them.

I read a book by Jadunath Sarkar, an eminet Maratha Historian, called Shivaji and his times. The Marathas were the peasants of Maharastra. They were famous for lack of etiquette and manners and for their crude behavior. They were pure Sudras of Maharasthra and lived through farming and peasantry.

One has to note that no major kingdom ever rose in Maharastra except that of Shivaji's. Till before the entire region was either under one of the empires of the north or asouth who were based elsewhere. With the rise of the islamic nations of the Adilshah and Nizamshah etc many of these local farmers were given positions of power in their native land due to which they became substantially powerful. Some of these families were the Bhonsles, Mohites etc.

However they still didnot claim Kshatriya status. Neither were their Maratha people warriors. But with these local feudal lords rising they started taking members of the same farmer and peasant caste and making them soldiers.

There was a Sudra peasant whose son left tthe village and entered the service of a jadhav (a maratha whose grandad had been made a tehsildar from a farmer) noble. He first worked as a guard but later after gaining a lot of gold which he found somewhere he became rich. He then married his son, Shahaji to the jadhavs daughter Jijabai and their son was shivaji.

shivaji after becoming powerful wanted to become a kshatriya. But the brahmins refused to accept it saying that the only dwijas were brahmins. Eventually Gangu Bhat of Varanasi was payed nearly 5 crores (at that time) to declare shivaji a kshatriya. Moreover this bhat also declared that the marathas and shivaji were descended from the Maharanas of Udaipur in unbroken line and were of Suryavansham.

Thts how, about 350 years back the peasants who were the marathas became "kshatriyas" with even a hocus pocus descent from the udaipur family. Note that the only kshatriyas in India who the brahmins accepted as dwija were the rajputs and the kerala rajahs.

The nairs and rajahs did the same job. only that on the popular belief that only brahmins were dwija they were not considered kshatriya. however for ruling it was essential to be a kshatriya and so some of them , who claimed unbroken descent from the original 600 nagavanshi tharas, were made kshatriyas. Thts the only difference. The book also mentions the crude and unmannered behavior of shivaji himself and the author blames that on the peasant origin of hardships and toughness

I would also verify something. The book said tht the Udaipur Rajahs were descendants of Ram. But i read in the websiet of the cochin royal family tht they too have descended from rams son, luvs, grandson. does that make them cousins of the udaipur people? i guess they are rajputs in that case. Rama Varma, help- Manu

Manu, claiming to have descended from some divine/popular mythical/religious figure is a form of political legitimacy to make oneself and one's dynasty more appealing to the masses. Verifying such a claim is impossible - I usually consider the more probably version of any story. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്) 09:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Weddings and Tavazhi

I wonder if washermen had played a role in the Nair weddings of the past. Any idea? Thanks. In the region of Tulu Nadu and Kasaragod most of the non-brahmin Malayalee communities and Tulu commuitiies have a lineage system known as bali or bari in Tulu or illam in Malayalam. In fact, these lineages are the same across the castes. Though Malayalee names differ people identify corresponding lineages between Malayalee and Tulu communities. I wonder if Nairs( at least North Malabar) have vazhi names. Thanks for any inputs.

Manjunatha (27 Jul 2006)

NEWLY ADDED

The newly added part in the origins states that the Nairs have migrated from the north. This along with the story of mannarsala and the anaga theory of migration makes perfect sense to me..What say u Manu


Do you all out there know that Palakkad Royal Family is Nair???? Now let those who want to prove and beleive that Nairs were people who did menial jobs of brahmins explain that??? Raks


Hallo Friends Kindly express your views on my comments posted some days back under 'Nairs' in Discussion page. Raks

Sorry for the delay. Being in Iraq, my internet access is rather limited. While it is true that I was the one who initially wrote the article, it has changed over time due to the fact that Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. A lot of people have made changes. Furthermore, I haven't been monitoring the article lately, so I cannot tell you much about the new changes. As far as your first point goes, I agree with you completely. The Kerala caste system was completely different from the rest of India. While the Nairs were the ruling class, the highly orthodox Namboothiris still considered them to be untouchable due to the fact that they considered anyone lower (according to them) than their caste, untouchable. In fact, even other Brahmins (Iyers, for example) were considered untouchable by the Namboothiris. In that sense, you are correct - the Nairs were never classified into Kshathriya, Vaishya, or Sudra. However, I was merely trying to show a comparative analysis. As far as your second point, I am no authority on it, and therefore, cannot comment. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

Hey vivin...yeah i saw u on orkut actually....neways when writing about nairs we d rather preserve our identity as nairs only rather than go in for any claim as kshatriyas coz the brahmins never called us that and it was brahminic rule that set the caste system....neways - Manu

New changes

I rearranged and reworded the part about Nairs coming from the north. I had to remove the part about Nairs removing their thread to escape the wrath of Parashurama because the story of Parashuraman is a myth. I also removed the part about "handsome men and beautiful women among Nairs" bit since it's POV and has no place in this article. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്) 09:47, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

HELP!!!!

Oyi people....sum1 has gone and changed the nambiar article again....now its certainly a pov and boasts about racial difference frm nairs etc...plz sum1 who knows the subject write the article....this is torturing man...these people write utter nonsense...Manu

HALLO MANU!!!!!!!! Manu I saw your posting about damn-care attitude towards Kshatriya staus. however, Sabdathataravali define Nairs as "Nairs are the Malayalee warriors (Kshathriyas) of Kerala. They are the owners of this land.". That's just one point. Of course, since the Chaturvarna is not applicable to kerala as it is in its place of origin in the north, it is better and dignified if we refer ourselves to as just "Nairs- a class of savara Hindus". Not Kshatriyas, nor shudras. We did the kshatriya dharma rather than the shudra one. The term "Shudra"is misleading since in the north Shudras formed the bottom of caste hierarchy did menial tasks for the upper castes. I am reproducing what a friend of mine sent me.

" However, it may be remembered that 'Shudras' is not used in the same context as found in the nothern part of india. Shudras formed the bottom of caste hierarchy and were banned from learning and administration. they were supposed to do menail tasks for the upper castes.

However, Nairs formed the naduvazhis and other nobility in Kerala political and military setup. Many Nair families formed the hereditary(or otherwise) diwans and commanders in the armies of local rajas. Nairs were not barred from learning sanskrit and had produced scholars through the centuries. Brahmins and royal families had matrimonial alliances with aristocratic Nair families. The consort of many of kings of Travancore and Cochin kings were nairs. Why, the royal family of Palakkad is Nair.

Thus it is seen that the term shudra IF and WHEN used must be put in the proper perspective and context, decipherable and unconfusing even to a non-Keralite. While the claimed superiority or inferiority of one caste over another is laughable (to put it mildly), sociological terminology and connotations have to be used in a discretionary way with out being misled into wrong conclusions."

It is stated in the article that castes like Reddys and Marathas were considered by Brahmins as Shudras, in spite of their martial background. Anybody familiar with the Indian history would agree to this. However, I did't see any subheading like 'Classification controversy'in the articles cabout these castes. Then why should it be in the 'Nair' article??? It gives a WRONG PERSPECTIVE to the subject. Why don't we assert ourselves and do away with the'WHAT-OTHERS-MAY-THINK?' attitude!!! RAKS

oyi....ok wht was ur note about actually? as in u support the nambiar article or what? o yes i truly believe the nairs were kshatriyas in terms of the words true meaning....infact sacred laws of hindus clearly state that any brahmin who marries or has a kid with a sudra lady is a sudra himself...im sure namboodiris wudnt allow that...i mean being the most orthodox brahmins n all...so well all is not clear in the real history of nairs....true that to be called a proper 'kshatriya' as per the manusmriti one needs a poonool..and so the same book states that without a poonool, even a brahmin is a sudra....not that it matters, after all we knows what position the nairs held in society....anyways the nambiars claiming different racial origin has no proof, as far as i know, and neither has it been mentioned in history....i myself was under the impression, after reading from a blog, that even unnithans, my caste, were different...only to get to know later that they were actually like thampis, descended from royal houses and hence called samanthans....one more thing...when my aunt indira devi married a jat from jabalpur (who are kshatriyas) they had no caste based problems because they had always heard that nairs were the kshatriyas of kerala...so anywaysmanu

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nair/Archive_1&oldid=1137033304"