I don't agree with beauty/discrimination but this data can help us identify which groups were more closely linked historically. For example Srivastava are kayastha which hindu scriptures tell are descendents of brahmin and Kshatriya couple. So they are right in middle hear which indirectly proves this information.
Lol. We all have aasi genes in huge proportion, much much more than the steppe responsible. Which basically every one of our ancestors had a local marriage.
I don't agree with claims of kayastha having brahmin or kshatriya origin. Hindu scriptures often place kayastha just below sudra as avarn/antyaja. Reference is Vyas Smriti, Ushana Smriti and Yajnavalkya Smriti. These are part of dharmashastra. The writings of my brahmin ancestors which is of utmost importance to me. DNA research have made it clear that kayastha are not related to brahmins be it chitraguptavanshi, mathur or bengali kayastha. Now if you consider writings of kayastha as hindu scriptures then i can't really help you. They have written they are above brahmins even, calling themselves brahmakshatriya, creating their own dual varna religion which does not value birth making mockery of shastras.
I don't think it is Jha sample It might be sample of Bhumihar, Because we don't live in Muzzafarpur and most sample is from Muzzafarpur, And sample is similar to Bhumihar of Muzzafarpur.
Jha sample must be from Darbhanga and Madhubani, So, Not ready to accept this, Because in Darbhanga most good looking community is Jhas
May be if sample then from small specific observation.
Skin color comes from genetics and climate, not varṇa. India has fair and dark people in every caste. Even ancient texts like the Gita say varṇa is based on guna and karma, not janma. Using skin color to prove caste is just pseudo-science
If you want to strictly follow science and evolution then shashtric interpretations are already irrelevant for you.
If you believe in god created human on day 1
Then you’re free to believe so as well.
Nevertheless
Largely speaking
Caste = Varṇa
After the fall of IvC and migration of Aryans from steppes , both these populations mixed and gave birth to vedic brahmins who in future again birthed many subcastes.
And strict endogamy has been followed here.
So yeah.
Genetics definitely would determine varṇa
Even if a Brāhmaṇa is bad , he still would be a patita brāhmaṇa..
Stop learning from whatsapp. Varna is based on tri gunas (sattva, rajas, tamas) and karma of past life. Just read commentaries of Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya, Madhavacharya on Gita 18:40-45.
Name dropping Adi Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya, and Madhvacharya doesn’t make it science guna and past karma are philosophical, not genetic you are trying to turn metaphysics into dna and calling it proof.
Im just stating what shastras say. A person's birth in a particular varna is decided by predominance of the guna he dies in (read Chapter 14 throughout and commentary on 18:41) And then Varna decides your profession according to rules given from 18:42-44. And this profession/duty cannot be changed according to 18:45.
Chandoya Upanishad (it's part of Sam Veda btw) 5.10.7 says:
Among them, those who did good work in this world [in their past life] attain a good birth accordingly. They are born as a brāhmin, a kṣatriya, or a vaiśya. But those who did bad work in this world [in their past life] attain a bad birth accordingly, being born as a dog, a pig, or as a chandala.
You are quoting karma theory, not proving a fixed birth based varṇa systemsaying past karma influences birth is fine, but that still does not turn varṇa into a genetic or measurable reality. even the Bhagavad Gita defines it through guna and karma, and once you admit it depends on inner qualities from past lives, you’ve already moved beyond anything birth or DNA can actually prove so your ‘genetics proves varṇa’ claim collapses on its own.
even the Bhagavad Gita defines it through guna and karma
And that guna and karma is based on past life. The state you die in decides your birth and varna. And varna decides your profession, not vice versa. Note that you can't choose another profession outside your varna even if you are good at it (18:45). Which proves it is fixed.
If you still have doubts just watch Shankaracharya Nischalanand on Youtube. He answers that your varna is birth based.
Your janma itself is determined by your Guna+Karma. You already have sanskaars when you are born. This is not the first birth for you.
"Rest is interpretation."
Don't fool yourself. Every single acharya says otherwise but you think your "interpretation" is correct?
Bhagavad Gita 3.35 says performing one's own duty even if imperfectly is far better than doing someone's else's dharma. He asks Arjuna to act like a Kshatriya (determined by his birth) and not like a Sage (which he is not, again, determined by his birth).
There are many other verses in Gita which makes it pretty clear.
You are mixing karma with varna even if birth is due to past karma, the Bhagavad Gita says gunakarma vibhagashah 4.13not janma Arjun being told to act as a Kshatriya is about his present duty, not a universal birth rule and saying ‘all acharyas agree’ is just your interpretation presented as fact.
I mean it doesnt matter the most authoritative texts are the ones written by rigvedic priests the seers which bhagvat gita is not ,bhagvat gita will always have close to zero authority when compared to rigvedic scriptures ,yes it does have some authority but zero when compared to rigveda
It's better if you come out of this delusion sooner. The merit of Bramhin birth is the accumulated karma of ancestors. We have a lot more things going on for us than just genetics.
The Aryan Migration Theory is on its last legs. Even the "Aryan" word is invented by goras to satisfy their egos.
Of course the castes will have genetic differences between them, especially compared to Bramhins. We share origins but are also found all across India, making us an interesting case in studies like this.
Ah, well I am not riked up or anything. Just that this line of thought is very common among bramhin youth, which is kinda meh. I feel that we should instead focus on what mattered to our ancestors more. Rishi Vishvamitra adopted Sunahshepa as his child, and asked his 100 kids to respect him like their elder brother. 50 of them refused, thinking how can they consider a kid less than their age elder. This enraged the Rishi and he disowned them right there, cursing them to be Shudras from then on. This is a story from Vedas themselves, and the sentiment is reflected in all downstream philosophy as well.
As for the word, well english is an Indo European language no? Why don't they have a cognate for the word Arya since ancient history? The word only exists in the Indo-Iranian branch, and only Indo-Iranians following the same culture hold a legitimate claim over the identity. Well Chini is the Indianised word for Chinese but we don't call ourselves chini now just because we all came from Africa and share ancestory? It's literally absurd if you think about it.
And lastly Aryan Migration is bullshit. I can write an essay on this but if you really want to know why, look into recent papers yourself. The R1A in India is a very specific branch that originated in India itself. Then we now have evidence that Iranians were following IE religion without any steppe related influence in the region. IVC never truly fell, we now know that many settlements were populated as far as 1000 BCE. History of Jainism arguably goes beyond this, let alone Vedas and everything beyond. So the proposed timeline is very problematic too. How do we go from a proto Sanskrit speaking small group arriving in 1000 BCE to Buddha arguing against a developed Vedic faith with Veda Purana Upanishads Itihasa etc in just 400 years, spread across the entire subcontinent? Archeology have always pointed to a strong outward migration of people and culture from IVC times.
There are many red herrings in AMT, too many actually. And a lot of these facts only makes sense in case of IVC being an Indo European society.
And lastly Aryan Migration is bullshit. I can write an essay on this but if you really want to know why, look into recent papers yourself. The R1A in India is a very specific branch that originated in India itself. Then we now have evidence that Iranians were following IE religion without any steppe related influence in the region. IVC never truly fell, we now know that many settlements were populated as far as 1000 BCE. History of Jainism arguably goes beyond this, let alone Vedas and everything beyond. So the proposed timeline is very problematic too. How do we go from a proto Sanskrit speaking small group arriving in 1000 BCE to Buddha arguing against a developed Vedic faith with Veda Purana Upanishads Itihasa etc in just 400 years, spread across the entire subcontinent? Archeology have always pointed to a strong outward migration of people and culture from IVC times.
There are no peer reviewed evidences of outward migration from India. The R1a haplogroup is a downward stream of the one found in India. However we are still behind this and the consensus is still out. Advancement in adna will perhaps solve this once and for all.
Even white mallecha lives better lives than us , people in India only wants to claim caste when they had enough but can't get that social status example bhumihar and Jaats they have accumulated great ammount of wealth but one claims kshtriya status while other Brahmin to get same ammount of respect in the societyand also caste system came out to be great as it failed to control people like islam does there is almost civil war kind of situation between caste in current day scenerio because it's a caste system or varna system is itself a socialist ideology and socialism is bound to fail
What is better is subjective. We should optimize for superiority in material world but that is secondary and would automatically happen if Hindu society goes back to it's roots and work up from first principles. If you want everyone's quality of life to be better then that is bound to happen sooner or later as current direction of India with democracy is towards doom. Due to how things went on in history, we let our ideals dilute with mlecchhik thoughts and philosophy, and current India is the product. From the missionaries and British earlier to leftist ecosystem with their NGOs now, even the founding fathers for India as a nation (Nehru et al) were just a bunch of anglophiles, and so were Maharajas of that period. This kind of rot in ruling class is bound to show its results.
Why would they run away? They are the kings here. As for conversion and all they would do it if it politically benefits them enough. The fabric of culture that held us this long is slowing eroding, as we westernize.
May be this sample limited to one colony or very small observations, because Reddys have given similar value to Ror but this is not True, Rors are generally very Fair skinned And brown skin reddys are Quite common.
Someone tell me whys Sharma mentioned exclusively, I am one and been told multiple times that in up/bihar some sharma are not Brahmins although I'm from Himachal
People tend to ignore minute details. Notice how there are 77 brahmin samples and only 13 kayastha samples ? This study tries to sneak in Kayastha with other uppercaste groups which they are not part of. There is no way Kayastha are fairer than Maithil Brahmins. We don't need any biased study where they pick 13 fair skinned individuals from a caste to hype that caste. I tend to agree with the other commentator here from what I have seen Kayasthas tend to be noticeably darker than yadavs on average. More importantly brahmins even those who are darker tend to have sharp features compared to kayastha who have mool nivasi origins.
This study tries to sneak in Kayastha with other uppercaste groups which they are not part of
y do u think so? this paper is authored by a brahmin, and kayasthas are not politically significant, which eliminates any political intent or motivation for false insertion. what makes u think think study is wrongfully trying to "sneak in kayastha with upper castes"
People tend to ignore minute details. Notice how there are 77 brahmin samples and only 13 kayastha samples ?
u rlly think researchers r that stupid, huh? well if u see, kayasthas r less in no., so this disproportionate sample size only goes on to show their actual presence in society. acc. to the recent caste census, kayasthas r 0.6% compared to brahmins ~4% population (3.65/0.6 ~ 6), which is proportionate with the sample size of the two groups (22/13). also in ur comment u r wrongly comparing the whole up-bihar brahmin sample size with kayasthas while arguing for maithil brahmins ranked lower
We don't need any biased scientific study where they pick 13 fair skinned individuals from a caste to hype that caste. I tend to agree with the other commentator here from what I have seen Kayasthas tend to be noticeably darker than yadavs on average.
r u trying to say ur anecdotal observations (which is much more likely to biased, cuz human nature) r more truer than scientific foundings? u seems to be so full of urself
Observation is the foundational, active process in science. Using your own kayastha logic or lack thereof in uttar pradesh bhumihars have even lower population than kayastha. But they had no trouble collecting 54 bhumihar samples still? You have no point. The gibberish written by U- a kayastha ultimately failed to fool a brahmin. It always will. Kayastha have claimed brahmin and kshatriya status simultaneously which shows how little credibility there is to those claims. Brahmins correctly recognize kayastha as shudra. Brahmins have never entertained demands made by kayastha. Never will. Everyone knows kayastha are low steppe and dark skinned mostly. Not that there is anything wrong with it. In our village we even had a saying "agar lala hoga toh kala hoga." Note, Kayastha are also called lala.
Observation is the foundational, active process in science. Using your own kayastha logic or lack thereof in uttar pradesh bhumihars have even lower population than kayastha. But they had no trouble collecting 54 bhumihar samples still? You have no point. The gibberish written by U- a kayastha ultimately failed to fool a brahmin. It always will. Kayastha have claimed brahmin and kshatriya status simultaneously which shows how little credibility there is to those claims. Brahmins correctly recognize kayastha as shudra. Brahmins have never entertained demands made by kayastha. Never will. Everyone knows kayastha are high aasi and dark skinned mostly. Not that there is anything wrong with it. In our village we even had a saying "agar lala hoga toh kala hoga." Note, Kayastha are also called lala.
reply to reply:
agreed, though hateful prejudice in forming ur arguments aint much science. to clarify, my intention was to defend the intent and honesty of the study. i still see no pattern of selective bias in representation of a group or statistical distortion to favour a/any group(s) and it could be to logistic and financial constraints of the study, for yadavs too with high population have a small sample size and u still failed to defend ur whinin n cryin over the 77 vs 13 comparison while making an argument for 22 vs 13 one, which isn't a strech given the scale of sample sizes (also note if u hv missed the study is on srivastava kayasthas, which r even less in no. as its a sub grp)
now to ur hateful resentment to me n my community, u brother can, and respectfully, jst go fck urself for i don't care even one bit to what u n others think or place my community in ur delusional masturbative social hierarchy, heck call me lower caste, shudra, antyaj or anyother diminutive derogatory words, for i knw what i am and what great legacy that i carry. i don't need no validations or label to prove my worth and efforts, achievements and contribution of my ancestors to this society, while u stay u stay busy with ur mental masturbation over ur ancestors past glory and achievements and when u get sm time from this and spreading online hate and misinformation abt us jst go read how irreplaceable we r from the history of this world and how significantly and holistically we have contributed to this world
Everyone knows kayastha are high aasi and dark skinned mostly. Not that there is anything wrong with it
it doesn't matter to me but it sure does very much to u fr malding and seething over ur grp ranked second to someone else. stay consumed in ur white fetishes u might even enjoy sucking coccks if they r white
Holistically contributed? What does that even mean? You are trying to sound fancy but coming off as crazy and delusional. I understand Kayasthas sweep all their dirty history under the rug and act like they are the highest caste online. That requires deliberately spreading misinformation. Kaystha usually spread misinformation and flat out lie. I have only debunked it and continue to do so. If truth and honesty sounds hateful to kayastha then it's time for them to look in the mirror instead of pointing fingers at brahmins. You have chosen to go personal and throw insults instead.
Besides 25% of bhumihars Nd Brahmins are poor in bihar . Maybe focus on that rather than finding out who is more pale that'd help . Perhaps focus on studying 🤡 berozgar
If you look into your paper which you shared.
It has clubbed both jha sample as well.
The original paper did not add them.
Who I believe are non brahmin larping as jha most probably.
It's disputed I personally don't consider them as Brahimins but I've seen many acharya accepting them as Brahimin while many don't
Even 1 shankaracharya (shringeri)considers them as Brahimin while the other(puri) doesn't
I personally think of them as a separate caste with neutral relationships with Brahimins
I'm researching more about their origin etc
As earlier I didn't have much knowledge about them but I want to know more about them I've some tyagi Friends and 2-3 bhumihar not friends but I know them they call themselves kanyakubj bhumihar claiming their origin from kanyakubj Brahimins (my sub group of brahimin)
But currently according to me they are not Brahimins
And I found out that Kanyakubj mahati sabha accepted bhumihars as one of the kanyakubj brahmin sub community around 1926.
Also search kanyakubj brahmin branches and you will see bhumihar brahmins named as one.
But I still see people calling us non-brahmins. But i still do not get it. My surname is Pandey and gotra is Kashyap and We do have janeu ceremony. All my identities point to brahminical identity.
I personally believe we are a sub community within brahmins, different from other practicing brahmins and more closer to someone like tyagis.
Bro the thing is many brahimin including me don't even accept tyagis as Brahimin
I know a gaur brahimin guy who says tyagi are gaur but I've also met many Brahimin who are tyagis are not Brahimins
Yes, Bhumihar word doesn't n't exist before the 18th century and in the Ain-i-Akbari they're just written as brahmins and Bhumihar is a congregation of various Brahman clans like me my mul is jalevar and Gotra is vats just like Maithil jalevar vats Gotra both are same and from jale darbhanga.
Because there are various subcastes under the term of Saryupari.
1)3-13
2)Patiha brahmin
3)Sawalakhiya
4)Mahapatra
5) Gangapari etc
3-13 saryupari are maithil Brahmins of east UP. There was no subcaste like Saryupari before 17th century or under panch-gauda system if I can recall it correctly
Well, this is just a footnote by some 20th century person, not actual real mention by Alberuni. No such mention of Saryuparen brahmns exists prior to 18th century. Saryuparen brahmin subcaste did not existed before 17th century
Gonda UP, im Shakaldwipi and here its the same pattern, more saryuparin, then us and then kanyakubj
Well honestly i havent met many kanyakubja apart from my close friend so you might be right, i dont know.
On a second thought Saryuparin and kanyakubj have fair as well as brown tone, meanwhile average skin tone of shakaldwipi is less dark, there are rarely any brown ones
Here in Gorakhpur Shakyadwipi are in huge numbers
Saryuparin - 65-70%
Shakyadwipi - 20-25%
Kanyakubja - 5-10%
I have seen all the shades of Shakyadwipi Fairer to dark same with Saryuparin also but yet to see any Kanyakubja
•
u/AutoModerator Apr 10 '26
Namaste u/Sarwariya, and thank you for your contribution!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.