Talk:Namadhari Naik

maintenance of this page

It has come to my notice that some of the wiki users are taking interest in this article of mine and have been editing and adding their inputs. I am happy that there are people who are interested in this subject just as I am,& I welcome all constructive inputs.But the problem is that none of the inputs received on this page are satisfactory . Most of them go against my knowledge about the subject & to make me believe or atleast give credence to the input,there are no citations. Editing without any citations make them look like mere defacing attacks which we see so many in no. on wiki. so I request all future contributers to add citations when they edit. For now,am undoing all the editing done.

Tej smiles (talk) 10:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

What is with the claims of Greek origin? The page you have cited has no particular relation with the claim. I believe Mere speculation is not enough for a encyclopedia. Please get back to me on that. I'll wait for week before editing it out. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.96.65.2 (talk) 15:33, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Well isnt History "10% information n 90% speculation"?!! Nevertheless, I appreciate the concern abt the 'weak' link as the one mentioned. I checked out the link, n 2 my dismay found nothing which i had gone thru back then. When i cited the link, my idea was 2 relate the info abt Greek,Roman presence in Coastal Karnataka[n coastal India as a whole]2 the formation of an ethnic group such as ours.The page had a reference to a Greek-Arab battle near Barakuru. It is common knowledge that the Coast harbored a sizable population of Greek n Roman merchants,mercenaries since the time of Satavahanas.The Kodava history talks abt the Greek aspect as well. It should be noted here that I am only refering 2 the possible assimilation of these groups into the larger group n not abt 'ORIGIN'. There is no 'claim' as such.Anyway i m doing away with the older link. I would appreciate if the correspondence i m entering into is with a member who is signed in.Editing[if necessary] without signin in wud not at all be advisable for that wud amount 2 vandalism.N i believe i neednt respond 2 any 'deadlines'...any valuable info or any question can be brought 2 notice in this talk page,which can be entered into the article after a thorough discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tej smiles (talk • contribs) 17:21, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll have to ask again "exotic features"? What do you mean by that? "Greek/Roman" intermixing? There is nothing which can lead us to believe that the Namadharis had any such intermarriage with the "Greeks/Romans". If there is, please show me any reference to such an occurrence. Also an encyclopedia is no place for anyone to push forward their personal fantasies/speculations. I will have edited it out. You can put it back when you show some genetic or written proof for it. Also I see a lot of "it seems". Let me reiterate encyclopedia is not the place to speculate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Another user id (talk • contribs) 20:37, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

To the respected above. I do agree that encyclopedia isnt a place 4 one's personal fantasies,but i still stand by my previous argument that "History is,and has been 10% information and 90% speculation". its not an exact science as you would like to believe. my belief matters here because the material on this page is a product of my endeavour over the years to know my origin,identity. if there was any 'authentic' material that was available, i would have definitely lent credence to it and included it. but sadly, there isnt any material or any research done.this is the lone forrow in that regard. even the one material which i have [which i plan to scan n upload soon]isnt a well researched work. it gives no references whatsoever and depends solely on hearsay. in that direction we atleast have a start made here. when i talked about exotic appearance,i meant certain physical features which distinguished us from the general population [ just like the kodava ]. The Halepaiks on the ghats have a markedly darker complexion/wheatish complexion and raised zygomatic bone when compared to the population of coast which resembles the Konkanis and Bunts at times. The reddish hair, fair complexion, oval face and predisposal to certain diseases such as cancer which is common to the Caucasians and which i've observed myself in my family has allowed me the luxury to 'speculate' alongwith the info found in historical texts [pictorial depiction would have helped me explain better] For any social group to attain certain characteristics and settle down ,it undergoes many assimilations and changes due changing dynamics around it. The Halepaiks too before attaining their present form and identity 'should have' undergone a no.of such changes otherwise they wouldnt have come this long. It is not 'Namadharis mixing with Greek/Romans' but a set of individuals with common professional requirements and work culture mixing socially and developing into a community. to deduct this we dont have to go too far or it isnt something abominable either. Till 16-17th century the Nairs in Kerala mixed with the Portuguese as they had been doing with the Namboodiri Brahmans for ages,thinking them to be of a higher race. The example of understanding between communities belonging to different religions just on the basis of profession is found in our own district. The Hindu Areru who are classed as Kshatriya people in our district have been having marital relations with the Pathans who are Muslim by religion just because both belong to a common warrior class. Last such case according to my knowledge has happened as near as 40 years back. And any historian worth his salt would tell you what kind of a assimilation we Indians as a nation have had. We arent called 'melting pot' without any reason. from australoid, to mongoloid and caucasian ,the Indian population has every racial element within it. I mean, we display such great degree of mixture that we indeed have turned out to be the 'melting pot' of mankind.and which is exactly how nature works. All this theory of racial purity is a farce put up by ideologues with vested interests. the priests of purity apply the same thing everywhere,only to the further detriment of what they intend to protect. the so called 'purification' of language forms a good example in this case. a language which assimilates and gains from other languages grows,and the one which doesnt,dies. any guesses why English is the largest [2nd] spoken language in the world n yet is known as a thief language. Ya i use 'it seems' many a times as i am aware that no matter how much confident i may be about a certain assumption, there is every chance that it may be disproved tomorrow. i may talk without perfect proof and so called 'fantasies'. but the world runs on such assumptions. u dont get readymade proof off the shelf. u have to propose a theory and then look for proof.and it stays until disproven. thats the way it is. the whole of India accepted and incorporated one western intellectual's 'assumption' that 'Aryans' invaded and destroyed the Dravidian civilisation. political parties propagated and fought elections using this. though it has been since disproven, a whole set of generation is led to believe they are superior over their countrymen just because of this one assumption. and wikipedia affords you the liberty to put forward your views making it one of the reason for its spectacular growth. you visit any page on wiki,it'll give you 'views' rather than your 'truth', and bias in such condition is understandable. for 'authenticity' u may visit any of the official Govt. sites [if it has info on our topic], this page will continue to harbour feasible assumptions and speculations to encourage research. Lastly, i started this page with a view that it might serve as a source of info as well as act as an initiation point for further curiosity and research in the subject. i have enquired with a lot of people about the subject and none barring Shri Vishnu Naik showed any indepth knowledge. even we [myself and shri Vishnu Naik] have difference of opinion and we both acknowledge it and see as a healthy debate. I had followed his talk on 'history of Halepaiks' with my version in the annual function of Namadhari Sangha,B-luru on 18th August 2009. talking about proof,even that what i said[and what Shri Vishnu Naik said] can be quoted and used to substantiate claims. about genetic and other researches,i would definitely love to see it happen and i am pretty much sure that it'll validate my claim. but somebody has to do it, even if it is to disprove what i've 'hypothised' here. and i'll wait for that day and gleefully remove the material which i've typed in. but till then, it REMAINS. when the Rajput community in North were told that they trace their history to the Huns and other tribes that invaded India from 3-4rth century onwards and not to the famed Kshatriya families as has been propagated for a longtime,there were largescale protests. u see. everybody wants a so-called glorious past,anything other than it is cast aside vehemently [they might not have included this point in their wiki page, likewise the kuruba page seeks to glorify shifting from basic truth by linking the etymology of the word 'kuruba' to 'search something' rather than 'shepherd' ie 'kuri'=sheep as we all know].If a reader finds it unfathomable to digest the views put up on this page,he can either discuss in the forum n validate his thinking by placing his arguments [not ultimatums] or simply start a new page with his views. wiki has space for everyone. wielding the scissor without a background in the knowledge of the topic isnt advisable.As i've already mentioned before, this is the lone furrow and the ONLY effort in order to arrive at a coherent history of the Halepaik community. All the material here has been pieced by me and joined over years of learning. and in the absence [or even presence] of any such seminal work, the material put in here stays. This is akin to a copyrighted material of a researcher, i could have kept it in wraps and use it for a book and claim benefits of sale. I chose to put it on wiki so that it reaches everyone and further impetus is provided for the propagation of the thought. the benefit i get is more here than mere remuneration i would have got in the so called 'coprighted' material. any disagreement can be discussed and looked upon into. constructive inputs are most welcome and i really appreciate the interest shown in the topic till now. expecting further interest and cooperation in future.

Tej smiles (talk) 19:06, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I do not really see a point in using a study done on Ezhalavas of Kerala to support the claim of a foreign ancestry.

I do not believe that Ezahavas=Namadharis. (I know that you don’t believe that too, otherwise you wouldn’t have written that article about you being the first IAS officer from the your Caste). If we could find a study done on Namadharis in particular. That would be usable. Until then let us not use findings done on the other people. Just a suggestion.

--Another user id (talk) 00:00, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

1 year back some foolish made changes and wrong details were added, the writing and poems of namdhari have been removed edited please add the same, I remember one - Even if thousand head rolls devars don't. Kindly update all details correctly Avinash12345naik (talk) 01:42, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

maintenance of this page

I welcome all the suggestions to help improve this article to conform it to wiki standards. Enforcement of the suggestion may take time as am busy with my preparations,but they'll be done for sure.

Tej smiles (talk) 10:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

See Namadari another article similar to this. Are they the same??

Athos, Porthos, and Aramis (talk) 01:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

yes,its the same

....can be merged with the present article Tej smiles (talk) 14:56, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Some info

Karnataka State gazetteer says dheevaru was the old name of namadhari. It also says they were migrants from island. please read following

http://books.google.com/books?id=RiMLAQAAIAAJ&q=deevaru&dq=deevaru&lr=&ei=ZVd9SqqHD5CwkATarvisCg

http://books.google.com/books?lr=&ei=J1Z9Sq3yCoPqkwTNnIGRCg&q=deevaru&sa=N&start=10

This article should add more references .i found one such article which will be helpful http://books.google.com/books?id=tUYWbzjB1S4C&pg=PA276&dq=halepaik&lr=&ei=8Fh9SqTwH4askATQ5JiyCg#v=onepage&q=halepaik&f=false116.75.43.73 (talk) 10:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Impressive!! these are very interesting links that you've given n are the best i've rcvd on this forum till date...lemme thankyou for that. about the Karnataka Gazetteer info,lemme tell u m nt that sure...it talks abt the info we generally knew till date..my endeavor 2 knw more than this led me 2wards the Gazetteer of Kannada dist in Bombay Presidency,printed first in 1891....that did give me some satisfactory info n i've included the same in this article..any additions on this line are welcome n can be incorporated.

abt the last link,i thnk itz the best of the lot...throws a lot of light on marriage customs n lineage issues...we shud b able 2 discover a minefield of info here where our article is missing some points.. thanks once again Tej smiles (talk) 02:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Peer review by Ragu Kattinakere

Version 1.0

Thank you for writing an article about Deeva/Idiga community, it is very appropriate. I have taken a first look. It looks very good. I have some doubts: I have not found any mention that some other communities arrived along with Havyakas. Also, their language has very old styles such as :ಹೊತಾರೆ = ಹೊತ್ ಹರಿಯೆ = ಬೆಳಿಗ್ಗೆ. I think we need to add information about the dialect. I will re-read any give my opinion here (Version 1.1). You may chose to edit as you find fit.

Version 1.1

(..to be continued)

~rAGU (talk)

New article Paik Rebellion added and also..

Lot of editing required on this page...will soon be upto it..:) (see; See Also section of Namadhari naik) Tej smiles (talk) 23:30, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Somebody falsly connect us with Ezhava

We Vaishnava have no relation with Ezhava.Please do not connect us with Ezhava.People know Ezhava are desendants of Kaikasi, the mother of Rakshasa king Ravana.Ezhavathunadu is Sri Lanka not India. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.254.118.229 (talk) 14:36, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Please understand Namadhari Naik never do toddy tapping and coconut climbing.Namadhai Naik are not Rakshasa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.254.118.229 (talk) 14:46, 1 January 2011 (UTC)