Talk:Shudra

If the definition of who is Shudra is correct then most non-brahmin Hindus would fall under that category. This basically would be 90% of Hindu population of India or around 75% of total Indian population. I am including the "untouchables" amongst the Shudra, however other definitions may put them outside the varna system: So how about: 1. Shivaji maharaj and his descendants (Maratha) 2. The Shinde (Maratha) , Gaikwad (Maratha), Holkar(Maratha Dhangar) royal families 3. Swami Vivekanand (Kayastha) 4. Lal Bahadur Shastri (Kayastha) 5. Amitabh Bacchan (part kayastha) 6. Royal families of Vijaynagar (Kuruba/Dhangar) 7. Bal Thakaray (Kayastha, more specifically CKP) 8. Mahatma Gandhi (Bania)? 9. Sant Tukaram (Vani) and most bhakti saints) 10.Kalidasa 11. Bhimrao Ambedkar (Mahar)

I could go on and on by basically excluding brahmins, muslims , christians etc. from the list of Indian Notables and that would be the list of notable shudras.

Having said that, in day to day life, nobody, except some brahmins and a few academics care about the Varna system and certainly, no one likes to describe themselves as shudra. For example, someone belonging to the Lohar (iron-smith) caste does not put Shudra as the prefix before lohar when describing his /her caste. A number of castes would like to be designated "backward class/caste in order to receive preferential treatment in jobs and college admission but they would most certainly be vehemently opposed to being described as shudraJonathansammy (talk) 17:02, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Removed the notable sub-section.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 21:43, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

It is too late to reply to this but I do not agree with you at all, Jonathansammy - some of the people(1-10) you mentioned are formally considered twice born - by brahmins as well as modern scholars. It does not make sense to call any community who has a tradition of wearing janeu , (and has been approved by Brahmins ), anything other than "twice born". Even if a certain historian disagrees/agrees, it does not matter.

Another point, Kunbi and (so called 96 kuli) Marathas have been shown to have same origin but Marathas do not accept that generally although both the Brahmins and historians agree on their Kunbi origin. The sonar case in maharashtra is a bit strange, Brahmins do not approve the vedic rituals but the Sonars wear the thread anyways and call themselves Brahmins. ckp/saraswat have vedic rituals that are approved by brahmins (in writing literally) and modern scholars clearly agree that they were ritually high castes. So adding Bal T is incorrect from both Brahminical POV as well as historical POV. historians agree that Sonars might have brahmin ancestry also- so what do we do?. And according to the Puranas, no Brahmin exists in the Kali Yuga due to loss of dharma. See ^[1] So then who performs the thread ceremonies? So does every hindu caste including brahmins become shudra? In non-Maharashtrian subcastes there has been no formal classification into varna in most cases. Other than Brahmin, Saraswat, CKP and pathare prabhus - every marathi caste has been formally classified as shudra. But we cannot add the word on every such caste. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 07:31, 2 September 2019 (UTC) The following Maratha names should be added much before most of the above like Amitabh or great scholars like Shastri or Vivekananda. There seems to a consensus among scholars that the name-calling(for example against Bengali non brahmins) was due to competition in jobs and not because of facts. In case of Marathas though, it was not because of jealousy or any politics. The following should make the Shudra list from both brahminical and historical perspective much before any of the previous names are added- which are incorrect anyways. 12.Yashwantrao Balwantrao Chavan (maratha) 13.Vasantdada Patil (maratha) 14 Shankarrao Chavan (maratha) 15.Sharad Pawar (maratha) 16.Narayan Rane (maratha) 17.Patangrao Kadam (maratha) 18.Vilasrao Deshmukh (maratha) 19.Madhavrao Mehere (maratha) 20.Prithviraj Chavan (maratha) These days scholars make a distinction between name-calling and facts.

I see some people use that term, no doubt referring to the British, who not knowing about the Indian Caste system could easily be led astray. Be in no doubt that such caste are readily apparent in British society, the colour of our skin is but an arctic adaptation, we are otherwise like brownwash 146.199.68.79 (talk) 22:29, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

No agreed etymology? --82.132.230.74 (talk) 13:07, 4 May 2019 (UTC)