A Rajput (from Sanskrit ''rāja-putra'', "son of a king") is a member of a prominent caste who live throughout northern and central India, primarily in the northwestern states and territories of India of Rajasthan, although not all Rajputs find their origin in Rajasthan. The term Rajput is in reference to this group's "Jati" which is a social hierarchial status found within the Caste System of Hinduism, originally called the Varna System. The Rajputs are considered the original Kshatriya descendants, thought to number about 12 million. The Rajputs believe themselves to be descendants of the ancient warrior caste, the Kshatriyas, however Rajputs vary in profession from aristocrats to farmers, but all are warriors. Rajputs are Hindu, and there are also Sikh minorities. There are muslims who claim to be Rajputs, but this is an oxymoron since one must belong to Hinduism in order to be part of the "Jati" system found within the Caste System, once an individual has left Hinduism, they no longer fit into the order of things and are considered an outcaste. Rajputs are known for their fierce loyalty to their faith, often choosing death before dishonour and committing great sacrifices for the survival of India and her people. "The Rajputs were the vanguard of Hindu India in the face of the Islamic onslaught."(Reference: Henry Wolpert "History of India" page 86) Rajasthan is located in northwestern India, near the Khyber Pass route used by most foreign invasions of India, including the Arabs, Afghans, Turkic peoples, Mughals, and other Islamic invaders of the Middle Ages. The Rajputs are traditionally martial in spirit, fiercely proud and carry a long history of lineage and tradition. Traditionally, Rajput patriotism is legendary, an ideal they embodied with a fanatical zeal. Rajput warriors were often known to fight until the last man. The Hindu practice of sati (widows would burn themselves on their husbands funeral pyre) and jauhar (mass sati)was practised most prominently in Rajput communities. Rajputs are known for their sense of honour, chivalry and love of tradition and revelry. They celebrate weddings, festivals and feasts to the Gods with great enthusiasm, customs which are now fading against the scenario of Indian culture which is now being rapidly urbanised and modernised. Some historians have claimed that some Indo-European tribes like the Scythians (''Shaka'' in Sanskrit) may have intermingled with the descendants of the Aryan Vedic kshatriyas forming the current race of the Rajputs. The Rajputs are divided into 36 clans, claiming three basic lineages: the ''Surya Vansi'' (Solar Race), the ''Chandra Vansi'' (Lunar Race), and the ''Agni kula'' (Fire Born). One version of the story of ''Agni kula'' origins is that four warriors, Agnikul, Yadaukul, Suryakul and Odak, whose names are given to the Rajput clans, sprang from the sacred fire in a ceremony performed by Sage Vashishtha near Mount Abu. Historically the Rajputs refused to accept the spiritual authority of Brahmin priestly caste, and some scions of their noble families even officiate as priests in their Hindu temples; for example, the regent of the House of Mewar is also the high priest of his clan deity, the form of Shiva known as "Ekling ji”. The Rajputs rose to prominence in Indian history in the ninth and tenth centuries. The four ''Agni kula'' clans, the Pratiharas (Pariharas), Chauhans (Chahamanas), Solankis (Chaulukyas), and Paramaras (Parmars), rose to prominence first. The Pratiharas established the first Rajput kingdom in southern Rajasthan, with the Chauhans at Ajmer in eastern Rajasthan, the Solankis in Gujarat, and the Paramaras in Malwa. The Pratiharas rebuffed the Arab invasion of the ninth century. Significant Muslim invasions were then not attempted until the mid eleventh century, largely due to the formidable reputation of the Rajput clans. The Pratiharas later established themselves at Ujjain and ruled Malwa, and afterwards at Kanauj in the Ganges-Yamuna Doab, from which they ruled much of the Ganges plain of northern India in the ninth century. Clans claiming descent from the Solar and Lunar races, who were originally vassals of the other clans, later established independent states. The Chandela clan ruled Bundelkhand after the tenth century, occupying the fortress-city of Kalinjar and building the famous temple-city of Khajuraho. The Tomaras established a state in Haryana, founding the city of Dhiliki (later Delhi) in 736. The Guhilas established the state of Mewar (later Udaipur), and the Kachwaha clan came to rule Amber, India (later Jaipur). The Rajputs fought each other in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, but managed to pull together to resist the incursion of the Turks, who later established the Delhi Sultanate in the early part of the thirteenth century. The Rajputs were ultimately conquered by the Delhi Sultanate. When the sultanate weakened in the early fifteenth century, the Rajputs reestablished their independence, and the Rajput states were established as far east as Bengal and north into the Panjab. The Tomaras established themselves at Gwalior, and the ruler Man Singh built the fortress which still stands there. Most of the Rajput states lost their independence to the Mughal empire in the sixteenth century, but many Rajput rulers retained local control of their states, and Rajput generals often led Mughal armies. When the Mughal empire declined in the early 18th century, the Rajputs again reestablished their independence, but by the mid-eighteenth century they were under pressure from the Maratha empire. The Rajput princes asked for United Kingdom protection from the Marathas during the Third Anglo-Maratha War of 1817-1818, and the fifteen Rajput states in the region of Rajputana became princely states in the British Raj. Rajput rulers of Rajputana and elsewhere in India acceded to newly-independent India after 1947, and Rajputana, renamed Rajasthan, became an Indian state in 1950. ==Genetics== The Rajputs are genetically similar to other upper castes and North Indians.See Aryan Invasion Theory . Social groups of India
To whomsoever it concerns, Kartavya Virya singh Jameval was absolutely right in what he discussed. At the end of the vedic era,the vedic kings divided their kingdom, during their lifetimes, into small principalities which were ruled by their sons and appointed kin. Hence thats the root of the word Rajput-- abbrv of Rajan-putra (Son of king), cos they were literally sons of kings and not actual solemn Kings per se. Now it is accepted in Hindu society that the earliest known monarch with his capital at Ayodhya, was Iksvaku, who founded the aryan solar dynasty of Ksatriyas. Now he is mentioned In pali buddhist scriptures as King Okkaka. Lord Ram too had divided the kingdom, during his lifetime, into small principalities. He coronated his eldest son Kusa as the king of Kusavati present Kushinagar, where buddha breathed his last. So as per what ive written Lord Ram was A Rajah and his son Kusa was a 'raj-put' As a rule No tom, dick or harry in ancient India could assume the title of Rajput, without having a lineage going up till the ancient kings. Yes ,there could be exceptions to that rule, ( as what is mentioned Shivaji had done when he coronated himself )but those examples are few and far between. To whoever wrote -->''The word rajput comes into play after 5-6th century AD. As such Rajput is NOT synonymous with ancient kshatriya in the Vedic hymns'' Purusha shukta rigveda--"Kshatriya" is not mentioned there---The word mentioned in the rigvedic hymn is "Rajanya".:) Siddhartha ( Gautam Buddha's ) army commander was a person called Bikram Singha and he was also a rajput--The word Rajput is mentioned in buddhist literature-and that was around the 5-6th CENTURY B.C (Bows down to Kartavya Virya singh Jameval ) best regards, -Shonan Talpade ''The word rajput comes into play after 5-6th century AD. As such Rajput is NOT synonymous with ancient kshatriya in the Vedic hymns'' Omer Khan--Pakistani I assume ? .LOL. Omer Khan,I have heard Islamic propaganda saying that Lord Shri Ram and Lord Shri Krishna were descended from the middle eastern tribal, ass-riding ,camel herding and date chewing Solomon and Abraham. This is perfect !..Now we shall have Islamic mullahs teaching us the esoteric meaning of the vedas or something. Omer Khan , Kindly stick to your koran and your hadiths and satisfy yourself with the camel race mythology there. This isnt your cup of tea. ---Shonan Talpade The word rajput comes into play after 5-6th century AD. As such Rajput is NOT synonymous with ancient kshatriya in the Vedic hymns. It is a medieval ranking of the ruling class in north and western part of southern asia and does not designate common desecnt or ethnicity but a rank acquired. Rajputs are indistinguishable from other folks of their respective region, and show a huge variety in their phenotype. So to say that they are all generally taller, fairer and more "meditterannnid" than other peoples of northwestern region in India is false. --Omer Khan :Feel free to make those changes. IMHO, this article still reads too much like a 19th-century Romanticism view of the Rajputs. Perhaps I can't see it due to the deficiency of my "western" mind, but most of the generally-accepted histories I have read, by both westerners and Indians, can't document an unbroken line between ancient Kshatriyas and modern Rajputs, much less a 7000 year pedigree. That is not to say it isn't true, but there just doesn't seem to be much in the way of solid evidence. User:Tom Radulovich 21:35, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC) This article became part of the apparently Rajasthani nationalism inspired anonymous POV -campaign by [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=61.17.113.245 61.17.113.245] (et al.) over at Kshatriya. It probably needs NPOVing (or reversion) and cleanup. I do not know the etymology of Rajput (rajaputra seems fair enough), but it may be disputed, note Talk:Kshatriya: :''"-put" in "Rajput" is not a sanskrit suffix for son. Raj-put originated from the word Rajputana (a mixed word variation from the sanskrit word rAjasthAna, the region of royal palaces). The word is not ancient and has no reference in the Vedic texts.'' -- User:Dbachmann 10:18, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC) 1)Rajput comes from sanskrit Rajanya + putra. Rajanya-- Royal /King. putra--- son. 2) Rajasthan-- Land of kings and Rajas and NOT region of royal palaces. That would be 'Mahal stan' or Haveli stan in the rajasthani language. :I would agree. I was only pointing out that there seem to be people contesting this. User:Dbachmann 09:22, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC) 3) I have never heard of the phenomenon called "Rajasthani Nationalism' ?? wonder what that could be. If someone could kindly enlighten me . with best regards, Kartavya Virya Singh Jamval. :call it "Rajput Chauvinism", then. Fact is that somebody seems terribly intent on emphasizing that a) Kshatriya=Rajput and b) "originally" Kshatriyas were "above" Brahmins, without giving any historical justification whatsoever. *shrug* User:Dbachmann 09:22, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC) ==Hunnish origin theory== In all fairness, I think we can remove the reference to Huns, if our Rajput readers find this idea so offensive: It's just speculation anyway. By saying that their origins are obscure, we are basically implying that they may or may not have a hunnic strain. User:Dbachmann 20:39, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC) :I'm not sure this is the best solution. You don't burn books simply because somebody's offended by what's in them. It ''is'' speculation I suppose, but one with a scholarly pedigree. (I mean, I assume we have articles on scientific racism and creationism and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and so on – doesn't mean we ''endorse'' such beliefs.) I suggest it might be better to cite where such opinions come from: for example, the sceptical and Western-educated Indian historian Romila Thapar, who makes this argument for the origins of the Rajputs in Volume I of her ''History of India''. Then our Rajput readers can give evidence to support why they feel Ms Thapar is wrong, as K V S J has begun to do below. Cheers, User:QuartierLatin1968 16:53, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) Dear Mr Dbachmann, I appreciate your knowledge on Indiology and indeed much of the information you wrote is quite accurate,but you still havent removed the references connecting rajput lineage to the Huns and that we are descended from the invaders who attacked India from the northwest. So I am deleting that myself, if there's no objection. You gave the reference of the manu smriti for the hierarchy of races and castes. Thats excellent..BUT theres a slight problem....the Manu smriti is a law book .Its not a religious treatise. actually nowhere in the hindu scriptures will you find the superiority of any caste over the other. if you give me the example of the Purusha shakta of the rigveda, it outlines the function..not the hierarchy of the castes.races Its by spiritual and mystical right that the Kshatriya was on the top of the society ( which I was 'shouting' about all this while.) secondly, sir, If i may say so..most of the information that you have posted here are direct copy pastes of other webpages. I can prove it to you,sentence by sentence with the corresponding website/page that you have copy pasted from.(if you wish) e.gs..britannica encyclopaedia etc. I dont know about copyright violations etc, but this doesnt reflect well with your own view of objective and sincere research. Thirdly, Your borrowed claim that the Rajputs have obscure ancestry beyond 1000AD in the kshatriya webpage..is..(if i may use the word )in utter ignorance. The Mewar Line goes up to the Era of Lord Ram (around 5000 BC ) if that is imaginable and conceivable by western society. They even have records which i believe arent doctored by any brahmins as in Shivaji's case. They are kept in the archives of Udaipur palace in rajasthan till date. Mr Dbachmann,I frankly dont know and dont care about the allegmanic race...but I respect people who are aware of their own roots. my regards to you. And sir thank you very very much :) ..i know my own lineage..descended from King Prithu of the vedic age around 700 BC. we dont need to prove such things..its only the limited western mind, which doesnt think its evolutionarily,socially and chronologically possible due to its own conditionings. Mr. Dbachmann, it was nice having a discourse with you ( which i cant say for the other belligerent, internet-learnt morons here ). my best regards, your friendly neighbourhood rajput chauvinist. K V S J. == "Possibly" Raj-putra == Is there any confusion whatsoever that Rajput comes from Raj-putra?
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Rajput:
Rajput
Rajput
Rajputana
Rajputana_Rifles
Rajputs
Rajput_Class_destroyers
Rajput
A Rajput (from Sanskrit ''rāja-putra'', "son of a king") is a member of a prominent caste who live throughout northern and central India, primarily in the northwestern states and territories of India of Rajasthan, although not all Rajputs find their origin in Rajasthan. The term Rajput is in reference to this group's "Jati" which is a social hierarchial status found within the Caste System of Hinduism, originally called the Varna System. The Rajputs are considered the original Kshatriya descendants, thought to number about 12 million. The Rajputs believe themselves to be descendants of the ancient warrior caste, the Kshatriyas, however Rajputs vary in profession from aristocrats to farmers, but all are warriors. Rajputs are Hindu, and there are also Sikh minorities. There are muslims who claim to be Rajputs, but this is an oxymoron since one must belong to Hinduism in order to be part of the "Jati" system found within the Caste System, once an individual has left Hinduism, they no longer fit into the order of things and are considered an outcaste. Rajputs are known for their fierce loyalty to their faith, often choosing death before dishonour and committing great sacrifices for the survival of India and her people. "The Rajputs were the vanguard of Hindu India in the face of the Islamic onslaught."(Reference: Henry Wolpert "History of India" page 86) Rajasthan is located in northwestern India, near the Khyber Pass route used by most foreign invasions of India, including the Arabs, Afghans, Turkic peoples, Mughals, and other Islamic invaders of the Middle Ages. The Rajputs are traditionally martial in spirit, fiercely proud and carry a long history of lineage and tradition. Traditionally, Rajput patriotism is legendary, an ideal they embodied with a fanatical zeal. Rajput warriors were often known to fight until the last man. The Hindu practice of sati (widows would burn themselves on their husbands funeral pyre) and jauhar (mass sati)was practised most prominently in Rajput communities. Rajputs are known for their sense of honour, chivalry and love of tradition and revelry. They celebrate weddings, festivals and feasts to the Gods with great enthusiasm, customs which are now fading against the scenario of Indian culture which is now being rapidly urbanised and modernised. Some historians have claimed that some Indo-European tribes like the Scythians (''Shaka'' in Sanskrit) may have intermingled with the descendants of the Aryan Vedic kshatriyas forming the current race of the Rajputs. The Rajputs are divided into 36 clans, claiming three basic lineages: the ''Surya Vansi'' (Solar Race), the ''Chandra Vansi'' (Lunar Race), and the ''Agni kula'' (Fire Born). One version of the story of ''Agni kula'' origins is that four warriors, Agnikul, Yadaukul, Suryakul and Odak, whose names are given to the Rajput clans, sprang from the sacred fire in a ceremony performed by Sage Vashishtha near Mount Abu. Historically the Rajputs refused to accept the spiritual authority of Brahmin priestly caste, and some scions of their noble families even officiate as priests in their Hindu temples; for example, the regent of the House of Mewar is also the high priest of his clan deity, the form of Shiva known as "Ekling ji”. The Rajputs rose to prominence in Indian history in the ninth and tenth centuries. The four ''Agni kula'' clans, the Pratiharas (Pariharas), Chauhans (Chahamanas), Solankis (Chaulukyas), and Paramaras (Parmars), rose to prominence first. The Pratiharas established the first Rajput kingdom in southern Rajasthan, with the Chauhans at Ajmer in eastern Rajasthan, the Solankis in Gujarat, and the Paramaras in Malwa. The Pratiharas rebuffed the Arab invasion of the ninth century. Significant Muslim invasions were then not attempted until the mid eleventh century, largely due to the formidable reputation of the Rajput clans. The Pratiharas later established themselves at Ujjain and ruled Malwa, and afterwards at Kanauj in the Ganges-Yamuna Doab, from which they ruled much of the Ganges plain of northern India in the ninth century. Clans claiming descent from the Solar and Lunar races, who were originally vassals of the other clans, later established independent states. The Chandela clan ruled Bundelkhand after the tenth century, occupying the fortress-city of Kalinjar and building the famous temple-city of Khajuraho. The Tomaras established a state in Haryana, founding the city of Dhiliki (later Delhi) in 736. The Guhilas established the state of Mewar (later Udaipur), and the Kachwaha clan came to rule Amber, India (later Jaipur). The Rajputs fought each other in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, but managed to pull together to resist the incursion of the Turks, who later established the Delhi Sultanate in the early part of the thirteenth century. The Rajputs were ultimately conquered by the Delhi Sultanate. When the sultanate weakened in the early fifteenth century, the Rajputs reestablished their independence, and the Rajput states were established as far east as Bengal and north into the Panjab. The Tomaras established themselves at Gwalior, and the ruler Man Singh built the fortress which still stands there. Most of the Rajput states lost their independence to the Mughal empire in the sixteenth century, but many Rajput rulers retained local control of their states, and Rajput generals often led Mughal armies. When the Mughal empire declined in the early 18th century, the Rajputs again reestablished their independence, but by the mid-eighteenth century they were under pressure from the Maratha empire. The Rajput princes asked for United Kingdom protection from the Marathas during the Third Anglo-Maratha War of 1817-1818, and the fifteen Rajput states in the region of Rajputana became princely states in the British Raj. Rajput rulers of Rajputana and elsewhere in India acceded to newly-independent India after 1947, and Rajputana, renamed Rajasthan, became an Indian state in 1950. ==Genetics== The Rajputs are genetically similar to other upper castes and North Indians.See Aryan Invasion Theory . Social groups of India
Rajput
To whomsoever it concerns, Kartavya Virya singh Jameval was absolutely right in what he discussed. At the end of the vedic era,the vedic kings divided their kingdom, during their lifetimes, into small principalities which were ruled by their sons and appointed kin. Hence thats the root of the word Rajput-- abbrv of Rajan-putra (Son of king), cos they were literally sons of kings and not actual solemn Kings per se. Now it is accepted in Hindu society that the earliest known monarch with his capital at Ayodhya, was Iksvaku, who founded the aryan solar dynasty of Ksatriyas. Now he is mentioned In pali buddhist scriptures as King Okkaka. Lord Ram too had divided the kingdom, during his lifetime, into small principalities. He coronated his eldest son Kusa as the king of Kusavati present Kushinagar, where buddha breathed his last. So as per what ive written Lord Ram was A Rajah and his son Kusa was a 'raj-put' As a rule No tom, dick or harry in ancient India could assume the title of Rajput, without having a lineage going up till the ancient kings. Yes ,there could be exceptions to that rule, ( as what is mentioned Shivaji had done when he coronated himself )but those examples are few and far between. To whoever wrote -->''The word rajput comes into play after 5-6th century AD. As such Rajput is NOT synonymous with ancient kshatriya in the Vedic hymns'' Purusha shukta rigveda--"Kshatriya" is not mentioned there---The word mentioned in the rigvedic hymn is "Rajanya".:) Siddhartha ( Gautam Buddha's ) army commander was a person called Bikram Singha and he was also a rajput--The word Rajput is mentioned in buddhist literature-and that was around the 5-6th CENTURY B.C (Bows down to Kartavya Virya singh Jameval ) best regards, -Shonan Talpade ''The word rajput comes into play after 5-6th century AD. As such Rajput is NOT synonymous with ancient kshatriya in the Vedic hymns'' Omer Khan--Pakistani I assume ? .LOL. Omer Khan,I have heard Islamic propaganda saying that Lord Shri Ram and Lord Shri Krishna were descended from the middle eastern tribal, ass-riding ,camel herding and date chewing Solomon and Abraham. This is perfect !..Now we shall have Islamic mullahs teaching us the esoteric meaning of the vedas or something. Omer Khan , Kindly stick to your koran and your hadiths and satisfy yourself with the camel race mythology there. This isnt your cup of tea. ---Shonan Talpade The word rajput comes into play after 5-6th century AD. As such Rajput is NOT synonymous with ancient kshatriya in the Vedic hymns. It is a medieval ranking of the ruling class in north and western part of southern asia and does not designate common desecnt or ethnicity but a rank acquired. Rajputs are indistinguishable from other folks of their respective region, and show a huge variety in their phenotype. So to say that they are all generally taller, fairer and more "meditterannnid" than other peoples of northwestern region in India is false. --Omer Khan :Feel free to make those changes. IMHO, this article still reads too much like a 19th-century Romanticism view of the Rajputs. Perhaps I can't see it due to the deficiency of my "western" mind, but most of the generally-accepted histories I have read, by both westerners and Indians, can't document an unbroken line between ancient Kshatriyas and modern Rajputs, much less a 7000 year pedigree. That is not to say it isn't true, but there just doesn't seem to be much in the way of solid evidence. User:Tom Radulovich 21:35, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC) This article became part of the apparently Rajasthani nationalism inspired anonymous POV -campaign by [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=61.17.113.245 61.17.113.245] (et al.) over at Kshatriya. It probably needs NPOVing (or reversion) and cleanup. I do not know the etymology of Rajput (rajaputra seems fair enough), but it may be disputed, note Talk:Kshatriya: :''"-put" in "Rajput" is not a sanskrit suffix for son. Raj-put originated from the word Rajputana (a mixed word variation from the sanskrit word rAjasthAna, the region of royal palaces). The word is not ancient and has no reference in the Vedic texts.'' -- User:Dbachmann 10:18, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC) 1)Rajput comes from sanskrit Rajanya + putra. Rajanya-- Royal /King. putra--- son. 2) Rajasthan-- Land of kings and Rajas and NOT region of royal palaces. That would be 'Mahal stan' or Haveli stan in the rajasthani language. :I would agree. I was only pointing out that there seem to be people contesting this. User:Dbachmann 09:22, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC) 3) I have never heard of the phenomenon called "Rajasthani Nationalism' ?? wonder what that could be. If someone could kindly enlighten me . with best regards, Kartavya Virya Singh Jamval. :call it "Rajput Chauvinism", then. Fact is that somebody seems terribly intent on emphasizing that a) Kshatriya=Rajput and b) "originally" Kshatriyas were "above" Brahmins, without giving any historical justification whatsoever. *shrug* User:Dbachmann 09:22, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC) ==Hunnish origin theory== In all fairness, I think we can remove the reference to Huns, if our Rajput readers find this idea so offensive: It's just speculation anyway. By saying that their origins are obscure, we are basically implying that they may or may not have a hunnic strain. User:Dbachmann 20:39, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC) :I'm not sure this is the best solution. You don't burn books simply because somebody's offended by what's in them. It ''is'' speculation I suppose, but one with a scholarly pedigree. (I mean, I assume we have articles on scientific racism and creationism and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and so on – doesn't mean we ''endorse'' such beliefs.) I suggest it might be better to cite where such opinions come from: for example, the sceptical and Western-educated Indian historian Romila Thapar, who makes this argument for the origins of the Rajputs in Volume I of her ''History of India''. Then our Rajput readers can give evidence to support why they feel Ms Thapar is wrong, as K V S J has begun to do below. Cheers, User:QuartierLatin1968 16:53, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) Dear Mr Dbachmann, I appreciate your knowledge on Indiology and indeed much of the information you wrote is quite accurate,but you still havent removed the references connecting rajput lineage to the Huns and that we are descended from the invaders who attacked India from the northwest. So I am deleting that myself, if there's no objection. You gave the reference of the manu smriti for the hierarchy of races and castes. Thats excellent..BUT theres a slight problem....the Manu smriti is a law book .Its not a religious treatise. actually nowhere in the hindu scriptures will you find the superiority of any caste over the other. if you give me the example of the Purusha shakta of the rigveda, it outlines the function..not the hierarchy of the castes.races Its by spiritual and mystical right that the Kshatriya was on the top of the society ( which I was 'shouting' about all this while.) secondly, sir, If i may say so..most of the information that you have posted here are direct copy pastes of other webpages. I can prove it to you,sentence by sentence with the corresponding website/page that you have copy pasted from.(if you wish) e.gs..britannica encyclopaedia etc. I dont know about copyright violations etc, but this doesnt reflect well with your own view of objective and sincere research. Thirdly, Your borrowed claim that the Rajputs have obscure ancestry beyond 1000AD in the kshatriya webpage..is..(if i may use the word )in utter ignorance. The Mewar Line goes up to the Era of Lord Ram (around 5000 BC ) if that is imaginable and conceivable by western society. They even have records which i believe arent doctored by any brahmins as in Shivaji's case. They are kept in the archives of Udaipur palace in rajasthan till date. Mr Dbachmann,I frankly dont know and dont care about the allegmanic race...but I respect people who are aware of their own roots. my regards to you. And sir thank you very very much :) ..i know my own lineage..descended from King Prithu of the vedic age around 700 BC. we dont need to prove such things..its only the limited western mind, which doesnt think its evolutionarily,socially and chronologically possible due to its own conditionings. Mr. Dbachmann, it was nice having a discourse with you ( which i cant say for the other belligerent, internet-learnt morons here ). my best regards, your friendly neighbourhood rajput chauvinist. K V S J. == "Possibly" Raj-putra == Is there any confusion whatsoever that Rajput comes from Raj-putra?
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
R
RA | RB | RC | RD | RE | RF | RG | RH | RI | RJ | RK | RL | RM | RN | RO | RP | RS | RT | RU | RW | RX | RY | RZ |Words begining with Rajput:
Rajput
Rajput
Rajputana
Rajputana_Rifles
Rajputs
Rajput_Class_destroyers
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
