Talk:Bahun/Archives/2018/October
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Bahun. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Regarding Katto
The Katto ceremony is performed in the 13th day of the death of a King. This ceremony has nothing to do with Bahun but with the Brahmins. All Bahuns are Brahmins but all Brahmins are not Bahuns. Bahuns are a sub group of Brahmins who live in Nepali Hilly region. This Katto ceremony has been performed by Brahmins of India in the past for example in the case of King Tribhuvan and King Mahendra. So this specific ceremony has nothing to with Bahun ethnicity. This ceremony is also done in the Newar community which has nothing to do with Bahuns. Secondly the Katto ceremony includes feeding the Brahmin elaborate meal. This 13th day feeding of meal is common occurrence in Hindu communities of both India and Nepal. There is no documentation that the meal consists of flesh of the King. The funeral priest and the persons who performed this ceremony has come out and said that they cook the meal themselves and it doesn't consist of flesh of King. There has been no documented evidence of such happening. It is just rumors and fake information circulated by people who doesn't know about the ceremonies. See the Wikipedia page on Katto and read the sources for further information. Also Glory2Suriname is vandalizing pages on Bahuns and Chettris. Ifnord please look at it. Yajmir (talk) 14:32, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Unexplained removal of sourced content
@Yajmir: Please explain why you are removing sourced content. Please provide sources to indicate why you disagree with the inclusion of the content on this article.Glory2Suriname (talk) 13:49, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
Edit warring
@Kautilya3: @Oshwah:
The user Yajmir has broken the 3 revert rule and is removing sourced content.Glory2Suriname (talk) 14:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
Read the section I wrote on Katto and read the sources. The source provided in the Social Taboo section has conflicting information so I removed it. Yajmir (talk) 14:31, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
You have not provided any sources and you have broken the rules of this website. You have been reported.Glory2Suriname (talk) 14:38, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Not supporting edit warring behaviour, but I had a look at the online source and I have doubts about it. It's a thai news aggregator of unknown provenance, which is culling an article from IANS, but when I search IANS I find nothing about this topic at all. I'd suggest that claiming a specific ethnicity practices ritual cannibalism would require high-quality sources if we're going to make the claim in Wikipedia's voice. Simonm223 (talk) 14:44, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- I have actually linked other sources which use the term "katto bahun", see here:
So that's two sources as well as the news article.Glory2Suriname (talk) 14:48, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Read the sources provided on the Katto page. This ceremony has nothing to do with Bahuns because it has been perfomed by Indian Brahmins before. So the only requirement for this ritual is a Brahmin. The Thai page itself notes that the ritual is only symbolic in nature. Yajmir (talk) 14:51, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Read the source you provided it makes mention of Indian Brahmin performing the ceremony for King Mahendra and King Tribhuvan. These Indian Brahmins are not Bahuns. You can't just label an ethnicity as performing cannibalism without solid sources. Yajmir (talk) 14:54, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)Reviewing. And I have my doubts about the Declan Quigley source. He's a journalist who specializes in motor sports? Simonm223 (talk) 14:56, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
This page is about Bahun and bahun practices, these two sources as well as the Thai article both mention these to be Bahun practices hence it is relevant. You have not shown any sources indicating that other Brahmins carry out this practice.Glory2Suriname (talk) 14:55, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- (edit conflict)Reviewing. And I have my doubts about the Declan Quigley source. He's a journalist who specializes in motor sports? Simonm223 (talk) 14:56, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Read the source you provided it makes mention of Indian Brahmin performing the ceremony for King Mahendra and King Tribhuvan. These Indian Brahmins are not Bahuns. You can't just label an ethnicity as performing cannibalism without solid sources. Yajmir (talk) 14:54, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- When I look at the other source I only get a tiny snippet. Do you have a link to the full article text by any chance? Simonm223 (talk) 14:58, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
It is likely that they are not the same Declan Quigley but I think you are probably aware of that so I'm not sure why you are bringing it up. I have a physical copy of one of the Journal of Nepalese Literature etc with me now however I don't have the other one.Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:00, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- When I look at the other source I only get a tiny snippet. Do you have a link to the full article text by any chance? Simonm223 (talk) 14:58, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Read this https://books.google.com/books?id=77nQCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA70 It has quotes from the priest and the ritual specialist who performed this ceremony in 2001 who say that this ceremony is only symbolic and no eating of flesh occurs. Yajmir (talk) 15:01, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- You can read from the snippet you provided, about Indian Brahmins performing the ceremony in the past so it doesn't belong to Bahun page at all. Yajmir (talk) 15:05, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Could you please highlight where it says the act was symbolic. Also we have to consider that it has been historically carried out. You can add a note saying that the practice is no longer carried out if true.Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- There is no primary source to say that it has been carried out. The ritual priest and Brahmin who performed the ceremony in 2001 has denied as this ceremony involving flesh of King. You need primary sources for this and not rumors and hearsay before you tar an ethnicity as being cannibalist. Yajmir (talk) 15:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)So far the best I've been able to find online was a forum post that claimed to be a reproduction of an article from the Kathmandhu post which described this as "Local people say that by traditions these brahmins become social out-cast because the katto meals is supposed to be contaminated with some "unwanted material". However, the brahmins themselves are not sure whether anything like that is practised today or not." - however I was not able to find it on the Kathmandhu post page. What I will say is that a book on royal ritual by an Irish journalist who specializes in race cars, and an article of unknown provenance is not sufficient reliable sources for the extraordinary claim that an ethnicity in Nepal is practicing ritual cannibalism. I reserve judgment on the third source, which appears to be reliable, because the excerpt provided on google books says nothing about eating at all, however it's a very small snippet. Suggest getting your ducks in a row on the source and chilling on inserting very contentious material until you can back it up well. Would be receptive to reading more of the third source if you can provide a link. However I'll also caution Yajmir that you've got WP:PRIMARY backward and what we need is a reliable secondary source. So far I don't think we have that. Simonm223 (talk) 15:13, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
If it is an ancient practice, then it is still relevant, here is a source describing how they would eat part of the Kings brain in ancient times: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/nepal/1308883/Priest-takes-murdered-kings-soul-into-exile.htmlGlory2Suriname (talk) 15:17, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- (edit conflict)So far the best I've been able to find online was a forum post that claimed to be a reproduction of an article from the Kathmandhu post which described this as "Local people say that by traditions these brahmins become social out-cast because the katto meals is supposed to be contaminated with some "unwanted material". However, the brahmins themselves are not sure whether anything like that is practised today or not." - however I was not able to find it on the Kathmandhu post page. What I will say is that a book on royal ritual by an Irish journalist who specializes in race cars, and an article of unknown provenance is not sufficient reliable sources for the extraordinary claim that an ethnicity in Nepal is practicing ritual cannibalism. I reserve judgment on the third source, which appears to be reliable, because the excerpt provided on google books says nothing about eating at all, however it's a very small snippet. Suggest getting your ducks in a row on the source and chilling on inserting very contentious material until you can back it up well. Would be receptive to reading more of the third source if you can provide a link. However I'll also caution Yajmir that you've got WP:PRIMARY backward and what we need is a reliable secondary source. So far I don't think we have that. Simonm223 (talk) 15:13, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- There is no primary source to say that it has been carried out. The ritual priest and Brahmin who performed the ceremony in 2001 has denied as this ceremony involving flesh of King. You need primary sources for this and not rumors and hearsay before you tar an ethnicity as being cannibalist. Yajmir (talk) 15:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia accepts both primary and secondary sources. And Bahuns are a caste group, not an ethnicity. Please stop edit warring and revert your changes. And you have not pointed out where it says in the book, the act was symbolic.Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:14, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Bahuns aren't caste. They are ethnicity. There are other Brahmins in Nepal including Newari Brahmins and Maithil Brahmins. Also the onus of proof lies on the one making a grand claim. In public forums like this you cannot make grand claims just based on rumurs and hearsay. You need solid proof. Simple as that. Yajmir (talk) 15:17, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I have provided multiple sources including university papers, books and news articles. The evidence is mounting up. @Simonm223: seems to be ignoring all of this mounting evidence for some reason and seems fixated on the idea that one of the authors is a motorsport journalist because he has the same name. In any case, when others come to investigate, they will have their own say.Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:23, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Bahuns aren't caste. They are ethnicity. There are other Brahmins in Nepal including Newari Brahmins and Maithil Brahmins. Also the onus of proof lies on the one making a grand claim. In public forums like this you cannot make grand claims just based on rumurs and hearsay. You need solid proof. Simple as that. Yajmir (talk) 15:17, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Read your own sources properly and see what it says rather than bringing up sources from google search results. Yajmir (talk) 15:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
@Simonm223: Here is a University paper on the Katto practice: https://oestigaard.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/oestigaard_bar1212.pdf
Here is yet another source: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=9l_XDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA49&lpg=PA49&dq=katto+nepal+eating&source=bl&ots=vDqgjwOUSz&sig=wf-UZn5H5lQUg8V7rQTkAx_s9E4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj074Xk5pLeAhUHDcAKHaAgC_84ChDoATAIegQIBRAB#v=onepage&q=katto%20nepal%20eating&f=false Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- One again the source says about the symbolic nature of the ritual. There is no mention of Bahuns specifically performing this ritual. As I said Indians have performed this ritual in the past. Your sources say that.Yajmir (talk) 15:23, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I have you asked you repeatedly to point this out but you have failed to do so.Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:26, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Read your own sources properly first. They make mention of Indian Brahmins performing this ritual and also about the symbolic nature quoted from the guy who performed the ritual in the first hand. Yajmir (talk) 15:28, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Whether this is true or not, this is a page about Bahuns and multiple sources show that Bahuns/Brahmans in Nepal practiced Katto. Its a fact of history at this point. @Simonm223: seems to be ignoring the mounting array of evidence for some reason so maybe someone who is more professional would be better suited to viewing this.Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:32, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Read your own sources properly first. They make mention of Indian Brahmins performing this ritual and also about the symbolic nature quoted from the guy who performed the ritual in the first hand. Yajmir (talk) 15:28, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- None of your sources make mention of Katto being cannibalistic in nature except as rumors. Yajmir (talk) 15:37, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- To the contrary, I'm paying very careful attention to your sources, all I've said is that I have doubts about their provenance, which is very different from ignoring them. I've taken my concerns about Quigley to WP:RS/N if you care to weigh in there about that source specifically. I'd discount the journalistic source as being of unclear provenance. The third source remains at issue, and I have not dismissed it. However the link you provided does not contain any information on the topic of ritual cannibalism in the excerpt so I will reiterate my request that you share a more complete version of the article in question. Simonm223 (talk) 15:39, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Simonm223 Shouldn't the onus of proof be on the one making claims. Yajmir (talk) 15:42, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I have presented my evidence, I shall leave it to others to decide and will respect any decision that takes into account all of the evidence. I have no horse in this race, I am more baffled that you have engaged in edit warring and numerous reverts on multiple users and have only received a warning. Even on this talk page, I have asked you to point out your claims and you have failed to do so.Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:46, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Simonm223 Shouldn't the onus of proof be on the one making claims. Yajmir (talk) 15:42, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- To the contrary, I'm paying very careful attention to your sources, all I've said is that I have doubts about their provenance, which is very different from ignoring them. I've taken my concerns about Quigley to WP:RS/N if you care to weigh in there about that source specifically. I'd discount the journalistic source as being of unclear provenance. The third source remains at issue, and I have not dismissed it. However the link you provided does not contain any information on the topic of ritual cannibalism in the excerpt so I will reiterate my request that you share a more complete version of the article in question. Simonm223 (talk) 15:39, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- None of your sources make mention of Katto being cannibalistic in nature except as rumors. Yajmir (talk) 15:37, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- On the contrary you have vandalized pages relating to Nepali people. It is evident from your edit history. Simonm223 Yajmir (talk) 15:48, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)In cases where an extraordinary claim has been made, yes the onus lies on the person who wants to state it as per WP:EXTRAORDINARY I was replying to Glory2Suriname with my previous statement. I am not satisfied with the three sources provided, however in the case of the book by Quigley, I've asked for outside help adjudicating its reliability. I await a response from G2S about the third source. The thai aggregator fails verification as it claims to have copied an article from an Indian source that is not on the source page from what I can find. With regard to the source Yajmir provided, it definitely is a reliable source, but it's mute on the issue of ritual cannibalism and can't be used as evidence against the claim. Simonm223 (talk) 15:50, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Ok. Although I don't think this segment on Katto belongs to Bahun page at all because this ritual has been performed by other Brahmin groups whether it is cannibalistic or not. Look here https://books.google.com.np/books?id=MabnCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA4&dq=demoting+vishnu&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiyr9287pLeAhUP4o8KHRJVDm0Q6AEIJzAA#v=onepage&q=bhatta&f=false Simonm223 Yajmir (talk) 15:55, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- A final note, Yajmir it appears you have accused me of vandalizing this page in one of your comments up-thread. Was this inadvertent? And to both of you, please tone down the pinging, I'm obviously aware of this discussion. Simonm223 (talk) 16:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Not you. I was referring to the other guy who has been vandalizing pages on Nepali peoples. You can see in his edits. Also didn't mean to ping you. Yajmir (talk) 16:20, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Compilation of evidence of Katto practice
Here are all the sources that connect Bahuns/Brahmans to the historical practice of Katto:
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/nepal-seeks-end-social-malpractices-082353618.html?guccounter=1
https://oestigaard.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/oestigaard_bar1212.pdf
http://himalaya.socanth.cam.ac.uk/collections/journals/ebhr/pdf/EBHR_23_03.pdf Quote from Journal article: A report written in V.S. 1894 (AD 1838) states that Śrīkṛṣṇa Upādhyāya died two years after eating the kāṭṭo for King Siddhi Pratāpa Śāha of Gulmī (a minor independent kingdom at the time, which merged into united Nepal in V.S. 1843).33
This was practiced as recently as the 1800's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glory2Suriname (talk • contribs) 15:30, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Once again read your sources properly. It is not specific to Bahuns in the first place because Indian Brahmins perform this ritual. All Bahuns are Brahmins but not all Brahmins are Bahuns. For example Maithil Brahmins are Brahmins but not Bahuns. Yajmir (talk) 15:36, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
You keep saying this and yet you have no shown me where it has stated this.Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:42, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- I have carefully read all your sources you provided. It mentions in the source itself. Please read it carefully. There are several wiki pages for several Brahmin groups Maithil Brahmin, Kashmiri Brahmin, Nepali Pahadi Brahmin(Bahun) etc. The sources are on the pages. Yajmir (talk) 15:45, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
This is my last post on this matter. I believe you are being deliberately disingenuous now. If you want to make a point then provide those sources here. Don't tell me to go look on other pages lol. First you claim that your point is backed up in the sources I posted and now you're saying that its on other pages?Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:50, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- I have carefully read all your sources you provided. It mentions in the source itself. Please read it carefully. There are several wiki pages for several Brahmin groups Maithil Brahmin, Kashmiri Brahmin, Nepali Pahadi Brahmin(Bahun) etc. The sources are on the pages. Yajmir (talk) 15:45, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
As you can see, these are just some of the evidence I've compiled from a quick search. Glory2Suriname (talk) 15:26, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Ok. Although I don't think this segment on Katto belongs to Bahun page at all because this ritual has been performed by other Brahmin groups whether it is cannibalistic or not. Look here https://books.google.com.np/books?id=MabnCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA4&dq=demoting+vishnu&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiyr9287pLeAhUP4o8KHRJVDm0Q6AEIJzAA#v=onepage&q=bhatta&f=false Yajmir (talk) 15:54, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)Response Thank you. Notes below:
- This is a more reliable source for the IANS article however it does note that, "Some say that the actual practice of eating the dead king's flesh was discontinued a long time ago and what the Brahmins ate subsequently was only a symbolic representation." so it can't be used as a claim in Wikipedia's voice that this practice involves actual ritual cannibalism.
- The excerpt provided here is incomplete and I cannot adjudicate. It appears to be a RS but the excerpt provided doesn't mention details of the ritual or cannibalism.
- This source supports your view but it's a blog and as such probably fails WP:RS worth an ask though, I'll bring it to them. edit Upon deeper reading, this source also does contradict the claim as it includes a quote from the priest that the rumours of ritual cannibalism are "a relict relic of the past". Simonm223 (talk) 16:14, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- This source mentions rumours of ritual cannibalism but does not claim the incident actually occurred. Simonm223 (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- For the two items I took to WP:RS/N I've started this thread. If you have any feedback to provide on the reliability of these sources at this venue please feel free. Simonm223 (talk) 16:04, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Please read this source properly. I have read it completely. https://oestigaard.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/oestigaard_bar1212.pdf It also reiterates my point about the ritual being symbolic. Though it makes mentions of rumors of ritual ashes being added to the meal which again is not callibalistic even if true. Also it makes no mention of Bahun ethnicity in particular. Although Bahuns are Brahmins they aren't the only Brahmin group in Nepal. And such ceremonies were performed by Indian Brahmins too. Simonm223 Yajmir (talk) 16:09, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Second page on the PDF. Yajmir (talk) 16:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
@Simonm223:you're misrepresenting me, I never claimed it was a current practice. I've even stated that it was likely to be a historical practice. Please don't misrepresent me. I've stated that historical practices also have relevance to this article. Also it's not a blog. Read the source carefully, it's a blog posting of a University paper. You can find it on the university website. @Sitush: is an expert on various sources related to South Asia so I would like for him to take a look at them.Glory2Suriname (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- For the two items I took to WP:RS/N I've started this thread. If you have any feedback to provide on the reliability of these sources at this venue please feel free. Simonm223 (talk) 16:04, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Once again not specific to Bahuns. So it doesn't belong here in the first place. Also rumors and "They say.." etc are not reliable source Yajmir (talk) 16:29, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Replying to the ping. I am not going to have time until Monday but if you still want me to take a look then, just drop me a note on my talk page. - Sitush (talk) 16:41, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Glory2Suriname you've pinged random uninvolved people twice today during this discussion. It is kind of looking like you're canvassing. I'd suggest your statements regarding the wordpress paper would be best suited to WP:RS/N on the thread I started there. If I were certain about the reliability I wouldn't have asked others for help so I'd suggest making your case there. Simonm223 (talk) 16:43, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
@Simonm223: I don't know what canvassing means in this context. They are not really uninvolved. Both have edited on this page and have reverted edits made by Yajmir. As Sitush has stated, katto is not an extraordinary claim as you have stated since it is quite a well known practice in Nepal. Perhaps you should try and familiarise yourself with South Asian history.Glory2Suriname (talk) 17:08, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Glory2Suriname you've pinged random uninvolved people twice today during this discussion. It is kind of looking like you're canvassing. I'd suggest your statements regarding the wordpress paper would be best suited to WP:RS/N on the thread I started there. If I were certain about the reliability I wouldn't have asked others for help so I'd suggest making your case there. Simonm223 (talk) 16:43, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Glory2Suriname when you ping three specific editors who haven't ever weighed in on this talk page that strikes me as canvassing. Had you gone to WP:NEPAL I wouldn't have such concerns. Simonm223 (talk) 17:29, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- And I'll note that this edit does nothing to contextualize this as a purported, possibly mythological historical practice and instead says, "these people have been doing this" - which is not an assertion clearly supported by the sources you've provided. Simonm223 (talk) 16:45, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) But just as a quick note, if the argument is that katto should not be mentioned because other Brahmin communities are recorded as practising it, as well as the Bahuns, then that is not an argument for excluding it here. We would perhaps say something like "The Bahun, as also with some other Brahmin communities, have been noted as practitioners of Katto Khune ..." (with cites, of course). I don't see much point in listing, for example, Hindu festivals that are widely celebrated - Diwali etc - but this particular thing is relatively off-beat. Scarcely canvassing to ping me, btw - I only very rarely edit Nepali articles. - Sitush (talk) 16:47, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- My concerns about canvasing are in part because Glory2Suriname also pinged Kautilya3 and Oshwah earlier today. Simonm223 (talk) 16:50, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- First there are no reliable source of cannibalism being performed except hearsay. Second what is the reason to single out Bahuns in particular. You don't associate a rare practice and tar an ethnicity with it in public wiki page unless you have a particular agenda. If it is practiced then it is practiced by the individual who could be from other Brahmin community not particularly Bahuns. Yajmir (talk) 16:52, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- I'll ask all editors to please at least try to WP:AGF Simonm223 (talk) 16:59, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Nepali articles are a mess in general. Full of POV's and even personal insults and political posturing. They are hard to salvage. Just look at how much trouble I had just editing a little piece. Thanks anyway. Yajmir (talk) 17:02, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Simonm223 Sorry for pinging. But why is the page reverted. Even you agree that it has unreliable sources. Yajmir (talk) 18:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- The page was reverted because Drmies showed some kindness and didn't give you a block for edit-warring. Per WP:BRD it's appropriate to restore the page to the pre-edit war version until discussion of the contested edits is resolved at talk. I would strongly advise that you operate in that spirit. I'm going to work on a proposed new version when I have a moment. I've already spoken to Sitush about some of my concerns after reviewing the sources, so I do hope that the editors now involved will assume mutual good faith and try to work collaboratively. Simonm223 (talk) 18:09, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. Also I hope you stay my edit. I didn't mean to edit war. The user Glory2Suriname had gone into edit wars on the "Khas" page which is another ethnicity of Nepal. So I wrongly thought he was vandalizing here too. In any case I don't think irrelevant mythological facts about second largest ethnicity of Nepal warranted a section. So I removed the section. Thanks.
- The page was reverted because Drmies showed some kindness and didn't give you a block for edit-warring. Per WP:BRD it's appropriate to restore the page to the pre-edit war version until discussion of the contested edits is resolved at talk. I would strongly advise that you operate in that spirit. I'm going to work on a proposed new version when I have a moment. I've already spoken to Sitush about some of my concerns after reviewing the sources, so I do hope that the editors now involved will assume mutual good faith and try to work collaboratively. Simonm223 (talk) 18:09, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Simonm223 Sorry for pinging. But why is the page reverted. Even you agree that it has unreliable sources. Yajmir (talk) 18:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Nepali articles are a mess in general. Full of POV's and even personal insults and political posturing. They are hard to salvage. Just look at how much trouble I had just editing a little piece. Thanks anyway. Yajmir (talk) 17:02, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- I'll ask all editors to please at least try to WP:AGF Simonm223 (talk) 16:59, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Proposed revision to Khatto Section
Proposal
Header: Katto Khane
Text:
Bahun priests serve a significant role in the secession ceremonies of Nepali royalty called Katto Khane (Katto eating). This is funerary practice observed specifically upon the death of the King of Nepal in which the Bahun will undertake rituals to make them consubstantial with the dead king. The priest dresses in clothing belonging to the deceased and engages in a series of ritual preparations, including the consumption of a complex ritual meal. It has been purported that this meal once included ritual cannibalism of the bone marrow or brain of the king, but Durga Prasad Sapkota, who served as the katto priest after the death of King Dhirendra says that this is "a relict myth from the past." He further said that he, "cooked the meal himself which consisted only of rice, vegetables and goat meat."
After the compeltion of the Khatto ceremony, the priest is ritually banished from the Kathmandu valley and is stripped of their caste. In the case of Sapkota, this led to a controversy as he believed he was promised gifts worth $10,000 and property to live on after the ritual, but instead received much smaller gifts due to the changing status of the Nepali royal family following the Nepali royal massacre.
---
References from the list provided up-page, as appropriate. Simonm223 (talk) 18:32, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Revised proposal
Bahun priests serve a significant role in the secession ceremonies of Nepali royalty called Katto Khane (Katto eating). This funerary practice was observed upon the death of the King of Nepal and, prior to the Unification of Nepal in the royal funerals of some small kingdoms outside of the Kathmandu Valley. In this ceremony, the Bahun will undertake rituals to make them consubstantial with the dead king. The priest dresses in clothing belonging to the deceased and engages in a series of ritual preparations, including the consumption of a complex meal. It has been purported that this meal once included ritual cannibalism of the bone marrow or brain of the king, but Durga Prasad Sapkota, who served as the katto priest after the death of King Dhirendra says that this is "a relict myth from the past." He further said, of his participation in the ceremony, that he, "cooked the meal himself which consisted only of rice, vegetables and goat meat."
After the compeltion of the Khatto ceremony, the priest is ritually banished from the kingdom (in the modern case from the Katmandhu valley) and is stripped of their caste. In the case of Sapkota, this led to a controversy as he believed he was promised gifts worth $10,000 and property to live on after the ritual, but instead received much smaller gifts due to the changing status of the Nepali royal family following the Nepali royal massacre.
Addition possible revision
Bahun priests serve a significant role in the secession ceremonies of Nepali royalty called Katto Khane (Katto eating). This funerary practice was observed upon the death of the King of Nepal and, prior to the Unification of Nepal in the royal funerals of some small kingdoms outside of the Kathmandu Valley. In this ceremony, the Bahun will undertake rituals to make them consubstantial with the dead king. The priest dresses in clothing belonging to the deceased and engages in a series of ritual preparations, including the consumption of a complex meal. It has been purported that this meal once included ritual cannibalism of the bone marrow or brain of the king, but Durga Prasad Sapkota, who served as the katto priest after the death of King Dhirendra says that this is "a relict myth from the past." He further said, of his participation in the ceremony, that he, "cooked the meal himself which consisted only of rice, vegetables and goat meat." 19th century sources attest to the practice of consuming the brain of the King taking place in minor kingdoms prior to the Unification of Nepal including the kingdom of Gulmi.
After the compeltion of the Khatto ceremony, the priest is ritually banished from the kingdom (in the modern case from the Katmandhu valley) and is stripped of their caste. In the case of Sapkota, this led to a controversy as he believed he was promised gifts worth $10,000 and property to live on after the ritual, but instead received much smaller gifts due to the changing status of the Nepali royal family following the Nepali royal massacre.
!vote
- support as proposer . Simonm223 (talk) 18:32, 19 October 2018 (UTC) edited I'm going to be clear that I am putting my support, as proposer, behind the revised proposal and not the original one. Simonm223 (talk) 19:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
*Reject unfortunately it SEEMS you are picking and choosing sources. The research by the Himalayan Research society references primary sources that support the existence of the practice in small kingdoms that formed what is now Nepal. For the sake of neutrality it would be good to include them. I would also like to wait for the other sources to be assessed by the reliable sources noticeboard. I should also add that the ignored source is a University of Cambridge based paper so it is strange that you not only misrepresented it but actually ignored it.Glory2Suriname (talk) 18:42, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Reject There is no source for 19th century eating of flesh. Even then it is just called Katto meal and has no mention of eating flesh except as hearsay and rumors. Also what is written here should be in the Katto page and not here. The Katto page can then link to Bahuns, Bhatta Brahmins and Mahabrahmans of India and the Newari Mahabrahmans of Kathmandu valley who also perform this rituals for nobility. Yajmir (talk) 20:00, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Threaded comments
Ok, here's my attempt to improve this section. After reading up I think the role of Bahun priests in Nepali secession is definitely WP:DUE coverage here, but we need to improve the WP:NPOV adherence. Simonm223 (talk) 18:32, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Although what you wrote is fair. I still don't think this warrants a section. There are hundreds of ritual, myths and ceremonies in Bahun community, why single out this as representative of the community. The wiki search also calls Bahuns "cannibalistic caste" which is not fair at all. The Katto ritual is not cannibalistic excepts in myths and is very rare ceremony that has nothing to do with Bahun community as a whole. As I have said other Brahmins from India too used to perform this ceremony. So why not write this in other Brahmin pages. Why single out Bahuns? I don't understand. Yajmir (talk) 19:10, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Participation in a royal funeral practice by a specific class of priest is WP:DUE and pretty darn notable. However it shouldn't be used as an opportunity to impugn that caste. I'm attempting to rectify that. Simonm223 (talk) 19:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- So I hope you add this to other Indian Brahmin page too. Read your sources. The Katto ceremony of King Tribhuvan and Mahendra was performed by Bhatta Brahmins from India. Similary other Katto ceremony used to be performed by special class of Brahmins from India called Mahabrahman. So you are being unfair by adding this section to Bahun page. As far as significance goes there are other hugely significant ceremonies, more significant than Katto which is performed by Bahun. Why not add those too? Yajmir (talk) 19:28, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Being a Bahun isn't even a requirement for this ceremony when other Indian Brahmin can and have done in the past too. So this is Brahmin specific ceremony not Bahun. It is simple to understand. All info about Katto can be written in Katto page in fair manner. Yajmir (talk) 19:34, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Participation in a royal funeral practice by a specific class of priest is WP:DUE and pretty darn notable. However it shouldn't be used as an opportunity to impugn that caste. I'm attempting to rectify that. Simonm223 (talk) 19:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Yajmir: Cambridge source confirms this to be true. Here's the quote:
A report written in V.S. 1894 (AD 1838) states that Śrīkṛṣṇa Upādhyāya died two years after eating the kāṭṭo for King Siddhi Pratāpa Śāha of Gulmī (a minor independent kingdom at the time, which merged into united Nepal in V.S. 1843).33 This proves that the kāṭṭo was not only practised at the Śāha royal palace in Kathmandu, but also outside the Valley.Glory2Suriname (talk) 20:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Where does it say that meal included flesh of King. It just says that the ceremony was performed. Yajmir (talk) 20:23, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Here you go, another quote from the same source:
Another practice of similar motivation consists in cutting off a fleshy part of the dead body before cremation and burying it some distance away in order to feed and keep away masans, a specific category of ghosts that roams around cremation ghāṭs, feeding on human flesh.47
Cut of the fleshy part to FEEDGlory2Suriname (talk) 20:27, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Out of context and meaningless to the discussion. The quote talks about feeding ghosts called masans. You have been banned for edit warring on the Khas page and you are hellbent on maligning Bahuns. Your motivations are suspectYajmir (talk) 20:29, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Not at all. You just didn't read it properly. It describes a typical Katto ceremony. And it mentions that feeding takes place prior to the ceremony. Here is yet another quote: According to Levy & Rājopādhyāya (1992: 359-361, 683, 769 n.80) a Bhā assisted the kriyāputra in carrying out the ritual obligations of the first ten days, and on the final day was dismissed with a considerable number of gifts after consuming a meal mixed with some part of the deceased’s brain. As the authors add, in recent times the boiled rice to be served to the Bhā on the eleventh day is at most simply touched with a bone fragment of the deceased. Stop your personal attacks or you will be reported.Glory2Suriname (talk) 20:33, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- If you knew anything about Nepal, you would know that "Bha" are Newari Mahabrahmans. They go by the last name Karanjit. They have nothing to do with Bahuns. Yajmir (talk) 20:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Here is a passage referring to Eastern Bahuns: The text continues with the statement that among pārvatīyas – a designation which refers to the communities of the Himalayan regions – there is the practice of serving a part of the skull-bone taken from the ‘forehead’ (lālāṭika) mixed with yoghurt and milk in a silver bowl, but it does not make clear the occasion. The passage ends by repeating that this knowledge is found among pārvatīya brahmins only.Glory2Suriname (talk) 20:38, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- If you knew anything about Nepal, you would know that "Bha" are Newari Mahabrahmans. They go by the last name Karanjit. They have nothing to do with Bahuns. Yajmir (talk) 20:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Here parvatiya Brahmins doesn't refer especially refer to Bahuns and may mean other Brahmins of the Himalayan region. The Himalayan region stretches from Kashmir to Myanmar. The parbatiya Brahmin could refer to any Brahmin from Himalayan region and not Bahun specifically. It could mean Kashmiri Brahmin of the past, Himachali, Newari, Kumaoni etc. No evidence to suggest it specifically refers to Bahuns. Yajmir (talk) 20:43, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Parvatiya means Pahari/Khas and Khan Brahmins are Bahuns. And the paper is based on Nepal. You know this as well as I do.Glory2Suriname (talk) 20:52, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- Here parvatiya Brahmins doesn't refer especially refer to Bahuns and may mean other Brahmins of the Himalayan region. The Himalayan region stretches from Kashmir to Myanmar. The parbatiya Brahmin could refer to any Brahmin from Himalayan region and not Bahun specifically. It could mean Kashmiri Brahmin of the past, Himachali, Newari, Kumaoni etc. No evidence to suggest it specifically refers to Bahuns. Yajmir (talk) 20:43, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- No it doesn't. It could be any Brahmins from the hills. It could be very well be Newari Brahmins. The source you are quoting is hundreds of year old. It is from Padma Puran. Back then when Padma Puran was written there wasn't even a unified identity of Brahmins called Bahuns. All Brahmins from the Himalayan region extending from Kashmir to Myanmar was called Parbatiya Brahmins. Get your source right. It has nothing to do with Bahuns of present day. Even then Purans are fraught with mythology. So it is hardly a documentation of history. Yajmir (talk) 20:56, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Parvatia Brahmin in the context of a paper about Nepal refers to Bahuns. You are playing mental gymnastics now. Just admit that this is a part of Bahun history and culture. This is a Cambridge paper and not some crap source.Glory2Suriname (talk) 20:59, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- No it doesn't. It could be any Brahmins from the hills. It could be very well be Newari Brahmins. The source you are quoting is hundreds of year old. It is from Padma Puran. Back then when Padma Puran was written there wasn't even a unified identity of Brahmins called Bahuns. All Brahmins from the Himalayan region extending from Kashmir to Myanmar was called Parbatiya Brahmins. Get your source right. It has nothing to do with Bahuns of present day. Even then Purans are fraught with mythology. So it is hardly a documentation of history. Yajmir (talk) 20:56, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- You are the ones doing mental gymnastics. The parvatiya is a reference made hundreds of years ago. Back then Newars were called parvatiya and other Brahmins from Kumaon, Garhwal, Kashmir, Himachal etc were called Parvatiya too. This is not present day reference. Please learn to separate the references. The reference you quotes comes from Padma Puran quoted by DharmaSindhu and NirnayaSindhu. They don't refer to Bahuns. Get your facts right. Also the quote itself says about the occasion not being clear. So this has no relation to Katto as the occasion is not clear. Yajmir (talk) 21:03, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Glory2Suriname You have completely wasted my time. I am not going to reply to you anymore. You can't even read the sources. Let the admins settle this. Good Bye. Yajmir (talk) 21:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- A reference that doesn't link a specific action (feeding skull bone) with this funerary custom isn't useful as a reference for this funerary custom. That would be WP:SYNTH we need to stick to what is directly verifiable by the source. Question: why is it so important that we include in Wikipedia voice that actual, rather than symbolic, cannibalism occurs here? How is it due? What is the relevance? It's pretty clear that there isn't an academic consensus on this point. Simonm223 (talk) 14:57, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
- Are you replying to me? The account Glory2Suriname and its sock puppet account Gandhawaria_Rajput has been indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This is what he wrote under his sock puppet account -- "Cannibals Khasias: these losers are not Brahmins: they are Shudras mongolians from Tibet and China like Chhetris; Khasas can not accepted be as Kshatriya Rajputs and Brahmins" and "in fact Bahuns initiate ethnic hatred; they show their Nepali loose character". You can see it his sock puppets account's edit history. His intentions are clear from these statements. He just wasted our time and created this mess. Is there a way to clear this mess in Talk Page created by this troll account? This will be last discussion on the subject. I am trying to expand the Bahun page and add more sections and info with reliable sources Simonm223 Just bringing this to your attention. Yajmir (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
- If we're sure the discussion is over you can close the conversation threads and that should be the end of it. Pulled a sock ban, eh? OK, well that'll solve that then.Simonm223 (talk) 16:06, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
- Please delete these discussion threads if possible. The user had a dozen sock puppets account all hell bent on maligning Nepali ethnic groups since 2015. This talk page just instigates hatred against a ethnic group and is not productive. Yajmir (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
- If we're sure the discussion is over you can close the conversation threads and that should be the end of it. Pulled a sock ban, eh? OK, well that'll solve that then.Simonm223 (talk) 16:06, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
- Are you replying to me? The account Glory2Suriname and its sock puppet account Gandhawaria_Rajput has been indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This is what he wrote under his sock puppet account -- "Cannibals Khasias: these losers are not Brahmins: they are Shudras mongolians from Tibet and China like Chhetris; Khasas can not accepted be as Kshatriya Rajputs and Brahmins" and "in fact Bahuns initiate ethnic hatred; they show their Nepali loose character". You can see it his sock puppets account's edit history. His intentions are clear from these statements. He just wasted our time and created this mess. Is there a way to clear this mess in Talk Page created by this troll account? This will be last discussion on the subject. I am trying to expand the Bahun page and add more sections and info with reliable sources Simonm223 Just bringing this to your attention. Yajmir (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
- A reference that doesn't link a specific action (feeding skull bone) with this funerary custom isn't useful as a reference for this funerary custom. That would be WP:SYNTH we need to stick to what is directly verifiable by the source. Question: why is it so important that we include in Wikipedia voice that actual, rather than symbolic, cannibalism occurs here? How is it due? What is the relevance? It's pretty clear that there isn't an academic consensus on this point. Simonm223 (talk) 14:57, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Two Brahmins for Nepal’s Departed Kings source
@Simonm223: Its seems you may have misrepresented this source in your assessment:
http://himalaya.socanth.cam.ac.uk/collections/journals/ebhr/pdf/EBHR_23_03.pdf
You claimed that it only talks about rumours but you have missed or ignored references to primary sources regarding the practice:
A report written in V.S. 1894 (AD 1838) states that Śrīkṛṣṇa Upādhyāya died two years after eating the kāṭṭo for King Siddhi Pratāpa Śāha of Gulmī (a minor independent kingdom at the time, which merged into united Nepal in V.S. 1843).33 This proves that the kāṭṭo was not only practised at the Śāha royal palace in Kathmandu, but also outside the Valley.
Please include this reference to primary source in your proposal. It's also important to note that this is a University of Cambridge source and not some random offhanded source.Glory2Suriname (talk) 18:48, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-
- I wasn't ignoring sources so much as concentrating at the incident (2001) that was at the core of the majority of the sources you provided. One moment and I'll try amending my proposal... Simonm223 (talk) 19:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
All you've done is mention that it took place prior to the Unification of Nepal. You've ignored the fact that a primary reference details that the actual consumption of human flesh was a historical fact attested to by primary sources.Glory2Suriname (talk) 20:03, 19 October 2018 (UTC) -Block evading sock-