Talk:Chandala

Mention of dog

I don't see the point of the paragraph about the meeting with a man and a dog. The additional citation doesn't make things any more clear. - Sitush (talk) 12:09, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

I completely agree with Sitush; I believe this story is irrelevant in the given context. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 06:04, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Shaggy dog story

I've just removed this. It has been in and out of the article in the past. I still can't see the point of including some random tale about someone meeting a man and a dog in the road. I've seen the story mentioned in several sources but not one of them explains the significance of it and without such an explanation it is obscure, confusing and pointless from the point of view of an encyclopaedia. Just because something is said does not mean we have to include it. - Sitush (talk) 13:49, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring

An IP has rewritten the beginning, removing referenced sources. I am neither bonded to the article nor well versed in the subject matter; I simply wanted other editors to comment. Ifnord (talk) 18:03, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

"Source" does not support the information, much of it was original research, and Patridge publishing is a self-published source. Article had more unsourced addions in recent weeks. 122.170.21.91 (talk) 18:11, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

• @Ekdalian: I am not getting that why you are frequently disregarding the concerns raised above as visible in your edits. Notion Press and Patridge are indeed self-published sources and thus unreliable. Since your source is printed from 2017 by "Satya Shri", it probably copied Wikipedia in terms of content and conclusion. Thapar's book is not supporting the content either. Read WP:SYNTH. I would also urge you not to add any categories that you can't support with a WP:RS. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 10:27, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Aman Kumar Goel, do you really have any doubt about the content, or else, are you just concerned about the technicality of reliable sources? Other reliable sources can be cited to support the statements. Moreover, a senior editor like Sitush, who is considered as an expert in this subject, and is very particular about reliable sources, has edited the article, and this is the consensus version. I can't really figure out your concern; I sincerely believe, there is no issue with the content; we can add more reliable source(s) for supporting the facts mentioned. I was not sure whether the view of the IP editor is same as yours, and moreover, the heading was 'Edit warring'. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 11:07, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Other uninvolved editors (at least in this particular dispute) are not responsible for your edits. No single person WP:OWN any article here. I came here when I was reverting an editor who had made a number of problematic reverts across many articles and also this article. Sources are self-published and thus unreliable. Issue is that we need reliable sources on subject and should add content without asserting our own assertions. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 12:04, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Aman Kumar Goel, I completely agree with you that no one owns any article here, and we need reliable sources supporting the statements, not any WP:OR. I would just like to point out that there is no dispute till now; we are working on a collaborative project, and we have a common goal i.e. to improve the article or its content based on reliable & verifiable sources. Please go through the following two sources, and let me know your opinion, so that we can work on these: "Source 1" and "Source 2". Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 07:09, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Added relevant content per the source provided. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 18:52, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your edit. I shall add some more relevant information from the source(s). Ekdalian (talk) 07:48, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Consider keeping the content relevant only to Chandala. The theories about caste, untouchability and other broader subjects should be kept out unless they are directly related to this subject. The most popular source here was merely giving descriptions about "The origins of Caste and Untouchability" than "Chandala". Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 12:19, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

A few Edits and Suggestions

So I just slightly edited the text, because Varna is primarily outlined in Dharmashastras. I also propose adding the more positive mentions of Chandalas in later text at least religiously speaking. 108.39.84.90 (talk) 04:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

good manners of the Aryans. To be chanting the holy name of Your Lordship, they must have bathed at holy places of pilgrimage, studied the Vedas and fulfilled everything required. (Srimad Bhagavatam 3.33.6–7)

A Chandala who is a pure Vaishnava at heart and who decorates the eleven parts of his body with Vishnu-Tilaka and sandalwood paste is always worshipable, even by the best of Brahmanas. (Padma Purana, Uttara Khanda 66.84)

A Bramhana who is expert in studying all four Vedas is not dear to Me. But a devotee who comes from a family of Chandalas is dear to Me. He should be offered gifts and one should accept gifts from him. He is as worshipable as I am. (Hari-Bhakta-Vilasa 10.127)

If a devotee of Vishnu, even though he be a Chandala, is recollected, named, seen or touched accidentally by anybody, O dear madam, the former purifies them. (Varaha Purana 211.9)

Oh Lord at SriRangam! Even brahmins in the top caste, Learned in all the four Vedas and their six adjuncts, will become outcastes, should they decry Your devotees in the low caste. (Thirumaalai,43)

It is through deep love that the Chandala makes me his own, while without it the Brahmin is nothing to me. (Garuda Purāṇa 1.231.9)

“Keep in mind I don’t believe in any of these texts due to them being of latter authenticity, but still this shows a different picture of Brahmins as a whole.”

Unconfirmed Verses 108.39.84.90 (talk) 04:51, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Doubts having arisen on this point, O prince; of serpents, Swayambhuba Manu has declared, that the mixed castes are to be regarded as better than the (other) classes, if having gone through the ceremonies of purification, the latter do not conform to the rules of good conduct, O excellent snake! Whosoever now conforms to the rules of pure and virtuous conduct, him have I, ere now, designated as a Brahmana.'

https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-mahabharata-mohan/d/doc7458.html 108.39.84.90 (talk) 04:52, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

All these quotes are from ancient texts like the Puranas, which are not accepted here; read WP:PRIMARY. Please find modern scholarly work by reliable authors! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 11:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Yajur-Veda

I read the sentence about the Yajur-Veda apparently describing chandalas as a union between a Brahmin and a Shudra, and defining them as outcastes. But I cannot find that in the original source, nor is there a mention of a specific verse in the Vedas describing chandalas as some kind of marginalized outcaste group.

In fact I believe the first mention of Chandalas being of mixed origina and being relegated to the margins of society as untouchables hails from texts like the manusmriti, not the Vedas. LouisBStevenson (talk) 09:52, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

I have posted the relevant notice on your talk page. You are not supposed to edit or discuss about caste and social group related articles until you become an extended confirmed user. You may only post an edit request on the article talk page, if required. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 12:02, 1 February 2026 (UTC)