Talk:Birbal

Humor

His sense of humor and presence of mind,for which he is remembered in india,and Akbar loved him,is completely not mentioned here,why?please add these,other wise the article will remain stab. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.232.250.189 (talk) 16:08, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Untitled

A couple of points: I have read in George Dunbar's History of India that the correct name is Raja Bir Bal and that his original name was Mahesh Das (as opposed to Birbal and Maheshdas). Any confirmation? DevanJedi 00:36, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Reading Michael H. Fisher's A Short History of the Mughal Empire confirms that his original name was Mahesh Das and he was given the title of Raja Birbal. Probably spacing differences are due to difference in transliteration rather than an actual difference in name, but it should be noted that Birbal is not a name but a part of a title (found on page 105 and 106 of the source listed above). Foxowl2005 (talk) 15:57, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Some historians reckon Birbal is a work of fiction. I too have read, esp. in non-English (Gujarati n Marathi) historical lit. that the character is completely made up. I think this should be reflected somewhere in the article.(I dont have any references though). Although, it is general consensus that many of the short stories are just fables. Quork 17:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Based on Michael H. Fisher's A Short History of the Mughal Empire it seems the individual is real. Fisher bases this information on Parmeshwar Prasad Sinha's 1980 book Raja Birbal (Life and Times), which is a revision of his 1969 thesis awarded froom Bhagalpur University. While specific stories may be fables, the academic consensus seems to be the individual was real. Foxowl2005 (talk) 16:01, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Legacy Section

Someone ought to write on the legacy of this person, regardless of whether he is real or fake. Talk about the stories for children, maybe even the cartoon. I think this article can go a lot further. Why am not writing it? There's got to be someone who knows better than me! Atrivedi (talk) 23:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Authenticity under Question

The article has conflicting information on the birth place of the character "Birbal". Picture states " Ghoghara, Sidhi district of Madhya Pradesh, India" and the article section of "Early years" specifies it as Narnaul , of Haryana.

Secondly the information floating in this page is completely without references. I hence propose deleting the page as the existence of this page questions the authenticity of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truehistoryonly (talk • contribs) 14:06, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

The solution is not deletion. It is adding references. Removed "Some historians reckon Birbal is a work of fiction. Akbarnama does not mention of Birbal's existence. However few Indian historians do state existence of Mahesh Das as a poor Brahmin to have been born to Gangadas and Anabhadevi in Trivikrampur in 1528." Multiple secondary sources like attest to Birbal. Exactly which noteworthy historians claim Birbal is fiction? --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 17:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

kayastha family

Birbal actually belongs to the Kayastha caste.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Birbal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140425052533/http://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/television/when-delnaz-irani-felt-like-a-queen/article1-1198857.aspx to http://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/television/when-delnaz-irani-felt-like-a-queen/article1-1198857.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:13, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Birbal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131111153511/http://archive.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=85182&cat_id=643 to http://archive.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=85182&cat_id=643

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:23, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

CM Naim

I AM GOING TO REVERT or REMOVE FOLLOWING. ALL these edits done by Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan (blocked user, it seems) from single source C.M. NAIM, CM NIM has presented BIASED PRIMARY OPINION and not verifiable-scholary-research-based secondary sources. THIS IS CLEAR VIOLATION OF Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view, lack of Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:No original research through Wikipedia:Disruptive editing by the Wikipedia:Single-purpose account of Prof Dr Takseen Ahmd Khan.

Editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan (he seems to have been blocked from wiki, may be he is a serial vandal) has copied large chunks of PRIMARY OPINION written by single source which is written by CM NAIM, further both writer CM NAIM (i read his cited article and it is communally biased and not neutral) and editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan (seems to be copying large PRIMARY UNSUPPORTED OPINION chunks from CM Naim to show bias against Birbal due to his non-muslim origin) are muslims, their statements are PRIMARY OPINION with no reliable source, editor Editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan even misrepresented some f statements of CM NAIM OUT OF CONTEXT to make Birbal look bad in biased manner, Editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan also copied refrences used by CM NAIM in his article and Editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan tried to use those references from CM NAIMs work by copying those into the article here as if they are separate soruces and he quoted those in out of the context manner to support his biased statement. Editor even misrepresented works of CM NAIM as work of Minakshi to show as if the writer of biased OPINION is more than one (not ust CM NIAM) and as if wirter of biased DUBVIOUS OPINION is hindu while infact its a muslim (motives of editors are communal and ot driven by the intent of creating NEUTRAL ARTICLE). All this must be deleted, admins please warn Editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan (Pls verify if he has indeed bene BLOCKED by wiki because his username appears in RED color so i assume it means he is blocked form wiki or doe sit mean he has no userpage)}

Specific examples below:

C. M. Naim writes that these folk tales should not be viewed as an historical commentary but they contribute to the understanding of political history, "Akbar and Birbal" stories show a bias of a Hindu narrator for a Mughal ruler. Akbar is shown in a slightly negative way and his Hindu courtier, Birbal, always outmatches him. In each case, there is a powerful ruler who had a powerful reign at his time, who is paired with a jester-like minister whose wit is just as sharp with a legendary reputation. These jokes and stories make each powerful ruler including Akbar, because he inspired the people, seem more human-like and flawed for them. Naim further states Birbal was chosen and not the other courtiers because he was a Brahmin fitting the old Indian tradition: a powerful Kshatriya king ruling with an equally powerful Brahmin advisor and in this case, an indication of Hindu subversion over Islam.|reason= Editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan (he seems to have been blocked from wiki, may be he is a serial vandal) has copied large chunks of PRIMARY OPINION written by single source which is written by CM NAIM, further both writer CM NAIM (i read his cited article and it is communally biased and not neutral) and editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan (seems to be copying large PRIMARY UNSUPPORTED OPINION chunks from CM Naim to show bias against Birbal due to his non-muslim origin) are muslims, their statements are PRIMARY OPINION with no reliable source, editor Editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan even misrepresented some f statements of CM NAIM OUT OF CONTEXT to make Birbal look bad in biased manner, Editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan also copied refrences used by CM NAIM in his article and Editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan tried to use those references from CM NAIMs work by copying those into the article here as if they are separate soruces and he quoted those in out of the context manner to support his biased statement. Editor even misrepresented works of CM NAIM as work of Minakshi to show as if the writer of biased OPINION is more than one (not ust CM NIAM) and as if wirter of biased DUBVIOUS OPINION is hindu while infact its a muslim (motives of editors are communal and ot driven by the intent of creating NEUTRAL ARTICLE). All this must be deleted, admins please warn Editor Prof.Dr. Taskeen Ahmad Khan (Pls verify if he has indeed bene BLOCKED by wiki because his username appears in RED color so i assume it means he is blocked form wiki or doe sit mean he has no userpage)

However, historically he never played such a role.[1][7]Reason=He mentioned two soruces, first sources is misquoted as misnakshi is actaully CM NIAM and second one is copied from the inside of CN Naim's article, and these are PRIMARY OPINON and not secondary works of reputed verifiable accuracy

Badayuni mistrusted him but did mention that he was "having a considerable amount of capacity and genius".[1] The Braj language poet, Rai Hol, praised Akbar and his nine jewels, having a special emphasis on Birbal for his generosity. Abul Fazl respected him by emphasising on his spiritual excellence and position as a confidant of the Emperor rather than on his wit or poetry.[1]

Modern Hindu scholars assert that he made Akbar make bold decisions and the orthodox Muslims in the court despised him, since he made Akbar renounce Islam. But no evidence is present that he influenced Akbar's beliefs.[7] Though sources suggest he influenced Akbar's policies to some extent. It was Akbar's affection for him, his religious tolerance and social liberalism which was the reason for this and Birbal was not the cause. Historically, he was more of a supporter of Akbar's religious policy and his religion, Din-i-Ilahi. Ain-i-Akbari mentions an incident involving prostitutes, where Akbar wanted to punish him, contrary to how he is portrayed as a deeply religious man|reason=it is just PRIMARY OPINION of CM NAIM which editor Dr PRok Takseen has inserted by vandalizing the page allover with communal bias

Can someone please guide me if it is valid to include these above three DISPUTED INLINE templates inside the main article or should they be placed only in the TALK page, sorry my first time to use this stuff, first time to dispute someones's work and it wil be my first time if i revert these vandalised OPINIONS of CM NAIM copied by Prof Dr Takseen Ahmd Khan.

Thanks Being.human (talk) 22:55, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Responded on the user's talk. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 05:40, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

pls check my DISPUTED templaytes and discuss specific. Can u help me revert those edits whoever made it, im still not good in hw reverts work, i hv never reverted anyones work so far. pls discuss this topic here for all to see in future, including review boards, and independent parties, not on individual walls (user talkpages). In the name of good faith, can not allow legitimizing biased POV of PRIMARY UNSCHOLARY RESEARCH of CM NAIM from dubious publication even if it is requoted as CIRCULAR-REFERENCED by more dubious sources. NO GAMING and NO GANGING UP please. thanks Being.human (talk)

Hi, Ugog Nizdast, I had left msg on your talk page several days ago and i noticed today that you have put it in ignore list. You have not specifically addressed any of my questions to you and my concerns about the article. I am going to remove all the islamised biased POV from this article. I will remove all the content attributed to CM NAIM and or attritubed to referenced mentioned by him (most out of context and distorted and weight of importance does not hold, can not legitimize such low value work by putting on wiki as it is not of encyclopedic standard). Being.human (talk) 11:06, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Removal of communalised poorly soruced POV edits and Gaming of System by one editor using two accounts

For the context, see my previous section titled "CM NAIM". Content attributed specifically to CM NAIM and and Vicki K. Janik edited essay of Karen Treanor is all junk, none of these are peer reviewed journals or respected authors, search on them showed no academic or acceptable quality work, CM NAIm has showed tendency to distort and only karen Treanor shows up as obscure writer of 1 book on short fictional stories. their work is not of standard, not based on research, their reference list is low quality and short, and lacks critical analysis. Editor who edited Birbal article heavily used these two low quality references CM NAIM and Karen trenor to communalize the birbal article with heavily biased POV with islamic slant. I further suspect one of the editor is using two accounts to game the system, he is likely same editor who introduced these unaceptable edits to bribal article. I will remove it by tomorrow, let me know if anyone wish to offer help or suggestions to rewrite or to provide better sources. Being.human (talk)

I don't see anything wrong with using CM Naim or his article as a source. I have made some changes to the section. Please have a look. If you still have objections, please list them specifically. I also don't see any mention of a Karen Trenor or Treanor in the article.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 13:17, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Caste Birbal

Birwal was born in a karn(Kayastha) family A. Kayastha (talk) 02:46, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm pretty confused by this airtcle

So is birbal according to this airtcle a fictional character or an historical person? Or both? 950CMR (talk) 17:43, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Lack of reference in Ain E Akbari. Ashok Rajpal USA (talk) 19:04, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Why it's mentioned jalaun uttarpradesh in early life

Pls mention correct in early life. Born in madhya pradesh sidhi district 116.75.24.183 (talk) 18:40, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

How name of birbal can be Mahesh das srivastava.srivastava and das belong to different kayastha group.

Srivastava and Das both are different surnames and can't be combined together, Srivastava and das belong to different kayastha subcaste 113.199.243.23 (talk) 09:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Request for protection of Birbal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I request temporary semi-protection of Article Name . because of repeated insertion of misleading or inadequately supported claims concerning the historical figure's caste/community identity, particularly in the Early life section.

The historical figure's Brahma Bhatt origin is supported by established historical facts, yet the Early life section has repeatedly been edited to introduce competing caste/community identifications, including Kayasth and Kanyakubj affiliations, without adequately establishing those claims from reliable sources.

The article is already heavily sourced, but disruptive edits repeatedly misrepresent or misquote material from sources that are actually discussing unrelated subjects, contexts, or issues. These statements can appear superficially well-cited because a citation is present, while the cited source does not substantiate the specific claim being made.

This is particularly problematic in a heavily researched historical article because most readers reasonably rely on the text and citations as presented and will not have the time to examine lengthy primary and secondary sources to determine whether a citation actually supports the accompanying assertion.

There have therefore been repeated attempts to introduce a particular community/caste affiliation as historical fact through selective or contextually inappropriate use of sources. I request that the recent edit history be reviewed and that temporary protection be considered while the disputed claims and their source-to-claim correspondence are resolved on the talk page.

The request is intended to prevent continued disruptive editing, not to preserve a particular version of the article. Aaranyaka (talk) 18:01, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Credibility of Sinha on Birbal and background of Birbal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I think Sinha's interpretation of Birbal's caste needs to be treated with caution. In Raja Birbal: Life and Times (1980), P. P. Sinha uses the identification of Kavi Bhushan as a Bhat as part of his argument concerning Birbal's social background.

However, this interpretation appears to require reconciliation with Bhushan's own Shivraj Bhushan. In the Bhushan Granthavali edition edited by Shyambihari Mishra and Shukdevbihari Mishra (Nagari Pracharini Sabha, 7th ed., 1958–59), Bhushan describes himself as a “दुज कनौज कुल कस्यपी” (“a twice-born of the Kanyakubja [Kanauj] lineage”) and identifies Trivikrampur on the Yamuna as his residence.See The following verse mentions “वीर वीरवर”, traditionally understood as Birbal. The editors' note connects the passage with Birbal and with the Kanpur region.

This makes it problematic to use Bhushan's supposed identity as a Bhat as straightforward evidence for Birbal's caste without addressing the primary text itself. In particular, Bhat and Brahmin are not simply interchangeable caste/community designations; “Bhat” could also refer to a bardic or genealogical occupational/community category. Therefore, an identification based on the word “Bhat” requires contextual evidence showing how the term is being used in the particular source.

There is also a broader issue with Sinha's argument concerning the prevalence of Bhats in Kanpur. If census statistics are being invoked to demonstrate that Bhats were numerous in the Kanpur area, the relevant census table and population figures should be cited directly rather than relying on a general assertion.

Finally, the question should be separated from the well-attested historical identification of Kavi Bhushan as a Brahmin, since his case does not by itself establish Birbal's caste. The Birbal question should instead be assessed from the earliest and most direct evidence available, including contemporary or near-contemporary Mughal sources and Bhushan's text, rather than from an assumed equivalence between “Bhat” and “Brahmin.” Bhats is an entirely different community than Brahmins.

I therefore think the article should present Sinha's interpretation as one scholarly interpretation, rather than treating it as an established fact, unless stronger evidence supporting his reading can be provided. ~2026-52496-69 (talk) 18:49, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Regarding the Brahmin Classification of Birbal

Repeated ECR violations; AE notified CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 10:25, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

}

Bhusan calling himself a Kannauji “दुज कनौज कुल कस्यपी” is to be treated as a Geographical division of Brahmins. Within Brahmin fold there are clans like the Dube, Tiwari, Tripathi, Chaturvedi, Bhatt, Bhat etc.

If a person calls himself a Gurjara Brahmana it doesn't mean an Umbrella term of Gurjara Brahamana is his clan. Rather it becomes specific when it comes to sub-clans (i.e. Nagar Brahman, Khedaval Brahman, Audichya, Uneval, Anavil,Modh etc.)

Here therefore the Kanyakubj is to be treated as a geographic division and the love of the poet for his geographical identity rather than a specific Ritualistic folk within Brahmin. Many other sources state birbal as a Bhatta/Bhat brahmin. And the origin to Kanpur substiantes the claim as it is a Bhat Brahmana Dominated area.

The Kanyakubj Vanshavali proves that the daughter of bhat brahmana Birbal Married a Tiwari of Kanyakubj area.

Bhat/ Brahmabhatt is a vast community. Confining it to just Kanyakubj(kannauj) region is not a justice to Birbal. Aaranyaka (talk) 10:15, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Search String not to be treated as a proof.

Non-ECR editor, likely WP:LOUTSOCK CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 10:41, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

The user CoffeeCrumbs has inserted a search string as a reference to the page "Birbal Kanyakubj Brahmin" is not an evidence to Birbal being a Kanyakubj.

The author Sinha is a respected author and more experienced veteran researcher than a random biased opionionated wiki page editor.

The Kanyakubj should be treated as a Geographic identity not his caste identity.

Within the Kanyakubj or any other Geography there exist numerous Sub-clans of brahmins and within the brahmin of a single sub-clan also there exists a vast differentiation of their titles and lineages.

Being specific regardding Birbal's caste is welcome than diluting his identity into an umbrella term to distribute free credit to everyone. ~2026-52488-31 (talk) 10:24, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Brahmin origin of Birbal

Non-ECR editor, likely WP:LOUTSOCK CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 10:41, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Bhat here is treated as Brahmin. Not a separete community from brahmin fold. And kavi Bhusan is not a contemporary of Birbal but a later scholar. Please check your facts.

I would like to notify AE and CoffeeCrumbs regarding the ECR violations by a group of people posing as history experts without qualifications. ~2026-52488-31 (talk) 10:37, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

You are free to state your case at AE if you wish to do so. I have extended-confirmed user rights, so am I allowed to edit in this topic. I have only requested you be blocked for a week; do not give AE reason to make it an indefinite block. My edits are solely to enforce the WP:CT/SA; I could not possibly care any less about castes or who is classified in what caste. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 10:44, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Once again, only extended-confirmed editors can discuss issues related to caste. TA editors can not ever be extended-confirmed. Please stop this or blocks and IP blacklisting is inevitable. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 17:39, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Administrator review request - Birbal sourcing dispute and Request to preserve sourcing discussion

I request administrator review of the recent editing dispute concerning the Early life section of the article Birbal and the conduct of User:CoffeeCrumbs.

The issue concerns both the treatment of historical sources regarding Birbal's ancestry and the subsequent handling of discussion concerning those sources.

On 29 September 2026, a revision added material identifying Birbal's family as Brahm/Bhat (Brahmbhatt), citing P. P. Sinha's 1980 monograph, Raja Birbal: Life and Times. This is a published historical monograph by P. P. Sinha, published by Janaki Prakashan in 1980. The digitized copy is held in the Central Archaeological Library, Archaeological Survey of India.

On 30 September 2026 at 09:20 UTC, CoffeeCrumbs reverted the revision and removed the Sinha citation and the associated sourced material. At 10:06 UTC I restored the material, after which CoffeeCrumbs reverted it again at 10:20 UTC. The subsequent revision history shows further reversions and was followed by CoffeeCrumbs notifying me that an Arbitration Enforcement request had been filed against me.

I have also attempted to raise the sourcing issue on the article's talk page. However, discussion concerning the historical sources has subsequently been removed. I request that administrators examine the relevant talk-page history and diffs as well as the article history, rather than treating the competing characterizations of the dispute by either editor as established fact.

There is older independent documentary evidence relevant to the historical question. Edmund W. Smith's Archaeological Survey of India publication The Moghul Architecture of Fathpur-Sikri describes Birbal as a Brahman named Mahesh Das and as a Bhât/minstrel. The Ain-i-Akbari likewise identifies Raja Birbal as a Brahman and describes him as a Bhat. These sources substantially predate the present editing dispute.

I am not asking administrators to decide the historical question in my favour. I am asking that the sourcing be evaluated consistently and at the level of the actual sources:

• whether P. P. Sinha's Raja Birbal: Life and Times actually supports the material for which it was cited;
• whether the replacement citations actually support the specific Kanyakubja assertion at the relevant pages;
• whether the historical sources identifying Birbal as a Brahman/Bhat have been accurately represented;
• whether the removal of a directly cited historical source and replacement with materially different sourcing is consistent with Wikipedia's sourcing and dispute-resolution policies; and
• whether the removal of good-faith sourcing discussion from the article talk page was procedurally appropriate.

I also request review of the subsequent allegations made against me concerning logged-out editing and alleged restriction evasion. These are serious allegations and should be evaluated against the actual edit history and the applicable restrictions, rather than treated as established facts merely because they were asserted by another editor.

I recognize that there may be disagreement over the interpretation of Birbal's ancestry. My request is therefore not that administrators endorse the Brahm/Bhat/Brahmbhatt attribution, but that the competing claims be assessed according to the quality, relevance, and contents of the cited sources, and that the discussion be allowed to proceed without repeated removal of the underlying evidence.

Relevant diffs:

• Special:Diff/1377646033 — CoffeeCrumbs's 09:20 UTC revert removing the Sinha/Brahmbhatt material.
• Special:Diff/1377649957 — restoration/removal sequence involving the cited Sinha material.
• Special:Diff/1377651478 — subsequent revert.
• Special:Diff/1377652004 — CoffeeCrumbs's later revert citing WP:LOUTSOCK.
• [insert diff(s) showing removal of the sourcing discussion from Talk:Birbal].

I would appreciate an objective review of the sourcing, talk-page conduct, and editing conduct on all sides, based on the actual revision history and the cited sources. Aaranyaka (talk) 10:52, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Bhāts and Brahmins are entirely different communities. Contemporary sources call Birbal as Brahmin not Bhat. Some scholars confused Birbal from his occupation and called him Bhat Brahmin which is an oxymoron. Bhats are known as Bards in Rajasthan whose primary occupation was of genealogists and poets. Just because someone is poet or called 'Brahmkavi', he doesn't becomes Bhāts or its branch Brahmbhatt by default. There is a consensus that Bhats and Brahmins are distinct communities and also about identity of Kavi Bhushan which makes work of Sinha unreliable strictly to Birbal's caste background. ~2026-52609-46 (talk) 13:15, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

User:CoffeeCrumbs You talk with such authority like you were a courtier yourself and rejecting the claims made by the Mughal courtiers!

So biased of you to prove your point.

Bhat exists as a sub-clan of Brahmins and also as a mixed bardic race of non-brahmin origin.(2 totally separete groups of people)

Correct your facts and do not emphasize your local ideas on Pan India caste division.

You cannot say Sinha is unreliable as he holds primary sources himself and has a reputed publication with neutral research. Not a Biased opion holder like you.

You are biased on your views and reject the existing facts for serving your vested interests. ~2026-52530-80 (talk) 17:36, 30 September 2026 (UTC)