Recent Posts
PeyuiK
No.665
So apparently the yadavas of up and Bihar originate from Rajasthan.
>Abhiras of Rajputana were sturdy and regarded as Mlecchas, and carried on anti-Brahmanical activities. As a result, life and property became unsafe. Pargiter points to the Pauranic tradition that the Vrishnis and Andhakas, while retreating northwards after the Kurukshetra War from their western home in Dwarka and Gujarat, were attacked and broken up by the rude Abhiras of Rajasthan
>There is no certainty regarding the occupational status of the Abhiras, with ancient texts sometimes referring to them as pastoral cowherders, but at other times as plundering tribes.Along with the Vrishnis, the Satvatas, and the Yadavas, the Abhiras were followers of the Vedas, and worshipped Krishna, the head and preceptor of these tribes.In the Padma-puranas and certain literary works, these herds were known as ayars in Tamil, as they were known as Ahirs and Abhiras in North India.
So what led to these tribal warriors to become kisans in North India.
lFOLxg
No.666
PeyuiK
No.667
>>666
Anti brahman often meant mleccha , not anti veda particularly.
mhQXim
No.668
>>667
Anti Veda is what made a person a Mleccha, the law of fall, only applies to Vritya, where the low rank someone can get to is Shudra, not Mleccha.
People need to understand that "Yadavas" that we know now have nothing to do with Yadava in scriptures. Both are neither genetically nor in the kulcha, connected to each other. Yadava were Kshatriya who followed Vedas under Yadu clan.
Yadava that includes Ahira, Abhira and so on (Ayar) as well is relatively loosely connect clans all being different tribes and Shudras. They did not follow vedas historically or scripturally. It is rather late inclusions, and they primarily have always been tribes, raiders and agragarian (tribe who assimilated to agragarian lives)
They did infact originate in Rajasthan, you are not wrong, but you are conflating the modern Yadava identity with one that doesn't exist at all, as it was wiped out in its entirety as far as i can remember. This is well believed by many Yadav who openly criticise their ancestors from trying to kang on something not relevant to them.
>TLDR
>Yadavs originated in Rajasthan
>They were Tribal and Raiders
>They assimilated with farmers
>Not related to he historical Yadus
>Not Kshatriya
>They are Savarna
ZjsTFN
No.670
>>668
>Anti veda
In principle. In practice being anti brahmin meant being relegated to a low position or high position or even out. For example, Maga Brahmins.
>>668
>People need to understand that "Yadavas" that we know now have nothing to do with Yadava in scriptures. Both are neither genetically nor in the kulcha, connected to each other. Yadava were Kshatriya who followed Vedas under Yadu clan.
Again. No.
>>he modern Yadava identity with one that doesn't exist at all, as it was wiped out in its entirety as far as i can remember.
thats only what the epics claim, it doesnt mean its true.
3cdnRH
No.671
>>670
>Again. No.
Cope, that also a ridiculous degree.
>>670
>thats only what the epics claim, it doesnt mean its true.
That's what everyone claims, if you think Bihari Yadavs some how related to Krishna or the real Yadu clan then you are outright retarded. I could claim I am Indra myself, and maybe that would become societal normal if enough retards go on repeating that, but that doesn't mean it's true lmao.
3cdnRH
No.672
>>670
>In principle. In practice being anti brahmin meant being relegated to a low position
You are retarded if you believe it even for a single second.
>the law of fall, only applies to Vritya, where the low rank someone can get to is Shudra, not Mleccha.
We literally got entire chapters on this. Anyone who wants to kang on a religious status and it's studies can't do that when the said study and the religion itself is breaking your knee caps.
ZjsTFN
No.673
>>671
>Correct.
Cause Krishna wasn't a Yadav. He was a Vrishni hero. Vrishnis had conflict with yadavas and then they got absorbed
ZjsTFN
No.674
>>672
>You are retarded if you believe it even for a single second.
It is true. Case in point, Maga Brahmins, Rajputs, Marathas. Their position elevated due to being friendly to Brahmins
>Religious Studies.
cause its not religious studies, its historical. Religion tells what should happen, History tells what did
xUykXW
No.675
>>674
>Maga Brahmins, Rajputs, Marathas. Their position elevated due to being friendly to Brahmins
Maratha's rise had nothing to do with Brahmin, Maga are not Brahmins, they are simply thus treated well because unlike Yadav chamars, they do not try to larp as something they are not. The Rajput could be one case, but they were always Kshatriya by lineage.
>>674
>Religion tells what should happen
<Source anon ki ma ki gand se aya tha
What kind of copium is this? Religion is not a bunch of moral fag regulation. The fundamental principle of religion varies by the said religion. Hinduism is prominently about history in the first place.
Neither genetics not the historical study back up Yadav chamars being high borne, even their pheno AND their geno is same as Dalitoids kek. Yadavs themself point out how many of their people are retarded for larping as people they are not
xUykXW
No.676
>>673
>rishnis had conflict with yadavas and then they got absorbed
What kind of chamar yadav cope is this? I am praying this is a bait because I refuse to believe Yadavs can be this retarded.
3IW6WF
No.677
>>675
>Neither genetics not the historical study back up Yadav chamars being high borne, even their pheno AND their geno is same as Dalitoids kek
I think you are confusing east up , central and bihar yadav with west up , haryana and rajasthan . The east up ones are gwals and fasariyas who converted to yadav in 1900s , while the weat up and haryana and raajasthan ones are real . See picrel rajpal yadav(east up) vs vishal yadav dp yadav’s son from west up
xUykXW
No.678
>>677
Holy fuck this is brutal 
ZjsTFN
No.696
>>675
>Maratha's rise had nothing to do with Brahmin, Maga are not Brahmins, they are simply thus treated well because unlike Yadav chamars, they do not try to larp as something they are not. The Rajput could be one case, but they were always Kshatriya by lineage.
How can smone be so wrong lol?
>>675
>>Religion tells what should happen
<Source anon ki ma ki gand se aya tha
Most basic 1 digit iq is enough to figure out this much.
>Yadav genome is similar to Dalits.
Do uc anons actually believe this?
ZjsTFN
No.699
>>676
He is right.
>Abhiras of Rajputana were sturdy and regarded as Mlecchas, and carried on anti-Brahmanical activities. As a result, life and property became unsafe. Pargiter points to the Pauranic tradition that the Vrishnis and Andhakas, while retreating northwards after the Kurukshetra War from their western home in Dwarka and Gujarat, were attacked and broken up by the rude Abhiras of Rajasthan.
uWhD21
No.702
>>696
>Most basic 1 digit iq is enough to figure out
That anon pulled the source out of apni sasti ma ki gaand.
>How can smone be so wrong lol?
No idea, i am not a Yadav.
>Do uc anons actually believe this?
Yes because it's true. How they cope about it is not relevant.
>>699
>Entire argument built on Abhira actually being the Yadava
>Any source provided favours all the Vrishnis instead
Again, majority of Abhiras we see now has not an ounce to do with the ancestral group that is known as Yadava. It's just a cope that people now days have come up with.
umXuk+
No.703
>>665(OP)
fake, Yadavs is a fake caste made up by British. It has no mention in Akbarnama unlike other castes.
Post proof of Yadavs being existent during Akbar times from Akbarnama or any other medieval book or keep quiet.
QwkNZc
No.704
>ITT randiputs seething
ZjsTFN
No.705
>>702
>>Most basic 1 digit iq is enough to figure out
Yaar anon you don't need a source for that. Religious laws are an ideal for what a society should be they are never the concrete on what a society is, cause of human behaviour and nature tht seeks to break rules as much as possible.
