Talk:Iyer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

[edit] Deities worshipped

Iyers are Smarthas that worship both Shiva and Vishnu. It is inaccurate to portray Iyers as worshippers of Shiva. I am an Iyer and am named after Shiva. Our family deity is Vishnu. As per the Smartha tradition people are free to choose thier favorite deities for devotion. Madhusudhana Saraswathi, a Smartha teacher is supposed to have chosen Krishna, Manifestation of Vishnu. Ramana Maharishi another Smartha teacher is supposed to have chosen Arunachala, Manifestation of Shiva <<User - Shiva>>

From the article, added by User:KRS, "Iyers are Shaivites worshipping Shiva as their principal God". From my understanding, Iyers are advaitins claimining allegiance to the Kanchi Math or some other Math established by Sankara. Isn't one of the defining principles of advaita that of a nirguna brahman, and all deities being manifestations of that brahman? All Iyers I've come across worship all deities - Shiva, Narayana, Rama, Krishna, Ganesha etc. without bias. Adi Sankara has himself composed slokas on various deities. Could KRS cite a reference for suggesting that Iyers are Shaivites? -- Ambarish

I can't cite any sources, this is my general impression as a member of the community. Isn't it considered that Iyers worship Shiva as opposed to Iyengars who worship Vishnu? Probably it could be rewritten as "Iyers predominantly worship Shiva". KRS 07:56, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Disclaimer: I am not a member of the community. The following is my understanding: Iyers are followers of Adi Sankara's advaita philosophy. Adi Sankara taught that among the manifestations of Parabrahman are Brahma, Vishnu and Siva performing their specific duties, as well as Sarasvati, Lakshmi, Parvati, Ganesha, Karthikeya, ... performing their respective duties. Thus, an Iyer is expected to treat all deities as manifestations of Parabrahman. Of course, specific families or individuals may have their own ishta-devatas or family deities. Take a look at:

Iyers are indeed advaitins. In fact, from what I know, what primarily separates them from Iyengars is the fact that Iyengars believe in Ramanuja (who came after Adi Sankara, I believe), and in his philosophy of dvaitam. Less formally speaking, from my experience, I have seen Iyers to be Shaivites, and Iyengars to be Vaishnavites. Iyers are NOT sole worshippers of Shiva and his pantheon. Shiva is considered to be the chief, or most important deity, not the only. This has a few consequences, one of them being a change in some of the mantras that are chanted during the Sandhyavandanam (A prayer dedicated to the Sun, performed three times a day). To any familiar with what I'm talking about, Iyers chant "mamopaartah samastah dooridakshyadwara shree parameshvara preetyartham" (the bolded text means Shiva), while Iyengars chant "mamopaartah samastah dooridakshyadwara shree naarayana preetyartham" (the bolded text refers to Vishnu).

In any case, Iyers names their children after all kinds of deities. Ramakrishnan, Srinivasan, Krishnamurthy, etc. are fairly common. In summary, I contend that "Iyers follow the Advaita philosophy of Adi Sankara, according to which both Siva and Vishnu and manifestations of Parabrahman". If you think you agree, I could go ahead and change the wording, or feel free to rewrite it yourself. Ambarish 09:23, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

You can go ahead and change, I am a not-so-well-informed person as far as such matters are concerned except when they intersect with intellectual or philosophical issues. Most of the info featured in the page consists of generally accepted viewpoints but this may not necessarily be 100 % factual. When you get to know wikipedia better, you will realise that viewpoints are also a form of knowledge- some say this, but others say that and so on and on:-)KRS 13:00, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Done. Thanks, and feel free to change anything that sounds POV-ish. I'm still new to Wikipedia :-) Ambarish 22:39, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

1) About Subgroups of IYERS in KARNATAKA : The article omits two distinct groups of Iyers who have been residents of Karnataka (more specifically erstwhile Mysore Province)in addition to Sankethis. One of the group is well known as MYSORE IYERS, who now speak dialect of Tamil mixed with Kannada. Late GV Iyer belonged to this group and many of them stayed in and around Mysore and Nanjangud area. Looks like the early settlers of this group migrated to Mysore in serach of employment and royal patronage. The other group ( to which I belong) is known as ASTAGRAMA IYERS as eight agraharams in Kolar district of Karanataka formed their base. The eight gramas (villages) on either side of PALAR river were gifted (or donated!) to the early settlers of this community by Palegars of later Vijayanagar empire. being in the borders of Andhrapradesh, the Tamil spoken by this group is highly influenced by Telegu and Kannada. This group retains many Iyer rituals with ceratin influence of local rituals. like they celebrate both Chnadramana and Souramana Ugadi, Mattu Pongal, Bhogi and Kannu etc. prepare Yellu-bella (a mixture of til and Jaggery) with Pongal on Snakranthi (PONGAL), Now they are spread across the globe but are mainly concentartaed in Bangalore area. Also known as DEVARAYA SAMUDRAM Iyers they are known for their enterprising nature. Late KV Iyer (writerin Kannada and gymnast), Well known Photographer TS Satyan , Cine artiste Soundarya belong to this community.

   - Ramkumar Parameshwaran

[edit] Iyers Today

The last para sounds so odd and POV. AFAIK, many other non-Iyers view Iyers as crooked and people who group themselves (sorry don't know the correct term in English), and such info is not available in this article. Also, doesn't have any info about Thanthai Periyar... This article seems to be written by a girl who is chauvinistic about her community (No offense, just my opinion). --Rrjanbiah 05:12, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Just read your comment This article seems to be written by a girl who is chauvinistic about her community. Though you say that you mean no offense, it still sounds offensive to me, not in terms of community but the way you have employed the words written by a girl. Maybe you use the word 'girl' to denote gender and maybe you are not aware that its quite derogatory or politically incorrect to use such terminology, especially when gender is not the issue here. I wish that in future you check your statements for their meaning before you edit.

Regarding my belonging to the community of Iyers, ofcourse, that's one of the main reasons I have sufficient knowledge to write about them. I have tried to be neutral, I have even written many a time the sterotypes even contradict and cancel out each other and given contradictory viewpoints. If you look carefully, there are lots of negative qualities I have mentioned, a few of which are

shrewdness- means cunningness primarily! However since in the Indian context many use the word shrewd to mean intelligent you might have missed its negative connotations.
lesser loyalty to one's community and more to one's individual self
flexibility in changing one's opinion bourgeois mentality

Note that this is supposed to be stereotypical views of the community and does not purport to be fact. KRS 04:08, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Better to edit the article than engage in argumentum ad hominem. -- Arvindn 05:33, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'm afraid, you might have misunderstood argument Vs. opinion. -- Rrjanbiah 07:40, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The last para seems POV. Iyers are perceived as intelligent. So, how are Dalits perceived? The perception is of the author alone. Also, attributing filter coffee to Iyers is not right. Is there any historical proof that Iyers invented filter coffee? Or are there statistics to prove that Iyers consume them in large quantities (more than any caste)? I followed through to the article on filer coffee. It states that coffee is popular in Brahmin households. But again this is unsubstantiated by references."Their strenghs"- what strengths? There are no statistical studies cited to prove that iyers form a substantial chunk of people in these professions when compared to other castes. The last para dwells on sterotypes which seems unnecessary. "Simple living , high thinking" is grossly POV.

This is a sober encyclopedia with no space for non-facts.

Arunkrishnan 12:13, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] reverting Anonymous contribution (by 68.119.82.49 )as on 07-Apr-04

I reverted a major edit by an anonymous user, as this user has deleted some information from the article. For example, the following passage was (perhaps inadvertently) deleted

The migration to the South features in legends of the sage Agastya; once the Vindhya mountain range in central India continued to grow higher and higher showing its might. Sage Agastya, sent to control it, asked it to stop growing until he returned from his sojourn in the South. The Vindhya bowed its head to Agastya and promised to comply with his request. Agastya never returned and the Vindhyas never grew further.

The user has also made some new content additions which deserve to stand, but the lack of edit summaries made it difficult for me to get them out and selectively replace them. But, I do plan to do that at some point. In the meantime, I would appreciate if the user would come forward and explain the deletion in the edit summary, and/or explicate in the Talk Page about the changes he wants to bring about. Regards Chancemill 05:52, Apr 7, 2004 (UTC)

Kamal is not an Iyer--Chancemill

AFAIK, Kamal is an Iyer; his father is Srinivasan Iyer. But, few people also say that he is Iyengar. Any citations/comments? --Rrjanbiah 07:45, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

To my knowledge, he is an Iyengar. Maybe this [1] lends credence to that. Most of Kamal's immediate family have names typical of Iyengar customs. But, not sure - really. Chancemill 08:17, Apr 7, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the citations :-) --Rrjanbiah 08:28, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Kamal is an Iyengar. His nephew suhasini married Mani Rathnam who is an Iyer. That's how kamal is connect with iyers. Kartheeque 07:44, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Famous Iyers

Somebody added these names to the list:

Satyamurthy (Indian freedom fighter and former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu state)
Sir CV Raman Nobel laureate and physicist
Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar (Nobel laureate and physicist)
M S Swaminathan (Indian agriculturist and proponent of the Green Revolution in India)

Could you provide some documentation that these people are, in fact, Iyers? They do not carry the name Iyer. Davidcannon 11:14, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It was added by Chancemill. AFAIK, all these people are Iyers. And I'm sure Chancemill may not be wrong as he is much aware of this community. FYI, some people used to drop the Iyer suffix--moreover it is not necessary that a person's name should consist Iyer; Iyer is a caste or community just like Jews. HTH. --Rrjanbiah 11:49, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for answering my question; I'm satisfied now:-)Davidcannon 02:04, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Rrjanbiah is right. I too know the last 3 to be Iyers (I think Swaminathan is a distant relative of mine :-). These days very few people keep the name because of the casteist implications. Arvindn 02:58, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm adding these two Iyers:

Their father was R.V. Krishnaswami Iyer if you need proof.

[edit] Aryan & Dravidian

The Aryan Invasion Theory is now discredited. Aryan and dravidian are purely used in a linguistic sense now and therefore iyers are also dravidians. The page says Iyers are of Aryan origin and this is not simply correct. They are infact migrants who took up tamil as their mother tongue.

I don't understand how if Aryan and Dravidian are used in linguistic sense, Iyers can be Dravidian but not Aryan? How does that make sense? Couldn't they equally be linguistically Dravidian and ethnically Aryan? Further, factual evidence supports the latter hypothesis. Most Iyers resemble North Indians much more than typical Tamils. I agree there are very dark/very Tamil looking Iyers too, but they must be seen in the context of the loophole in Manu Smriti which states that a person well-qualified could be a Brahmin, or a Brahmin who takes up the plough becomes a lowcaste etc. But a huge majority definitely looks out of place in darker Tamil land. —This unsigned comment was added by Desibanda (talk • contribs) 15 March 2006. Interpolated into a remark from 22 months earlier.

Also, their migration is not from North India. They are supposed to have migrated from Andhra pradesh. That's why you find many telugu Iyers as well.Kartheeque 07:53, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

The Aryan Invasion Theory is discredited? IMO, it's at the moment merely controversial. BTW, could you cite a reference for your statement that Iyers migrated from Andhra? Thanks. Ambarish | Talk 08:27, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

I do find it difficult to believe that it is discredited. The better word to use is highly contested. --Chandrachoodan Gopalakrishnan

I don't have references. I am an Iyer. In my family, we celebrate Ugadi more specially than the tamil new year's day. Also, many of my relatives are both tamil and telugu, though I myself am a tamil. I have heard this in my family. Infact, what I have heard is that the Vadama subcaste(Vadama refers to a northener) comes from Andhra Pradesh. Kartheeque 08:45, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

The theory of migration from the North is just an extension of the theory that Iyers are Aryan, and is a different issue altogether. Re. migration from Andhra: although linguistically the Telugu country and the Tamil country have been distinct for a while, culturally they have a lot in common. Iyers are sometimes referred to as Smarthas, and share a lot in common with Telugu Smarthas (Tyagaraja etc.). This, of course, does not mean that Iyers necessarily migrated from either region to the other. It's much more plausible that Smarthas are a community spread all over South India. As an aside, whether "Iyer" refers to Tamil-speaking Smarthas or whether "Iyer" is a Tamil word for Smartha is an interesting question in itself. Ambarish | Talk 09:43, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

This may not be a direct reference to this thread. But, I have been witness to too many of these discussions now. Personally, I think it is only too naive to assume that there are such people today who are purely-bred Dravidians or purely-bred Aryans. I simply cannot gauge the logic behind the assertion that there is a racial divide in this country based on these divisions. All we can say from Aryan Invasion theory is that - sometime in the past there were two cultures or two sub-sects of the same culture who occupied different parts of India. I cannot buy the argument that 5000 years into known Indian history, there are communities who still retain their pure blood/ideology/intuitive traits and there was absolutely nil intermingling. It is ridiculous to say the least, and offensive at its worst (I have been witness to a spectrum of these possibilities). The prevalence of Iyers among South India is equally counterbalanced by the worship of Shiva (Pashupati of the Indus valley settlers) and Kali (Mother of the Indus valley settlers) in the North. It is only logical to conclude that Hinduism and all its positive/negative connotations arose out of the intermigling of various communities. Chancemill 10:19, May 27, 2004 (UTC)

The notion that Brahmins came to the South from elsewhere on the request of Chola kings to perform yajnas is substantiated by recorded history, important books on the history of South India mention this( Nilakanta Shastry? will try to cite sources)

The notion of Northern origin is derived from oral history, each of these subsects have a unique name that describes the mode of their entry into the South- Brahatcharanam means through the hills or something, Vadama means the most recent entries from the North. I don't know where the hard proof is for this. The notion that these Brahmins came to be called Iyers is something I have read only on the net, maybe derived again from oral histories.

About Aryans/ Dravidians, whether it is just a belief/ myth/ fact, I think it is a necessary point to be included as speculation for its effect on subsequent events- when an entire state's political history still continues to be determined by this hypothesis. KRS 18:38, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

The matter of contention is not "Aryan invasion/migration theory". But declaring all the Iyers as of Indo-Aryan origin just because some or all of them are from North India. The genetic marker in question is M17. However, people who exhibit this marker are not exclusively linguistically Indo-Aryan. They could be Uralic, Dravidian along with being Indo-Aryan. Also, there are no South Indian specific markers or North-Indian specific markers. Also, the Indian female lineages are almost 85-90% are India specific. So even if somebody wants to declare, Iyers are Indo-Aryans or just "Aryans" has to modify the words as "male Iyers". As far as I know, all the ancestors of South Indians could have migrated to South India only from North-West of India if we trace their footsteps Out-of-Africa. Of course, the exception could be few South-East Asians, whose marker is found not only among Iyers but many of the other communities along South-East of India. The oral or historical records found among Iyers is not a good indicator of North Indian origins of Iyers as most other castes didn't have any literary traditions or had it very late.

Well, when I observe the general trend of Hinduism all I could see, Brahmins upholding Dravidian version of Vaidikism and not Indo-Aryan version. I mean why Indra, Agni, Vayu are all minor gods? As far as I know, Indian scripts were adopted from Semitic scripts. Also, just as many Indo-Aryan gods could be equated to other Indo-European gods, many Semitic stories also find an echo in Indian mythologies. I suppose, people who want to project either "Shudroid" or "Aryan" races should bear in mind all these facts. As such, I don't think this "racist" view deserves its place in the introduction even if it's 'teaching controversies'.

Manjunatha (21 Nov 2005)

"Altai-Uralic"? Does this mean Ural-Altaic, or is it something else? -- Jmabel | Talk 02:57, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Subrahmanya Bharati

Subrahmanya Bharati never denied his caste identity. Infact, he even performed upanayanam to a harijan boy and made him an Iyer. He was always an Iyer. Only those around him felt he was too far away from orthodoxy. Kartheeque 08:57, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

If that is the case, what does one make of his famous verse

Jathigal illayadi pappa. Kula thazchi solluvathu pavam

(There are no castes, dear. It is a sin to degrade a community.) Chancemill 10:04, May 27, 2004 (UTC)

The statement simply means that no one should see differences among humans and all are same. And, from the act of having performed an upanayanam to a non-brahmin, we can easily say that his idea of removing caste did not mean leaving his caste, but to make everybody else brahmin. Kartheeque 10:30, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

I am just adding the fact that Bharathi as mentioned here was against the caste system. I have a great respect for this community who made so many good things - but i dont want to see Bharathiyar's name used here without the additional information that he was against this evil caste system of the last century. I think it used to be taboo in later years of last century. I hope its no longer a big thing in these years. Feel free to edit what i mention in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arun bit (talk • contribs) 6 July 2006. (signing my earlier comments - just learnt how to do it)--Arun bit 05:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

What is the significance of bulleted vs. unbulleted items here in the section on related ethnic groups? Can some one make this clearer, either by reformatting or by adding text? -- Jmabel 16:28, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Done. --Rrjanbiah 10:06, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Social Stigma

Is it wrong for an Iyer to fall in love with a Tamil of a different caste? (An Iyer male or female falling in love with a Tamil non-Iyer female or male, respectively) -- 68.20.3.253

According to the caste system, not only Iyer, but for anyone (belongs to any caste) to marry person of different caste is wrong. --Rrjanbiah 05:41, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Social Group?

Would this be more better classified under Category:Social groups of India instead of Category:Indian culture Alren 17:31, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This has to be under Category:Caste, which is already done. --Rrjanbiah 19:58, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Mani Shankar Aiyar

User:Hemanshu, Mani Shankar Aiyar is probably referred to as Aiyar in the (north ?) Indian tradition of referring to people by their family names. Any member of the Aiyar community could potentially be referred to as "Aiyar", I guess. I don't see how this is particularly relevant. Ambarish 02:54, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It is relevant because somebody may want to find out who is being referred to by that name... he is often referred to simply as Aiyar. It was meant to be like a disambiguation. --Hemanshu 03:55, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't see this until now. But you see, just about any member of the community who uses the name could be referred to using "Aiyar". For instance, see list at Iyer#Some notable Iyers. Do you want to add all their names as disambiguations? Ambarish 03:07, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] migration?

Recent anonymous edits have (without comment or discussion) removed all mention of northern origin and migration to the south. I have no idea of the facts of the case, I just want to make the change visible. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:16, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I've reverted some of them, and edited others. The migration theory exists, although controversial. The article makes exactly that point, so removing the text is untenable. Ambarish 03:19, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Apart from the migration controversy, I see some valid points in his edits. Especially, Iyer<-Ayya<-Aryan explanation is too weird. --Rrjanbiah 05:10, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Why don't you go ahead and re-add them? It's possible that in my reversion, I've removed out some valid points. I reverted the Anon edits because there was no reason for mass deletion of information. ::: Regarding Iyer -> Ayya -> Aryan: the etymological connection between Iyer/Iyengar and Ayya is well-known. The English spellings might mask the link, but if you write the words in Tamil, it's quite apparent. As for Ayya deriving from Arya, I'm not so sure. However, without proof, I'd object to removing the existing content - it was added by User:KRS and there's no reason to believe that she did not know what she was doing. My 2 paise, Ambarish 07:15, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The root word of அய்யா is அய்யன்--which precedes Aryans or Sanskrit influence. I'll be happy to see the reference(s) for current reasoning. FWIW, this reminds me of a brahmin group which claimed that Sanskrit is the parent language on the earth, but lost the battle--unless that is true, this explanation doesn't fit. --Rrjanbiah 17:54, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Of course Iyer has been derieved from Ayya. How else would local Dravidians call a person well renounced in rituals.

[edit] deletions

Does anyone know why the following were removed (without comment)?

T.N. Seshan Ex-Chief Election Commissioner, Ex-Cabinet Secretary
singer M S Subbulakshmi

Jmabel | Talk 05:35, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)

TN Seshan has Illustrous Brother TN Laksminarayan who too was a senior IAS Officer and his father inlaw himself a reknowned sciencetist.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.18.188.77 (talk • contribs) 1 March 2007.

I wonder why someone would do the same...Both are prominent Iyers...

MS was not an Iyer. She was born into the Devadasi clan and married an Iyer named Sadasivam.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.199.211.197 (talk • contribs) 25 June 2006.

[edit] Recent unencyclopedic additions

I've cut the following recent unencyclopedic additions by User:35.8.130.171, but they seemed like OK talk page material, so I'm reproducing them here: -- Jmabel | Talk 01:44, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Iyers are socalled secular.

The Iyers are to follow/worship Lord Shiva (or Nataraja) and there is another group called Iyengars, who worship another famous deity Lord Vishnu. There have been sectarian beliefs on both the sides. So, simply it is 'Divide and Rule' policy. Divide in the name of religion. and Rule!!

(Recently the people incharge of Kamakoti Beedam -- the Acharyas currently in position -- are caught up in a murder case. So, religion has all become for money and fame as well as self interests! [[2]]!

-- (User:35.8.130.171 20 April 2005)

[edit] Para removed

"There are many essentialising features/ practices/ stereotypes of the Iyer community that are open to interpretation. Some may be factual while others may be either fictitious or obsolete, many a time the sterotypes even contradict and cancel out each other! To mention a few random ones - vegetarianism, filter-coffee drinking, intelligence, discipline, lesser loyalty to one's community and more to one's individual self, honesty, uprightness, valuing truth rather than loyalty, aversion to violence and confrontation, flexibility in changing one's opinion, resilience, objectivity, proclivity to rational thinking rather than emotion, bourgeois mentality,lesser importance to fields such as sports and trade, more emphasis on those related to thinking,and so on and on! However, there are also perceptions of Iyers being nepotistic, and being strictly adherent to casteist hierarchies though only nominally living by the tenets of the system."

The above para seems grossly POV. There are no proofs or references given.This is a sober encyclopedia with no space for non-facts.

filter coffee drinking- need statistics to prove iyers consume more filter coffee than any other caste

'intelligence'- need statistics and intelligence studies

'discipline'- vague assertion.

'lesser loyalty to one's community and more to one's individual self, honesty, uprightness, valuing truth rather than loyalty, aversion to violence and confrontation, flexibility in changing one's opinion, resilience, objectivity, proclivity to rational thinking rather than emotion, bourgeois mentality,' - vague assertions.

'lesser importance to fields such as sports and trade, more emphasis on those related to thinking'- sources?

'nepotistic, and being strictly adherent to casteist hierarchies though only nominally living by the tenets of the system'- need sociological studies and references

Therefore I removed it. Arunkrishnan 12:15, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] orthopraxy

Is there a definition for this word orthopraxy ? viyyer 17:48, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

New to me, but I would presume it to be formed by analogy to "orthodoxy" and to refer to practice rather than doctrine. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:11, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mix of good material and apparent original research

I copy-edited (to the best of my ability) the recent additions to Iyer#Origins. This looks to me to be a mix of good material and apparent original research, and certainly the sort of thing that could use much better citations (e.g. there should be a clear source for at least one scholar who advocates the migratory theory and at least one who opposes it). Some of the writing seems a bit polemical; I've tried to tone that down. Someone with far more knowledge of this topic than I have should go through here and separate the wheat from the chaff. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:37, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Similarly "Since the 8th century, a vast majority of Iyers have followed Sri Adi Sankara's advaita philosophy" became "Since 533 BC…". A remarkable claim of precision, no citation. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:03, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Some changes

1.There was a statement that Iyers followed advaita,since 533 BC.This needed to be removed for the following good reasons.

a)There is no documentary evidence on how long the Iyers were advaitis.

b)That Adi Shankaracharya was born in 533 bc,is still a matter highly contested.

c)Even if Adi Shankaracharya was born in 533 bc,there is no sufficient proof of when Iyers became advaitis.

d)There are different Iyer sects,and within the same Iyer sect,there are many differences.So the statement "vast majority of Iyers" followed advaita does not have proof to back it up.

I have removed that,and replaced it with the word "for atleast a millenia".This appears to be more reasonable,though even this may not be true.

2.I removed the statement surrounding the controversy on Jayendra Saraswati.There is no need to put this in this article,as the matter is still pending in the court,as also the fact that such topics should be fit elsewhere.

3.I have also added Karnataka in the list of states where there is a traditional following of the kanchi mutt.The number may perhaps not be large.But it deserves a mention.

[edit] Iyer women

Any talk on Iyers cannot be complete without discussion on its women.So I have added this paragraph. User:harishsubramanian July 27,2005

[edit] Traditional Iyer Ethics

This section makes it sound as if iyers are *very* strange creatures :) Tintin 15:59, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Whoever has written this section has a peculiar sense of humour. I suppose there is a well-known saying, "there are three I's of egoism; I, Iyer, Iyengar" :-).

Manjunatha (14 Nov 2005)

[edit] Reorganizing some content

The mutts and Gurus Iyers follow should come under "Spiritual belief" section,and not in the section on "Iyers Today".So I have moved the content. --Harishsubramanian 06:18, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rituals,Ceremonies and festivals

A discussion on Iyers has to include a discussion on their rituals,ceremonies and festivals. I have added this section. --Harishsubramanian 08:40, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Iyers and Aryan Invasion theory

It never is mentioned,that Aryan Invasion theory is based upon indirect interpretations,but there is no written work directly indicating any form of invasion.The historians in favour of the theory gladly omit this fact,because then the effectiveness of the theory is reduced. I have also seen some sites which claim that Iyers believe in the Aryan theory.This may be true of some,but most Iyers who believe in tradition do not accept this at all.This current debate on Aryan or Dravidian race has started only a century ago.Traditional tamils,have been extremely friendly with Iyers,and do not seem to have recorded any kind of invasion by Iyers.In fact Iyers who came down to the interior belts of Tamil Nadu,from neighbouring regions were actually welcomed by Tamil Kings and given land for the services performed.There was no invasion or superimposition on someone's culture in this context.Even Agastya's migration does not indicate any kind of cultural invasion.Agastya is spoken in most respected terms,and even credited with origin of Tamil.Besides the sages of those times,lived and worshipped in the forests.I have therefore added ,the point on the way Iyers percieve this theory as well how ancient tamils regarded Iyers. --Harishsubramanian 09:55, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Soundarya ,Velayanur Ramachandran,Shankar

I think Soundarya is not an Iyer,yet has been included in the list of Iyers.Please remove her from the list if she is not one.

Velayanur Ramachandran,Shankar are without doubt from Tamil Nadu.Please also remove them from the list in case they are not Iyers.

No offense intended to any of these people,Iyers would gladly include them among their community. --Harishsubramanian 10:14, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

I, myself being of a distantly related family of Soundarya without doubt can tell wiki users that she was definately an Iyer from the Ashtagrama subclass of Vadama Iyers.
We live in 8 villages of Kolar district in Karnataka and are believed to have migrated here from the nearby state of Tamil Nadu(tanjore, to be exact).

So Soundarya was an iyer who was born in Karntaka. Refer to www.ashtagrama.com for more details about the ashtagrama Iyers. --User:dhanuiyer 05:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Riddled with POV

Continuing my remarks above: this article is riddled with POV. "some section of Tamil society has been brainwashed into hating the Iyers", in the narrative voice of the article, and in the lead section, no less. "The divine leader Paramacharya, gave new life to this mutt"? Oughtn't this be "The divine leader Paramacharya, considered divine by the adherents of his faith..." or some such? Etc. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:12, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Contradiction

In one place, the article says, "Though such practices are not followed in modern times by a majority of Iyers, all of them undergo at least the thread ceremony before marriage." Elsewhere, it says that women normally do not undergo the thread ceremony. One of these statements must be wrong. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:30, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

The former line appears in a paragraph that describes the rituals performed by male children. So I guess it is okay. Tintin 05:38, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Still, if that's the meaning it should say "all male Iyers" not "all of them". The antecedent of "all of them" in the sentence is "Iyers". -- Jmabel | Talk 06:36, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Embarassing Points?

As I looked through this article,I realized that the original content was written by a person proud of his Iyer heritage.There were some points which were omitted.Two communities Iyengars,and Devadasis are very close to Iyers Genetically,and culturally as well.While Iyengars were a split away group of Iyers,Devadasis were never considered as Iyers,inspite of having Iyer fathers.I felt that Devadasis needed to be mentioned whenever,there was any general information on Iyers,as these women were great friends of Iyers,inspite of the way they were exploited by Iyers.In a world of hostile people,Iyers lost good friends by distancing themselves from the community. --Harishsubramanian 07:31, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

First off, the original content was not written by a person proud of his heritage, because it was written by a she. That said, please be bold and edit the article as you think appropriate. Secondly, the Iyengars didn't "split away"; all the three forms of Vedantic philosophy have existed for a while. Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhva merely resurrected them. Ambarish 09:09, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

The philosphy of Vishistadvaita may have existed,but the fact remains that even these people were also called Iyers.Moreover in the case of Ramanuja,there are many indications that he was a smartha.His early Guru ,was an advaitic teacher.Thus the fact that ,they organized themselves into a distinct group ,has been refferred to using the word "split".Moreover I would like to state that Iyers are smarthas,and not always "Advaitins".But in course of time,Advaita dominated over all other schools.It is another misconceprtion that smartha stands for a follower of advaita.I would refer you to another reliable website http://www.namboothiri.com ,where such distinction has been made.

--Harishsubramanian 13:02, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Recent nastiness

A recent anonymous editor made some very nasty edits, bordering on hate speech. Because the next several people in here did not simply revert, it was not easy to track down and remove. I've done my best, and believe I got everything egregious. I suggest that someone more knowledgable than I on the topic should go through the article looking to see if some outright nastiness remains. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:34, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

FWIW, in caste based division, nothing is right. If you find something as nastiness, someone else may find it right, *IMHO*. To be bold, at least I find some of the hate speech acceptable especially remark about Cho Ramasamy. --Rrjanbiah 17:44, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Improvements required

I see some points being repeated.All points need to be mentioned only once. I also suggest that certain topics can be made into new articles,with some brief information provided.Some suggestions in this regard are 1.A brief idea needs to be given that Iyers are aryans,but there are various contadictory views regarding this .Detail treatment can be given in an article titled "Origin of Iyers". 2.In the section on spiritual and philosophical beliefs,it is sufficient to mention the schools of Iyers.Each school can be described in separate articles. 3.Iyer rituals and festivals can also be named,further description can be done in a separate article "Iyer rituals and festivals". 4.Iyer Ethics can be condensed ,but written to mention all points. 5.Famous Iyers can also be made into a new article. --12:45, 1 August 2005 Harishsubramanian

May I know, why have you removed "Padma Lakshmi Famous nude model who married to Salman Rushdie"? --Rrjanbiah 17:46, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I didn't remove her entry, but she seems to be an Iyengar. Ambarish 18:01, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Counter proof --Rrjanbiah 18:39, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I readded her entry. Ambarish 16:25, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Also, I should add that we put spaces after commas and periods, not before. Nohat 18:44, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Padma Lakshmi Entry was removed by me for two reasons

1.I did not think she was an Iyer 2.Even if she is/was one,the prefix "nude",I find objectionable and not a description that can be fully applied to her.

If she is an Iyer,you may add her without the prefix nude,unless she is commonly described/or she herself describes herself as a nude model.Besides being a model,she has also done some food shows for BBC,I believe.

Harishsubramanian 07:02, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Capitalization, italicization

Capitalization and italicization (for non-English words) is extremely inconsistent in the article. Can we try to reach an agreement on which of the following should be capitalized and/or italicized? And for which this may depend on context? Please feel free to add to the list; if someone is familiar with what is common in English-language works on this topic, please comment on what should or should not be italicized. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:39, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Hindu: capitalize, do not italicize
Iyer: capitalize, do not italicize
Tamil: capitalize, do not italicize
Sanskrit: capitalize, do not italicize
Dravidian: capitalize, do not italicize
(names of individual deities such as Shiva, Ganesha, Krishna): capitalize, do not italicize
mutt
brahmin
advaita
veda
vedic
alwar
godhai
andal
naivedhya

[edit] Iyer and Nair women

Many Kerala Iyers also enjoyed Sambandham relationship with Nair women.

Enjoyed?! Hmmm... I suppose 'practiced' would be a better word. 5 Aug 2005

[edit] Significant removal of information

Two large sections of the article — "Rituals,Ceremonies and Festivals" and "Spiritual and philosophical beliefs" — were anonymously removed, without explanation. I'm on a slow connection right now, so I cannot restore, but someone should. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:02, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] More nasty edits

[3] is a weird mix of apparently innocuous edits (such as spelling an grammar corrections), introduction of misspellings ("sugarcane"→"sugercane"), miscellaneous deletions, and some truly nasty additions ("This makes them believe that they are superior by race and colorNeo-Nazism… They have always believed in equal treatment of all human beingsSarcasm.")

Folks: I know very little about the Iyers, but I can spot racism when I see it. Unfortunately, someone edited on top of these bad edits rather than reverting them, and I'm not willing to try to sort out the mess. Someone who knows what they are doing and has some knowledge of the topic should get in here and clean this up. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:40, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I am reverting them. It may take a couple of iterations to get all the relevant stuff back. Tintin 23:20, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! The article is still not going to win any prizes, but at least you got rid of all this egregious stuff. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:59, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Churn

This article continues to undergo a lot of churn. Personally, I've given up trying to do anything except prevent blatant vandalism. People keep adding and removing various material. It would help greatly in improving the article if people would enumerate their disagreements and present their cited sources here on the talk page instead of just editing back and forth. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Iyengars

First, I think the article on "Related communities" and reference to history of Iyengars is plain wrong. It tries to create the impression that many of the Iyengars were initially non-Brahmins and hence Iyers are superior. Next, I don't see how the history of Iyengars is relevant in an Iyer page, except to create spite. This section has been removed.

I reverted it before you posted this justification. Feel free to delete it again but look for a consensus here. Tintin 16:27, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Btw, when you delete something, please use edit summary. IP editors + deletion + no edit summary is a very suspect combination. Tintin 23:26, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ayya-Arya

I suppose "ayya" is an old Dravidian term for ones father or grandfather(also in Chinese). It's used as a honourific term not only for Brahmins but all the elders in the South Indian(I have observed it in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh) society. Well, I have also learnt that Arya 'tatbhava' is Ajja. From what I heard, in the villages of Andhra and Tamilnadu, the declared lower-castes still use the term ayya to address their father. Since I'm not an expert would somebody point to the source describing why it's considered derivative of arya.

Manjunatha 24 October 2005

Since nobody replied, I edited to give room for other views on the origins of Ayya.

Manjunatha 28 October 2005

[edit] Sanskritised Tamil and Aryanization

It's metioned in the article that Sanskritised Tamil gives credence to theory that Ayyars of Indo-Aryan origin. Is that really a credible argument? In fact, there is a Kannada Brahmin caste called Havyakas that speaks a dialect of Kannada with a conspicuous archaic Kannada tilt. I have yet to hear anybody calling them purer Dravidians than their surrounding non-brahmin population. Yes, I agree it's mentioned in the later part of the article that Ayyar share many genetic markers with non-brahmin Tamils. However, I am surprised why it's felt necessary to put the "Indo-Aryan" origins in the beginning of the article.

Manjunatha 28 October 2005

[edit] Mutts

This edit drops mention of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham. I have no expertise on the topic, but since it was an anonymous, substantive removal of information, with no edit summary, I thought I would point it out here. -- Jmabel | Talk 09:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Can any one add the link Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham once again. Iyers usually visit kanchi or sringeri mutt.There is no doubt there is much rivalry between the followers of the mutt.But it needs to be added , that a lot of Iyers still visit this mutt.So it seems to be a malicious act in removing this item.

Harishsubramanian 13:25, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

So do it! -- Jmabel | Talk 07:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "the highest community of Brahmins"

In the lead sentence: "the highest community of Brahmins (members of the priestly class / caste) of India". No doubt there are Iyers who consider themselves to be such; if this is really an uncontroversial statement that belongs in the narrative voice of the article, then clearly it also belongs at caste, Indian caste system, and Brahman. (There, I think that has remained within the requirements of civility.) Can we agree to remove this? -- Jmabel | Talk 01:45, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

It should be removed. It is factually wrong as well. Iyers are one of the many divisions of Brahmins, and there is no clear heirarchy among them. Tintin Talk 01:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Namboothiris and Iyers : Sudhasudham

Eda Sudham: This is the Asudham resulting from contact with Tamil Brahmanans (Iyer, Pattar, Iyengar). Namboothiri women (and not men) are not permitted to eat if they become Eda Sudham. For doing Sandhyaavandanam, Namboothiris should take bath if they are polluted with Eda Sudham

http://www.namboothiri.com/articles/sudham.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rajeev dev7 (talk • contribs) 10 September 2006.

[edit] Cowardly neutrality?

Iyers are self centered and they do not teach their children their language tamil,Culture if he happens to be In US and they are proud that their children are unaware of their country unlike sindhis or Punjabis Gurathis who speak their language fluentlly inspite of staying in other countries . The example of Marutuius where Tamils have forgotten their Mother tongue but Biharis have retailed Bhojpuri.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.18.188.77 (talk • contribs) 1 March 2007.

"They believe in non-violence, and 'righteous' conduct in life, righteousness in their vocabulary having come to mean a self-centred way of life with cowardly neutrality where helpful, and caution against benefits going 'elsewhere' - tendencies which are possible because of the still-remaining spark of the intelligence component deriving from their hard-built ancestral DNA inheritance."

The above lines strike me as being POV. While it could be argued that many Iyers aren't exactly the outspoken or the politically active type, saying "Iyers lead a self-centred life and are cowards" is simply going too far. Even the next line ("still-remaining spark of the intelligence component deriving from their hard-built ancestral DNA inheritance") is one I find extremely bothersome. I propose either deleting the paragraph or simply changing it to "Iyers believe in non-violence and leading a righteous way of life." Adityan 02:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

The article is full of POV. Much anti-Iyer sentiment has been expressed here, as has much excessive Iyer ethno-egotism. Feel very free to work through the article NPOV-ing it all around: there is a request at WikiProject Ethnic groups to do just that. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:08, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Another hideous passage: "While 90 to 95 % of Brahmins may be said to make an outward show of pride of being Brahmins, especially when working with 'other' classes of people, or when seeking marital alliance, the same people brag about their being just nominal Brahmins and finding much of the Hindu philosophy and religious practices contrary to "modern science" which they pretend to have understood and extol." There is a lot of this stuff. This article is not a priority for me, but I would hope that it would be for someone. This article is becoming an embarrassment to Wikipedia. - Jmabel | Talk 06:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I have added the {{POV}} tag to this article. - Jmabel | Talk 07:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Editing and cleaning up of the Page.

I have removed many opionated statements, which either reflect an individual's opinion or are not entirely proven.In the sections where it is necessary to discuss the origin of Iyers, a brief idea has been given about a few traditional accounts as well as a mention of some controversies and speculations which exist regarding their origin.I have clearly specified that there is no clear Information about this.

I have removed lengthy discussions on this as well as all those theories which are highly speculative without any traditional account to properly back them up.If any one wants to add to this record they would have to quote "verbatim" from a tradional record and without indulging in any wild/unsubstantiated speculation.

I have also tried to edit ,he rest of the article to give an idea about the Iyer society without stating any thing unsubstantiated and describing the society as it exists today and as it existed in the past.

If anyone can reorganize the material without removing any Known or proven Information , it would be of great help.

Harishsubramanian 13:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Important section on Rituals and Ceremonies has beeen removed

An Important section Rituals and Ceremonies was removed. So older edit has been restored. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Harishsubramanian (talk • contribs) 5 March 2006.

[edit] Social and political issues

I moved the following from the article:

The above paragraph is far from truth. Iyers emphasise on ethics in all spheres of life: personal/professional which is a dying phenomenen in post independence India. Ethics/morality take backseat. Corruption and immorality take the lead. Iyers succeded not because of knowledge of vedas alone. It is because of sincerity in things they do which most other communities sadly lack. Successful communities are always persecuted around the world. Nobody likes successful people. Brahmins were successful in British India simply because British appreciated talented people and those who are sincere in work. Democracy in India has given space and breeding ground to mediocre people and groups because they have numeric majority and nothing else. Therefore, Brahmins can be pushed aside even if the country goes to dogs. Dravidians have ruled the state of Tamil Nadu for about sixty years after pushing out Brahmins. What have they achieved. NOTHING.

Mr. H. Venkatachalam

From [4] this edit. --Alf ^melmac 07:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I have moved the list of famous Iyers to a different article distinguised Iyers.Moreover the list is only bound to grow with time.

This article should provide mainly Information on the origin, culture and history of Iyers.

"An upshot of this atmosphere was an "anti-Brahmin" movement and the formation of the Justice party. Though formed on a principled high-ground, the movement soon led to a power struggle between the Brahmins and the other castes like the Mudaliars, Pillais and Chettiars. In the 1960s the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (roughly translated as "Organisation for Progress of Dravidians") and its subgroups gained political ground on this platform forming state ministries, thereby wrenching control from the Indian National Congress party, where Iyers at that time were holding important party positions."

Can somebody give some more information about this?

Pramod 18:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC) User:Pramod.s

[edit] Iyers have an illusion of distinctiveness

I was very shocked at the tone of the Iyer wiki in Wikipedia. Many of the qualities which the editor describes as "Iyer" qualities are practised by a wide range of people. In terms of food, the sambar, kozhambu and rasam mentioned in the wiki constitute the staple food of South Indians of various castes and states. In terms of names, many Iyers have names like "Nagarajan" or "Sivakumar" which any member of the Tamil community (of which Iyers are a subset) may have.

Therefore, it's imperative that Iyers quit their illusion of distinctiveness and acknowledge the shared culture they have with other Tamilians (an 80-million-strong fraternity), South Indians (300 million) and Indians (one billion).

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.156.6.54 (talk • contribs) 27 April 2006.

Your comment is probably out of date.

The reference to food only claims that Iyers eat X. No claim as to X being exclusively Iyer is made.

I don't understand the point about names. As far as I can see the article makes no claim about certain names being exclusively Iyer.

Please be a little more specific about what and where the offensive "Iyer Qualities" are.

An encyclopedia is probably not the right place to debate the rights and wrongs of Iyer perceptions of their heritage/culture.

Pramod 18:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Identity and origins

Could someone who knows this topic better than me take a look at the section Iyer#Identity and origins? At the very least, the first paragraph is a poor transition out of the intro. - Jmabel | Talk 20:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

This remains the case; I am referring to the passage that begins "They are smarthas and follow Adi Shankara's teachings…" - Jmabel | Talk 22:40, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Population

This used to say (without citation) that there are 2,000,000 Iyers as of 2004, 3% of the Tamil population. Now it says (without citation) that there are 4,000,000 Iyers as of 2004, 3% of the Tamil population. Can someone please sort this out (and provide citation)? Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 22:39, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Whether Population figure is correct? Population figure is indicated as 40,00,000 and 3% of Tamilnadu population. Tamilnadu population as per 2001 census is nearly 6,00,00,000 so 3% of Tamilnadu population is around 18,00,000. I found from Google search that Brahmin population in Tamilnadu(Iyers+Iyengars+Gurukkal) as per 1931 census is 3.12%. So I suspect current Iyer population cannot be more than 20,00,000. Ravi

For those who do not format numbers i this uniquely Indian way: that can be read as "Population figure is indicated as 4,000,000 and 3% of Tamilnadu population. Tamilnadu population as per 2001 census is nearly 60,000,000 so 3% of Tamilnadu population is around 1,800,000. I found from Google search that Brahmin population in Tamilnadu(Iyers+Iyengars+Gurukkal) as per 1931 census is 3.12%. So I suspect current Iyer population cannot be more than 2,000,000." I tend to agree, but "from a Google search" is not exactly citation: another site can be just as wrong as we can! Again, does someone have a citation from a reliable source? - Jmabel | Talk 03:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Jmabel, I think the problem is that information on caste was not collected by the Indian census after 1931. So I don't think there are any reliable current percentage figures. I don't think the 3% statement is even useful in this article, as it is so hopelessly outdated and likely to give an incorrect view of a community that has seen a lot of emigration abroad in recent years.Adityan 20:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dubious recent edits

These edits look to me to be not too well written, uniformly uncited, and I suspect some of it is factually wrong. I'm not expert on the topic, so I'm staying out of it beyond raising the flag. Would someone knowledgable please review these. - Jmabel | Talk 05:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

In the list of PATRIOTS from amongst the iyer community, the name or Mani Iyer who made an attempt on the life of Sir C P Ramaswamy Iyer is not included. That act was the main reason for the Diwan's backtracking from his ealier position of travancore as an independent nation SREE —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sreefern (talk • contribs) 15 September 2006.

This article still needs a going over by someone knowledgable and scholarly. For example, I cannot even parse the following: "Iyers have many subsects among them, such as Vadama, Brihatcharanam, Vathima, and Ashtasahasram, sholiyar or chozhiars." Are the last two additional sects? Is there a reason they are grouped with Ashtasahasram after the "and"? Is there a reason they are lowercase? There is a lot of this sort of thing in the article. Unparsable sentences greatly reduce the usefulness of an encyclopedia article. - Jmabel | Talk 06:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Woah, how long has this been at the top of the article? "Like the Jews, they are a persecuted community and they are distinguished as the community on whose rabid hatred, the polity of the modern south Indian state of Tamil Nadu is founded" Whether or not there is truth to this statement, that's not something that can be in the first paragraph! Adityan 20:47, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure this is recent. I've given up on doing anything much here except raising flags. Clearly, no responsible person has taken responsibility for this article, which gets periodic inundations from rabidly anti-Iyer people, but also from people who seem to consider the Iyers the annointed of the gods. - Jmabel | Talk 07:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../i/y/e/Talk%7EIyer_bb51.html"

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the Project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing attention.

	After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic Groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.