Bhogiraj Chamling Shares Chobar's Stories | Sushant Pradhan Podcast
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- Bhogiraj Chamling is a PhD Fellow in Anthropology at Tribhuvan University and an expert in Mundhum, Raithane Culture, Kirat History, and Archaeology. He provides a fascinating exploration of Kathmandu's history, the rich heritage of the Kirati community, and the profound relationship between the Kiratis and Kathmandu.
Recommend us Guests for the Podcast: docs.google.co...
For Business Enquiries: podcast@sushantpradhan.com
PODCAST LINKS :
Spotify: open.spotify.c...
Apple Podcast: podcasts.apple...
Google Podcast: podcasts.googl...
Instagram: / sushantpradhanpodcast
SPONSOR :
The Physique Workshop: thephysiquework...
Conversations spark ideas and ideas lead to actions that drive the growth of society. I believe long and unfiltered deep conversation is a lost art in this nearly perfectly presented world. And this is my attempt to have real conversations with real minds and present them to you. The goal is to learn from the greatest minds and take you on the journey.
Do subscribe if you feel this would add value to your life.
MY SOCIAL MEDIA LINKS :
My Website: sushantpradhan.com
Instagram: / sushant_pradhan_
Twitter : / sushant_tpw
Facebook: / sushantpradhantpw
Tiktok : / sushant_pradhan_
DISCLAIMER: The views, information, or opinions expressed in the UA-cam Channel and Podcast are solely the views of the individuals involved and by no means represent absolute facts. Opinions expressed by the host and guests can change at any time.
!! Reproduction of this video or content is strictly prohibited. If done, it may lead to legal action !!
TEAM MEMBERS:
- HOST: Sushant Pradhan
- PRODUCER: Pratik Thapa
Why Limbus Should Not Be Given Indigenous Status in Nepal or Sikkim
The question of granting indigenous status to the Limbus in Nepal and Sikkim is a contentious one, laden with historical intricacies and socio-political implications. Despite their current claims, the evidence supporting the Limbus' ancient ties to these regions is scant and contested. Furthermore, historical actions by the Limbus have led to significant disruptions in the historical narrative and territorial integrity of both Nepal and Sikkim. This essay argues against granting the Limbus indigenous status in Nepal or Sikkim by examining their questionable historical claims, their role in erasing the history of other ethnic groups, their collaboration with colonial powers, and genetic evidence suggesting Mongolian origins.
Lack of Historical Evidence
The historical claims of the Limbus to ancient roots in Nepal and Sikkim are fraught with inconsistencies. Unlike the Lepchas, Bhutias, and Khas Arya, whose presence and contributions to the region are well-documented through oral histories, artifacts, and early records, the Limbus' historical footprint is comparatively faint. Archaeological and textual evidence that might firmly establish their ancient ties to these lands is largely absent or ambiguous. This lack of concrete historical documentation raises questions about the legitimacy of their claims to indigenous status.
Genetic Evidence and Mongolian Ancestry
Another crucial factor that challenges the Limbus' claim to indigenous status is their genetic makeup. Studies have shown that the Limbus possess a high amount of Mongolian DNA. Historically, the Mongols never attacked Nepal but focused their military campaigns on China and Tibet. The presence of significant Mongolian DNA in the Limbus suggests that they might have once lived in regions that were either attacked by the Mongols or were under the greater Mongol Empire. This genetic evidence implies that the Limbus likely migrated from areas influenced by the Mongols, further weakening their claims to being indigenous to Nepal or Sikkim.
Erasure of Lepcha, Bhutia, and Khas Arya Histories
The Limbus have also been implicated in the erasure of the histories of other prominent ethnic groups in the region. The Lepchas and Bhutias of Sikkim, and the Khas Arya of Nepal, have rich cultural and historical narratives that predate significant Limbu settlement. However, with the advent of British colonial rule and the subsequent alliances formed by the Limbus with the British, these narratives were systematically marginalized. The British, keen on leveraging local support to consolidate their control, rewarded the Limbus with land grants, educational opportunities, and a preferential status that allowed them to influence historical records disproportionately.
Betrayal and Territorial Losses
The Limbus' alliance with the British had profound geopolitical consequences. In Sikkim, this collaboration resulted in the significant reduction of the kingdom's size, as the British sought to weaken local powers that were resistant to their rule. Similarly, in Nepal, the Limbus' betrayal contributed to the loss of eastern territories. These actions underscore a pattern of opportunistic alliances that had detrimental effects on the territorial integrity and sovereignty of both Sikkim and Nepal.
Preferential Treatment and Historical Revisionism
In exchange for their loyalty, the British accorded the Limbus preferential treatment, bestowing upon them land, access to education, and a first-class citizen status. This starkly contrasted with the treatment of the Lepchas, Bhutias, and Khas Arya, who were relegated to second-class status. This preferential treatment enabled the Limbus to position themselves advantageously within the socio-political hierarchy and to rewrite history from a Limbu-centric perspective. The historical narratives that emerged under British patronage often downplayed or ignored the contributions and presence of other ethnic groups, thereby distorting the region's true historical landscape.
Adversarial Relations with the British
Conversely, the Lepchas, Bhutias, and Khas Arya maintained adversarial relations with the British, resisting their attempts at domination and control. The British, in retaliation, sought to diminish their influence and historical significance. This antagonism resulted in the deliberate undermining of these groups' historical narratives and cultural prominence. By supporting the Limbus and elevating their status, the British effectively used them as a tool to suppress other ethnic identities and histories.
@@user-tg5ut6ic8l अब बाहुन लाई पनि दिनु पर्छ jasto cha indigenous status 🤣🤣🤣। Chettri ta यहाँको indigenous नै हो, तर बाहुनको पछि लागेर जनै लगाएर, बाहुन नै भएपछि कसरी indigenous claim garos ta.🤣🤣🤣
Bharta bata aako bahun haru lai aba uttai Bharat pathaune batabaran milaunu parcha sambidhanma
The Limbu and Rai: Rewriting the History of Nepal's Darjeeling Hills
The history of the Limbus and Rais in the Darjeeling hills has long been shrouded in myth and misinformation. Contrary to the popular narrative propagated by these groups, there is little archaeological evidence to suggest they were the ancient Kiratas who ruled over Eastern Nepal for centuries.
In reality, the available evidence points to a very different story. The Sen Thakuris, not the Limbus or Rais, were the dominant rulers of Eastern Nepal for over 600 years. Their legacy is evident in the numerous forts, palaces and inscriptions that dot the landscape, such as the Makawanpur Gadi, Udayapur Forts and Bijaypur Durbar. Similarly, the Bhutias (Chogyals) established a strong presence in Sikkim during this period.
Yet, through the patronage of the British in Darjeeling, the Limbus and Rais were able to gain an education and subsequently rewrite the history of the region in a way that placed them at the center. Leveraging the lack of written records among the Nepali populace, who were restricted from literacy under Rana rule, these groups crafted a mythical narrative of ancient Kirata kingships and oral traditions to bolster their claims.
Tellingly, this revised history lacks any substantive archaeological or documentary evidence to back it up. Instead, it relies heavily on unverified "oral histories" that conveniently align with the Limbus' and Rais' desire to be recognized as the rightful indigenous rulers of the Darjeeling hills.
Further undermining their claims is the genetic evidence, which reveals a strong Mongolian ancestry among the Limbus and Rais that distinguishes them from other Mongoloid groups in South Asia. This suggests they were likely refugees who migrated from China's Sichuan province to Tibet during the Mongol conquests, before eventually seeking shelter with the Sen kings of Nepal and the Chogyals of Sikkim in the 17th century.
In essence, the Limbus and Rais, with the aid of the British, have succeeded in rewriting the history of Nepal's Darjeeling hills in a way that erases the legitimate claims of the Bhutias, Khas Aryas and Newars. This biased, Limbu-centric narrative has left historians grappling with a distorted understanding of the region's true past. Only by confronting this revisionist history with the weight of archaeological and genetic evidence can the record be set straight.
Who are you to counterfeit the geuninity of history?
Where are the references of your claim ? ????
ua-cam.com/video/AAqX4zL1iVo/v-deo.htmlsi=34rSoFNOZRZz99iO
How funny man😆😆
Whilst your forefathers fail educate you in this regards as they have steps to this country only 235 years ago and they are busy settling and then planning to sale this country where they failed to tell you the history of this country …
Please you do us proud writing history of our country without prejudice …
Thank You
The claims made in the post are baseless and lack credible historical or archaeological backing.
Archaeological Evidence: The assertion that there is no archaeological proof of the Limbus and Rais is patently false. Numerous stone inscriptions, relics, and fortifications across Eastern Nepal predate 500 BCE and are linked to the Kirati tribes, which include the Limbus and Rais. Sites like the fortified remains near the Kathmandu Valley have yielded iron tools and weapons with symbols associated with the Kiratas.
Historical Records: Various Licchavi and Newari chronicles document the presence and rule of the Kirata tribes in the Kathmandu Valley before the Licchavi dynasty. These records confirm the historical presence of the Limbus and Rais long before British involvement in the region.
Cultural Heritage: The rich cultural heritage of the Limbus and Rais, including their distinct language, script (Sirijonga), and oral scriptures (Mundhum), are indicative of a well-established civilization. Their contributions to the cultural tapestry of Nepal cannot be dismissed as mere fabrications.
Brahmin Migration: It is well-documented that Brahmins migrated to the hills from Bihar after the Mughal invasion, seeking refuge. This makes them the actual refugees in the region who later attempted to dominate and erase indigenous cultures.
British Involvement: The relationship between the Limbus, Rais, and the British was complex and strategic. The Limbus and Rais were not the only groups to collaborate with the British; many communities across India and Nepal did so for various reasons, including survival and political leverage.
Your attempt to paint the Limbus and Rais as historical fabricators is not only inaccurate but also a deliberate distortion of facts. The true history of Nepal's Darjeeling hills includes the significant and undeniable contributions of the Limbus and Rais, backed by both archaeological and historical evidence.
कसरी शरणार्थी राय, लिम्बूहरू नेपालमा आदिवासी मान्यताको दोषपूर्ण परिभाषाका कारण आदिवासी मान्यता पाउँछन्
नेपालको जातीय र सांस्कृतिक बुनाई विविधताले भरिएको छ, जहाँ धेरै आदिवासी समूहहरूका धागाहरू मिसिएका छन्। तथापि, यी समूहहरूलाई आदिवासी मान्यता दिने मापदण्डहरू विवादको विषय बनेका छन्। राय र लिम्बू समुदायहरूले आदिवासी मान्यता पाएका छन्, जबकि खस जनताले पाएका छैनन्, जसले यी मापदण्डहरूमा रहेको जटिलता र सम्भावित अन्यायलाई उजागर गर्छ। यस निबन्धले नेपालमा आदिवासी मान्यताको दोषपूर्ण परिभाषाले कसरी यस भिन्नता ल्याएको छ भन्ने कुरा छानबिन गर्छ।
नेपालमा आदिवासी मान्यताका मापदण्डहरू
नेपाल आदिवासी जनजाति महासंघ (NEFIN) र सरकारले कुनै समूहलाई आदिवासी मान्न निम्न मापदण्डहरू निर्धारण गरेका छन्:
१. ऐतिहासिक निरन्तरता: समूहले १८औं शताब्दीमा देशको एकीकरण अघि नेपालमा ऐतिहासिक उपस्थिति राख्नुपर्छ।
२. विशिष्ट भाषा: समूहको आफ्नै विशिष्ट भाषा हुनु पर्छ।
३. विशिष्ट संस्कृति र परम्परा: समूहको अनौठो सांस्कृतिक अभ्यास, परम्परा, र रीतिरिवाजहरू हुनु पर्छ।
४. आत्म-पहिचान: समूहले आफूलाई एक विशिष्ट समुदायको रूपमा आत्म-पहिचान गर्नुपर्छ।
५. भौगोलिक पृथकता: समूहले केही हदसम्म भौगोलिक पृथकता वा विशिष्ट भौगोलिक सम्बन्ध राख्नुपर्छ।
६. आर्थिक अवस्था: समूहले परम्परागत रूपमा मुख्यधारा अर्थतन्त्रको भिन्न अर्थतन्त्रमा संलग्न रहनुपर्छ।
७. सामाजिक संगठन: समूहको विशिष्ट सामाजिक संरचनाहरू र संस्थाहरू हुनु पर्छ।
यी मापदण्डहरूले नेपालका आदिवासी जनसंख्याको विविधतालाई संरक्षण र पहिचान गर्ने लक्ष्य राख्छन्, तर यी मापदण्डहरूमा केही त्रुटिहरू छन्, जसले विभिन्न समूहहरूको पहिचानमा विसंगति निम्त्याएको छ।
राय र लिम्बूहरूको केस
राय र लिम्बू समुदायहरूलाई नेपालमा आदिवासी समूहहरूको रूपमा मान्यता प्राप्त छ। उनीहरूले विशिष्ट भाषा, संस्कृति, र सामाजिक संरचनाहरू, साथै नेपालको एकीकरण अघि पूर्वी नेपालमा ऐतिहासिक उपस्थिति मार्फत स्थापित मापदण्डहरू पूरा गर्छन्। उनीहरूको भौगोलिक पृथकता र अनौठो आर्थिक अभ्यासले उनीहरूको आदिवासी स्थितिलाई थप सुदृढ बनाउँछ। तथापि, यी समूहहरूको ऐतिहासिक र आप्रवासी जटिलताहरूलाई मापदण्डहरूले पूर्ण रूपमा विचार नगरेको तर्क पनि छ। कतिपयले राय र लिम्बू समुदायहरू, अन्यहरूका साथमा, विभिन्न समयमा तिब्बत र भूटान जस्ता क्षेत्रहरूबाट आप्रवासी भएको सुझाव दिन्छन्, जसले "ऐतिहासिक निरन्तरता" को व्याख्यामा प्रश्न उठाउँछ।
खस जनताको बहिष्कार
खस जनतालाई, नेपालको लामो समयको उपस्थिति र महत्वपूर्ण योगदानहरू बाबजुद पनि, आदिवासीको रूपमा मान्यता प्राप्त छैन। खसहरू २६०० वर्षभन्दा बढी समयदेखि नेपालमा रहेका छन्, राष्ट्रमा सांस्कृतिक, सामाजिक, र आर्थिक योगदानहरू पुर्याएका छन्। विभिन्न क्षेत्रहरूमा फैलिएका र अन्य समुदायहरूसँग मिल्दाजुल्दा उनीहरूको विशिष्टता मापदण्डहरू अनुसार कमजोर देखिन्छ। निम्न बुँदाहरूले कसरी मापदण्डहरूले खसलाई बेफाइदा पुर्याउँछन् भनेर स्पष्ट पार्छन्:
१. ऐतिहासिक निरन्तरता: खसहरू नेपालको गहिरो इतिहास भएको बाबजुद, मापदण्डको अस्पष्टताले उनीहरूको दावीलाई कमजोर बनाउँछ।
२. विशिष्ट भाषा र संस्कृति: खस भाषा (खस कुरा वा नेपाली) र सांस्कृतिक अभ्यासहरू नेपालको मुख्यधारा पहिचानमा समाहित भएका छन्, जसले उनीहरूको विशिष्टताको तर्कलाई कठिन बनाउँछ।
३. आत्म-पहिचान र सामाजिक संरचनाहरू: खस जनताको व्यापक एकीकरणले उनीहरूलाई अन्य समूहहरूको जस्तो विशिष्ट समुदायको रूपमा आत्म-पहिचान गर्न गाह्रो बनाउँछ।
४. भौगोलिक पृथकता र आर्थिक अभ्यासहरू: खसहरूको ऐतिहासिक चलायमानता र आर्थिक एकीकरणले उनीहरूको आदिवासी स्थिति मापदण्डहरू अन्तर्गत कमजोर बनाउँछ।
आदिवासी श्रेणीकरण मापदण्डमा त्रुटिहरू
नेपालमा आदिवासी मान्यताका मापदण्डहरूमा केही त्रुटिहरू छन्:
१. अस्पष्टता: "ऐतिहासिक निरन्तरता" र "विशिष्टता" जस्ता शब्दहरूको स्पष्टताको अभावले व्यक्तिपरक व्याख्याहरू जन्माउँछ।
२. एकीकरणको सजाय: खस जस्ता समूहहरू, जसले ऐतिहासिक रूपमा मुख्यधारमा एकीकरण गरेका छन्, एकीकरणका लागि अन्यायपूर्ण रूपमा दण्डित गरिन्छन्।
३. पृथकताका लागि पक्षपाती: भौगोलिक पृथकता र आर्थिक विशिष्टतामा जोड दिनाले हालसालै पृथक समूहहरूलाई प्राथमिकता दिइन्छ।
राई र लिम्बूहरू चीनको सिचुवान प्रान्तबाट aaeka आप्रवासी हुन्, जसले विभिन्न समयका दौरान विभिन्न क्षेत्रमा शरण लिएका छन्। सिचुवानबाट उत्तर तिब्बतसम्मको यात्रा राई र लिम्बूहरूको यात्रा सिचुवान प्रान्तबाट सुरु भएको हो। १३औं शताब्दीमा, मंगोलहरूको आक्रमणका कारण उनीहरूको जीवनमा ठूलो उथलपुथल आयो र उनीहरूले आफ्नो मातृभूमि छोड्न बाध्य भए। यस कठिन समयमा, उनीहरूले उत्तर तिब्बतमा शरण लिए, जहाँ उनीहरूले केही समय बसोबास गरे। उत्तर तिब्बतबाट नेपालसम्मको यात्रा उत्तर तिब्बतमा पनि आन्तरिक संघर्ष र अस्थिरताका कारण, राई र लिम्बूहरूले अर्को सुरक्षित ठाउँको खोजीमा १६औं शताब्दीमा नेपालतर्फ यात्रा गरे। नेपालमा, उनीहरूले सेन राजाहरू र लेप्चा समुदायको संरक्षण पाए। यसरी, उनीहरूलाई बसोबासका लागि भूमि दिइयो र उनीहरूले आफ्नो नयाँ जीवनको सुरुवात गरे।
सिक्किममा पनि, उनीहरूले भुटिया चोग्यालहरूको संरक्षण पाए र आफ्नो बसोबासको प्रबन्ध मिलाए। राई र लिम्बूहरूको मंगोलियन डीएनएको प्रमाणले उनीहरूको सिचुवानबाट आप्रवासनको तथ्यलाई पुष्टि गर्छ। विभिन्न आनुवांशिक अध्ययनहरूले उनीहरूमा उच्च मात्रामा मंगोलियन र उत्तर चीनको डीएनएको उपस्थिति देखाएको छ, जसले उनीहरूलाई भारतीय उपमहाद्वीपका अन्य तिब्बती-बर्मेली समूहहरूसँग फरक पार्छ। उनीहरूको सांस्कृतिक अभ्यास, भाषा र परम्पराहरू पनि उत्तर चीन र मंगोलियाका समुदायहरूसँग नजिक देखिन्छ, जुन उनीहरूको वास्तविक उत्पत्तिको प्रमाण हो। किरात पहिचानको निर्माण राई र लिम्बूहरूले किरात पहिचानलाई अंगीकार गरेर आफ्नो ऐतिहासिक अस्तित्वलाई झुटा रूपमा प्रमाणित गर्न प्रयास गरेका छन्। यद्यपि, किरात वंशावलीसँग उनीहरूको कुनै ठोस पुरातात्विक वा ऐतिहासिक प्रमाण छैन। प्रसिद्ध लिम्बू इतिहासकार इमान सिंह चेम्जोङले किरात पहिचानलाई बढावा दिन महत्वपूर्ण भूमिका खेलेका थिए, जसले राई र लिम्बू समुदायलाई किरात वंशमा समावेश गरिएको झुटा धारणा फैलाए।
It's interesting how you seem to be everywhere spreading the same unfounded claims about the Rai and Limbu communities. Your narrative appears to lack solid historical and archaeological evidence, yet you present it as fact. Here’s a more nuanced perspective:
Questionable Motives: Why are you so intent on pushing this narrative across multiple platforms? It seems like there's a concerted effort to discredit the Rai and Limbu communities without engaging in any meaningful dialogue or providing credible sources.
Historical Context: Historical migration patterns are complex and multifaceted. While it’s true that many ethnic groups have moved and settled in various regions over time, your account oversimplifies and distorts these movements. The Rai and Limbu have a well-documented presence in Nepal, deeply rooted in the history and culture of the region.
Genetic Evidence: The claim about Mongolian DNA lacks specificity and context. Genetic studies can show connections between distant populations, but they do not negate the centuries-long presence and contributions of the Rai and Limbu in Nepal. Moreover, DNA evidence alone does not determine the entirety of a community’s identity or historical significance.
Cultural Identity: The Rai and Limbu have rich cultural traditions, languages, and histories that are distinct and integral to the fabric of Nepalese society. These communities have significantly contributed to the cultural diversity and heritage of Nepal.
Iman Singh Chemjong: You mention Iman Singh Chemjong, a respected historian who dedicated his life to studying and preserving Kirati history. His work is based on extensive research and is highly regarded. Accusing him of spreading false notions without credible evidence to back up your claims is disrespectful to his legacy and contributions to historical scholarship.
Dor Bahadur Bista and Other Historians: Renowned anthropologist Dor Bahadur Bista, in his seminal work "People of Nepal," provides comprehensive insights into the diverse ethnic groups of Nepal, including the Rai and Limbu. His research highlights the significant historical and cultural presence of these communities in Nepal. Other historians and anthropologists have also documented the long-standing heritage of the Rai and Limbu in the region, further disproving your narrative.
Constructive Dialogue: Instead of spreading misinformation and inciting division, why not engage in constructive discussions? Present credible evidence, if you have any, and participate in respectful debates. This would contribute to a better understanding of our shared histories and promote unity.
In conclusion, your attempts to discredit the Rai and Limbu communities seem more rooted in personal bias than in factual historical analysis
@@user2234yd किरातहरू, जो इतिहासका केही पाठहरूमा भील पनि भनिन्छ, प्राचीन काठमाडौं उपत्यकाका वासिन्दा थिए। यद्यपि, विभिन्न सामाजिक-राजनीतिक दबाबहरूको कारण, तिनीहरूलाई बसाइँ सर्न बाध्य पारियो। किरातहरूको ठूलो भाग काठमाडौंको पश्चिमतिर भागेर खसहरूसँग मिसियो। त्यस्तैगरी, किरातहरूको अर्को खण्ड पूर्वतर्फ बसाइँ सर्दै पूर्वी नेपाल र असमको क्षेत्रमा बसोबास गर्न पुग्यो। असममा, तिनीहरूले स्थानीय इन्डो-आर्यन असमिया जनसंख्यासँग अन्तरमिश्रण गरे, जसले तिनीहरूको सांस्कृतिक र भाषिक विरासतलाई अझै मिलायो। यस संयोजनले असमिया र नेपाली (खस) भाषाहरू बीचका साझा भाषिक र सांस्कृतिक विशेषताहरूमा योगदान पुर्यायो, जसले तिनीहरूको इन्डो-आर्यन सम्बन्धलाई प्रकाश पार्छ। यो संगै, भील भाषासँगका समानताहरूले पनि नेपाल र भारतका विभिन्न भागहरूबीचको ऐतिहासिक र सांस्कृतिक अन्तरक्रियालाई झल्काउँछ।
राई र लिम्बुहरू मूलतः मंगोलिया क्षेत्रबाट उत्पन्न भएका थिए। ७औं शताब्दीमा मंगोलियाबाट सिचुवान क्षेत्रमा बसाइँ सरेका थिए। मंगोल आक्रमणको कारणले गर्दा १३औं शताब्दीमा तिनीहरू उत्तर तिब्बततर्फ लागे। उत्तर तिब्बतबाट, अन्ततः तिनीहरू १६औं शताब्दीमा पूर्वी नेपाल र सिक्किमतर्फ शरणार्थीका रूपमा आइपुगे। त्यहाँ उनीहरूलाई लेप्चा भूस्वामीहरू र सेन राजाहरूले शरण दिएका थिए।
इमान सिंह चेम्जोङको प्रभाव: दार्जिलिङका प्रमुख इतिहासकार इमान सिंह चेम्जोङको प्रयासले यस कथालाई महत्वपूर्ण मोड दियो। चेम्जोङले किरात जातिको पहिचानलाई पुनः परिभाषित गर्न महत्त्वपूर्ण भूमिका खेले। उनले "किरात" शब्दलाई मूल किरातहरू मात्र नभएर राई र लिम्बु समुदायहरूलाई समावेश गर्न प्रयोग गरे। यो पुनःपरिभाषा रणनीतिक थियो, विशेषगरी सिक्किममा राजनीतिक शक्ति र प्रभाव हासिल गर्न यी समूहहरूलाई एकीकृत गर्नको लागि। चेम्जोङको कामले यी समूहहरूको राजनीतिक जुटानमा महत्त्वपूर्ण भूमिका खेले, जसले सिक्किममा चोग्याल सरकारको चुनौती र अन्ततः पल्टाउने प्रयास गर्यो। किरात पहिचानलाई समेटेर, चेम्जोङ र उनका समकालीनहरूले एकीकृत मोर्चा बनाउन सक्षम भए, तर यसले किरात जातिको मौलिक इतिहासलाई मेटाउन र परिमार्जन गर्नको लागि नेतृत्व गर्यो।
ऐतिहासिक मेटावटको पछाडिका राजनीतिक उद्देश्यहरू: किरात जातिको मौलिक इतिहासको मेटावट केवल ऐतिहासिक पुनर्व्याख्याको अनपेक्षित उपोत्पाद मात्र नभएर राजनीतिक उद्देश्यद्वारा प्रेरित योजनाबद्ध कार्य थियो। किरातको परिभाषालाई अन्य जातीय समूहहरूलाई समेटेर व्यापक बनाउने क्रममा, दार्जिलिङका इतिहासकारहरूले क्षेत्रको सामाजिक-राजनीतिक परिदृश्यमा थप शक्ति हासिल गर्न खोजे।
नेपाली भाषा, असमिया भाषा, र भील भाषाहरू बीचका समानताहरूले दुवै भाषाको इन्डो-आर्यन सम्बन्धलाई पुष्टि गर्छन्। किरात (भील) मानिसहरू काठमाडौं उपत्यकाबाट लिच्छविहरूको आक्रमणबाट भागेर खस र असमिया जनतासँग मिसिएको हुँदा, यी भाषाहरूमा धेरै साझा शब्दावली, व्याकरणिक संरचना, र उच्चारणका विशेषताहरू छन्। उदाहरणका लागि, असमिया र नेपाली भाषामा प्रयोग हुने धेरै शब्दहरू र तिनीहरूको उच्चारण शैली एकअर्कासँग मेल खान्छ। यसले भाषिक समानताहरूले किरात जातिको इन्डो-आर्यन जरा र तिनीहरूको सांस्कृतिक अन्तरक्रियालाई देखाउँछ।
We want dr.keshav man sakya❤ with next episode with chamling sir we wanna seen again
Yes! 100%
Nikai knowledgeable video . Thank you sir for dis information and very well done host
Chapter X: Rais and Limbus: Refugees from Sichuan Who Fabricated Connections with the Kirat Dynasty
The historical journey of the Rais and Limbus begins in Sichuan province, China. During the Mongol conquests, significant upheaval forced many communities to flee their homeland. The Rais and Limbus migrated from Sichuan to northern Tibet, and eventually, by the 17th century, they settled in eastern Nepal. Seeking refuge from the conflicts and instability of their original regions, they found protection and land from the Sen kings of Nepal and the Bhutia Chogyals of Sikkim.
Genetic and Cultural Evidence
Genetic studies provide compelling evidence of the origins of the Rais and Limbus. These studies show a significant proportion of Mongolian and northern Chinese DNA in these communities, distinguishing them from other Tibeto-Burman groups in the Indian subcontinent. Their cultural practices, languages, and traditions also bear closer resemblance to those found in northern China and Mongolia, rather than the indigenous cultures of eastern Nepal.
The Historical Dominance of Lepcha, Bhutia, Newar, and Khas Arya
Before the arrival of the Rais and Limbus, the regions of eastern Nepal and Sikkim were dominated by various other ethnic groups. The Lepchas and Bhutias were prominent in Sikkim, with the Bhutia Chogyals ruling the kingdom for centuries. In Nepal, the Newars and Khas Aryas held significant influence, with the Khas Malla kingdom and the Sen Thakuri dynasty leaving behind numerous forts, palaces, and inscriptions. These groups had established rich cultural and political traditions long before the arrival of the Rais and Limbus.
Fabrication of Kirat Connections
While the Kirat dynasty did exist, the Rais and Limbus have no substantial archaeological or historical evidence linking them to this ancient lineage. Instead, they fabricated connections with the Kirats to claim indigenous status in the region. Prominent Limbu historian Iman Singh Chemjong played a crucial role in this fabrication by promoting the idea of a unified Kirat heritage that included the Rais and Limbus. This narrative, however, often overshadowed the histories of the Lepcha, Bhutia, Newar, and Khas Arya peoples.
Chemjong's writings and the political mobilization around the Kirat identity contributed to the marginalization of other ethnic histories. Historical texts and educational curricula began to emphasize the Kirat narrative at the expense of the established histories of the Lepcha and Bhutia in Sikkim, and the Newar and Khas Arya in Nepal. The emphasis on Kirat identity, bolstered by Chemjong's work, led to a rewriting of regional history that minimized the contributions and legacies of these other groups.
The Lack of Archaeological Evidence for Kirat Dominance by Rais and Limbus
One of the significant criticisms of the Rais and Limbus' claimed Kirat identity is the absence of archaeological evidence supporting their long-term dominance in eastern Nepal. Unlike the tangible remnants of the Sen Thakuri and Khas Malla kingdoms, such as forts, palaces, and inscriptions, there are no comparable archaeological sites attributed to a Kirat civilization connected to the Rais and Limbus. This lack of evidence raises questions about the historical accuracy of their claimed Kirat lineage as an ancient and indigenous connection in the region.
Erasure of Indigenous Histories
The arrival and subsequent integration of the Rais and Limbus into Nepal and Sikkim had profound implications for the historical narratives of the region. The promotion of the Kirat identity, particularly by figures like Iman Singh Chemjong, has contributed to the erasure of other ethnic histories. Historical texts and educational curricula began to emphasize the fabricated Kirat narrative, often at the expense of the established histories of the Lepcha, Bhutia, Newar, and Khas Arya peoples.
Bajracharya bihar bata aaeko maithili brahmin ho?
इतिहासकारलाई पुरानो जम्मै कुरा थाहा हुन्छ, आफ्नो बुडीको बोइफ्रेन्ड को हो मात्र थाहा हुंदैन ।
शरणार्थी राई लिम्बू: सिचुवानदेखि नेपालसम्मको यात्रा
लिम्बूहरूको यात्रा सिचुवान प्रान्तबाट सुरु हुन्छ, जहाँ उनीहरू मूल रूपमा बसोबास गर्थे। १३ औं शताब्दीमा मंगोलहरूको आक्रमणका कारण उनीहरू आफ्नो मातृभूमि छोडेर भाग्न बाध्य भए। मंगोलहरूले सिचुवानमा ठूलो आतंक मच्चाए, जसका कारण लिम्बूहरू उत्तर तिब्बततर्फ लागे। उत्तर तिब्बतमा उनीहरूले केही समय बिताए र त्यहाँका सांस्कृतिक र भौगोलिक परिवेशसँग घुलमिल भए। तर, उत्तर तिब्बतमा बसोबास गर्न कठिन भइरहेको अवस्थामा, लिम्बूहरू फेरि बसाइँ सर्न बाध्य भए र १६ औं शताब्दीको अन्त्यतिर नेपाल तथा सिक्किममा आएर बसोबास गर्न थाले।
भिलहरूको इतिहास चोरी:
राई लिम्बूहरूले भिलहरूको इतिहासलाई चोरी गरी आफूलाई किरातहरूको रूपमा चिनाए। भिलहरू प्राचीन किरातहरूसँग सम्बन्धित थिए र उनीहरूको ऐतिहासिक विरासतलाई राई लिम्बूहरूले आफ्नो बनाउन खोजे। यसरी, उनीहरूले भिलहरूको इतिहासलाई अपहृत गरी आफूलाई किरातको रूपमा स्थापित गरे।
इमान सिंह चेम्जोङको भूमिका:
इमान सिंह चेम्जोङले याक्थुङ मुन्धुमलाई किरात मुन्धुमको रूपमा पुनः ब्रान्डिङ गरे। यस पुनः ब्रान्डिङको उद्देश्य राजनीतिक किरात आन्दोलन सुरु गर्नु थियो, जसले सिक्किमको चोग्याल शासनलाई अन्त्य गर्न सहयोग पुर्यायो। चेम्जोङले लिम्बूहरूको इतिहासलाई किरातहरूको इतिहाससँग जोड्दै, एक नयाँ पहिचान निर्माण गरे, जसले राजनीतिक रूपमा लिम्बूहरूलाई बलियो बनायो।
किरात आन्दोलन र चोग्याल शासनको अन्त्य :
किरात आन्दोलनको सुरुवातले सिक्किमको चोग्याल शासनमा ठूलो असर पारेको थियो। लिम्बूहरूले आफ्नो नयाँ पहिचानलाई आधार बनाएर राजनीतिक आन्दोलन सुरु गरे, जसले अन्ततः चोग्याल शासनलाई कमजोर बनायो र अन्त्य गरायो। इमान सिंह चेम्जोङको रणनीतिले लिम्बूहरूको स्थिति बलियो बनायो र सिक्किमको राजनीतिक स्थायित्वलाई चुनौती दियो।
नेपालमा राई लिम्बूहरूको स्वदेशी स्थिति र विवाद: नेपालमा राई लिम्बूहरूलाई स्वदेशीको रूपमा मान्यता दिइएको छ, तर यो स्थिति विवादास्पद छ। उनीहरूको वास्तविक उत्पत्तिको प्रमाणको अभाव र भिलहरूको इतिहास चोरीको कारणले, उनीहरूको स्वदेशी स्थिति पुनः मूल्यांकन गर्नु आवश्यक छ। आनुवंशिक अध्ययनहरूले राई लिम्बूहरूको उत्पत्तिमा मंगोलियन र उत्तरी चिनियाँ डीएनएको महत्वपूर्ण अनुपात देखाउँछ, जसले तिनीहरूलाई भारतीय उपमहाद्वीपका अन्य तिब्बती-बर्मन समूहहरूबाट अलग गर्दछ। तसर्थ, उनीहरूको स्वदेशी स्थिति र इतिहासलाई पुनः मूल्यांकन गरेर, सत्य तथ्यहरूलाई उजागर गर्नु आवश्यक छ।
No Nepali have heard the Krishna story. What a sham.
The Limbu and Rai: Rewriting the History of Nepal's Darjeeling Hills
The history of the Limbus and Rais in the Darjeeling hills has long been shrouded in myth and misinformation. Contrary to the popular narrative propagated by these groups, there is little archaeological evidence to suggest they were the ancient Kiratas who ruled over Eastern Nepal for centuries.
In reality, the available evidence points to a very different story. The Sen Thakuris, not the Limbus or Rais, were the dominant rulers of Eastern Nepal for over 600 years. Their legacy is evident in the numerous forts, palaces and inscriptions that dot the landscape, such as the Makawanpur Gadi, Udayapur Forts and Bijaypur Durbar. Similarly, the Bhutias (Chogyals) established a strong presence in Sikkim during this period.
Yet, through the patronage of the British in Darjeeling, the Limbus and Rais were able to gain an education and subsequently rewrite the history of the region in a way that placed them at the center. Leveraging the lack of written records among the Nepali populace, who were restricted from literacy under Rana rule, these groups crafted a mythical narrative of ancient Kirata kingships and oral traditions to bolster their claims.
Tellingly, this revised history lacks any substantive archaeological or documentary evidence to back it up. Instead, it relies heavily on unverified "oral histories" that conveniently align with the Limbus' and Rais' desire to be recognized as the rightful indigenous rulers of the Darjeeling hills.
Further undermining their claims is the genetic evidence, which reveals a strong Mongolian ancestry among the Limbus and Rais that distinguishes them from other Mongoloid groups in South Asia. This suggests they were likely refugees who migrated from China's Sichuan province to Tibet during the Mongol conquests, before eventually seeking shelter with the Sen kings of Nepal and the Chogyals of Sikkim in the 17th century.
In essence, the Limbus and Rais, with the aid of the British, have succeeded in rewriting the history of Nepal's Darjeeling hills in a way that erases the legitimate claims of the Bhutias, Khas Aryas and Newars. This biased, Limbu-centric narrative has left historians grappling with a distorted understanding of the region's true past. Only by confronting this revisionist history with the weight of archaeological and genetic evidence can the record be set straight.
That story is the second popular one to the manjushree one. The hindus try to back it up by saying Gopals are the first rulers of Nepal
Hindu Newars have a history of Manjushree coming initially and cutting the Chobar gorge but later in Dwapar Yuga, the lake had reformed into a lake so Krishna through his Sudarshan Chakra re-cut the gorge and brought some of his Gopalas from Dwarka after Dwarka was destroyed and Krishna established the Gopal dynasty which is considered the first dynasty of Nepal. The Gopali people (a subsection of the Jyapu now) living around Tistung still believe to be the descendants of those group.
Krishna, ram are the imaginary characters of the stories created by Brahmans.
@@SandeshKushwaha-tl2fd😂😂 Sikkhim & Darjeeling is not Nepal, it's a part of India. Limbus are called chong in Sikkim. Limbus and bhutias were the major rules of the Sikkhim. Sikkhim itself is a name in Limbu language given by the queen thungwamukma. Sikkim, Darjeeling has different history from Nepal. Rais were not the ruler of Sikkhim.
You have mixed a lot of misinformation about the history of Sikkhim and Darjeeling . Sikkhim Darjeeling has different history from Nepal, you can connect the history of Nepal with Sikkhim after the fall of prithivi naryan Shah. Pn Shah died around 1831 after the gorkha-limbuwaan treaty. Limbuwan, Sikkhim and Darjeeling were neighbouring countries and had peaceful relationship with common cultural practices during that time.
Very interesting
How Rai and Limbus Claim False Association with Rich Tribes to Legitimize Their Own False History
Throughout history, the Rai and Limbus communities have been known for their resourcefulness and adaptability in various regions of South Asia. However, there has been a growing concern that these communities have often engaged in fabricating associations with richer and more prosperous tribes such as the Newars, Lepchas, Bodos, Meches, Tharus, and others. This alleged fabrication is seen as an effort to legitimize their historical claims and to integrate more seamlessly into these regions. The complexities surrounding these claims raise significant questions about historical authenticity, ethnic identity, and inter-community relations.
Historical Background of Rai and Limbus
The Rai and Limbus communities trace their roots back to regions influenced by the Mongol expansions. Historical evidence suggests that they migrated from Sichuan, China, to Northern Tibet and eventually settled in parts of Nepal and Sikkim during the 13th century. Seeking refuge from the Mongol conquests, these groups were welcomed by the Sen Thakuris and the Lepcha tribe. Over time, they adapted to their new environments, forming unique cultural identities.
Despite their integration, the Rai and Limbus communities have faced challenges in asserting their legitimacy and historical roots in these new regions. This has led to efforts to fabricate connections with more affluent and historically established tribes.
The Quest for Legitimacy through Fabrication
One of the most significant accusations against the Rai and Limbus is their attempt to fabricate associations with the ancient Kirat people. This identity encompasses several indigenous groups of the Himalayan region, including the prosperous Newars, Lepchas, Bodos, Meches, and Tharus. By claiming a shared Kirat ancestry, the Rai and Limbus hope to embed themselves within the historical and cultural narratives of these regions.
The Newar Connection
The Newars, an affluent community with a rich cultural heritage in the Kathmandu Valley, have been a prime target for these fabricated associations. The Newars' sophisticated urban culture and historical prominence make them an attractive ally for the Rai and Limbus. By claiming historical ties to the Newars, the Rai and Limbus seek to elevate their own status and justify their presence in Newar territories.
However, the Newars, with their distinct linguistic and cultural identity, have little in common with the migratory history of the Rai and Limbus. This lack of historical evidence supporting the connection has led to skepticism and tension within the Newar community itself.
Encroaching on Lepcha and Bhutia Land
In Sikkim and parts of West Bengal, the Lepchas, considered the original inhabitants, have a rich cultural heritage. The Rai and Limbus have sought to align themselves with the Lepchas by claiming a shared Kirat ancestry. This association is used to justify their migration into Lepcha territories and assert their rights over land and resources.
This fabricated connection has exacerbated conflicts between the Lepcha and Bhutia communities in India. The Bhutias, another significant ethnic group in Sikkim, have been drawn into disputes over land and heritage, partly fueled by the Rai and Limbus' claims. These actions have contributed to ethnic discord and instability in the region.
Infiltrating Assam and Meghalaya
In Assam and Meghalaya, the Bodos, Meches, and other indigenous tribes have faced similar claims from the Rai and Limbus. By asserting a Kirat identity, the Rai and Limbus attempt to integrate into these regions and gain access to land and opportunities traditionally reserved for indigenous groups.
Recent ethnic violence in Assam, which has seen clashes between various tribal groups, has been partly fueled by the false claims and associations made by the Rai and Limbus. Their attempts to insert themselves into the socio-political fabric of Assam have led to increased competition for resources and heightened ethnic tensions.
The Role of the Khas and Tharus
In Nepal, the Khas Aryas and Tharus have also been drawn into the web of fabricated associations. The Rai and Limbus, by claiming a historical connection with these communities, seek to expand their territorial claims and secure a place within the broader socio-political landscape of Nepal.
The Tharus, with their unique cultural practices and historical ties to the Terai region, have found little in common with the Rai and Limbus. The Tharus, primarily of Indo-Aryan descent, have distinct cultural and linguistic identities that do not align with the Kirat narrative. This further underscores the opportunistic nature of the fabricated Kirat identity.
Furthermore, the fabricated associations have led to tensions between the Tharus and the Madhesis, another significant community in the Terai region. The Rai and Limbus' attempts to assert their presence have exacerbated existing conflicts over land and resources, further destabilizing the region.
Consequences of Fabrication
The alleged fabrication of associations by the Rai and Limbus has significant implications for the regions they inhabit. These actions have led to increased competition for resources, heightened ethnic tensions, and challenges to the historical narratives of indigenous communities. The quest for legitimacy by the Rai and Limbus, while understandable from a socio-economic perspective, has often come at the expense of the established rights and identities of other tribes.
Reevaluating Historical Narratives
In light of these fabrications, it is essential to reevaluate the historical narratives surrounding the Rai and Limbus. While their need for stability and prosperity is valid, their methods of claiming indigeneity through fabricated associations raise ethical and historical concerns. Accurate historical documentation and respect for the identities of established indigenous groups are crucial in addressing these issues.
शरणार्थी लिम्बू: सिचुवानदेखि उत्तर तिब्बतसम्म: उत्तर तिब्बतदेखि नेपाल र सिक्किमसम्मका :लिम्बूहरूको यात्रा सिचुवान प्रान्तबाट सुरु हुन्छ, जहाँ उनीहरू मूल रूपमा बसोबास गर्थे। १३ औं शताब्दीमा मंगोलहरूको आक्रमणका कारण उनीहरू आफ्नो मातृभूमि छोडेर भाग्न बाध्य भए। मंगोलहरूले सिचुवानमा ठूलो आतंक मच्चाए, जसका कारण लिम्बूहरू उत्तर तिब्बततर्फ लागे। उत्तर तिब्बतमा उनीहरूले केही समय बिताए र त्यहाँका सांस्कृतिक र भौगोलिक परिवेशसँग घुलमिल भए। उत्तर तिब्बतदेखि नेपाल र सिक्किमसम्म उत्तर तिब्बतमा बसोबास गर्न पनि कठिन भइरहेको अवस्थामा, लिम्बूहरू फेरि बसाइँ सर्न बाध्य भए। १६ औं शताब्दीको अन्त्यतिर उनीहरू दक्षिणतर्फ लागे र नेपाल तथा सिक्किममा आएर बसोबास गर्न थाले। नेपालको पूर्वी भाग र सिक्किमको विभिन्न स्थानमा उनीहरूले नयाँ जीवन सुरु गरे। नेपालमा, लिम्बूहरूलाई सेन राजाहरू र लेप्चा आदिवासीहरूले शरण दिए। सेन राजाहरूले उनीहरूलाई सुरक्षा प्रदान गरे र उनीहरूको बसोबासका लागि भूमि उपलब्ध गराए। यस्तै, सिक्किममा पनि चोग्यालहरूले उनीहरूलाई स्वागत गरे र उनीहरूलाई बसोबासका लागि सहुलियत प्रदान गरे।आनुवंशिक अध्ययनहरूले राई र लिम्बूहरूको उत्पत्तिको ठोस प्रमाण प्रदान गर्दछ। यी अध्ययनहरूले यी समुदायहरूमा मंगोलियन र उत्तरी चिनियाँ डीएनएको महत्वपूर्ण अनुपात देखाउँछन्, जसले तिनीहरूलाई भारतीय उपमहाद्वीपका अन्य तिब्बती-बर्मन समूहहरूबाट अलग गर्दछ। उनीहरूको सांस्कृतिक अभ्यास, भाषा, र परम्पराहरू पनि उत्तरी चीन र मंगोलियामा पाइनेहरूको जस्तो देखिन्छ, पूर्वी नेपालका स्वदेशी संस्कृतिहरूको भन्दा।किरात सम्बन्धको निर्माण जबकि किरात राजवंश अस्तित्वमा थियो, राई र लिम्बूहरूलाई यस प्राचीन वंशसँग जोड्ने कुनै ठोस पुरातात्विक वा ऐतिहासिक प्रमाण छैन। बरु, उनीहरूले यस क्षेत्रमा स्वदेशीको रूपमा दावा गर्न किरातसँग सम्बन्ध निर्माण गरे। प्रमुख लिम्बू इतिहासकार इमान सिंह चेम्जोङले किरात विरासतको विचारलाई बढावा दिने क्रममा यस निर्माणमा महत्वपूर्ण भूमिका खेले, जसमा राई र लिम्बूहरू समावेश थिए। यद्यपि, यो कथा लेप्चा, भुटिया, नेवार, र खस आर्य जनताको इतिहासलाई प्रायः ओझेलमा पारिदिन्थ्यो। चेम्जोङका लेखन र किरात पहिचानको राजनीतिक संगठित अभियानले अन्य जातीय इतिहासहरूको ओझेलमा योगदान पुर्यायो। ऐतिहासिक पाठ्यक्रमहरू र शैक्षिक पाठ्यक्रमहरूले किरात कथालाई जोड दिन थाले, लेप्चा र भुटियाको सिक्किममा, र नेपालमा नेवार र खस आर्यको स्थापित इतिहासहरूको खर्चमा। चेम्जोङको कामले सुदृढ पारेको किरात पहिचानको जोडले क्षेत्रीय इतिहासको पुनर्लेखन गर्यो, जसले यी अन्य समूहहरूको योगदान र विरासतलाई न्यूनतम बनायो। राई र लिम्बूहरूद्वारा किरात प्रभुत्वको लागि पुरातात्विक प्रमाणको अभाव राई र लिम्बूहरूको दावी गरिएको किरात पहिचानको एक महत्वपूर्ण आलोचना भनेको पूर्वी नेपालमा उनीहरूको दीर्घकालीन प्रभुत्वलाई समर्थन गर्ने पुरातात्विक प्रमाणहरूको अभाव हो। सेन ठाकुरी र खस मल्ल राज्यका किल्ला, दरबार, र शिलालेख जस्ता ठोस अवशेषहरूको विपरीत, राई र लिम्बूहरूमा जोडिएको किरात सभ्यतासँग सम्बन्धित पुरातात्विक स्थलहरू छैनन्। यो प्रमाणको अभावले उनीहरूको प्राचीन र स्वदेशी सम्बन्धको दावीको ऐतिहासिक सटीकतामा प्रश्न उठाउँछ।
I guess this dude is abit anti hindu Idk i watch the whole ep and he is trying to say kirat are more superior than others but
Rather comparing just tell the facts
He did not even mention about the Gopals and Mahespal dynasty who were the first rulers.
Fun facts the main thre real kirats are maharjan dangol and few other newa people of the valley thats why they did not get kicked out from the valley when licchavi took over. These newa people were farmers so they were kept inside the valley for farming and other like
limbus,rai,magar were kicked out of valley by the licchavi kings.
Faking the Kirat Identity
A Closer Look at Historical Manipulations
In recent years, the narrative surrounding the Kirat identity has come under intense scrutiny. Traditionally celebrated as a unifying force among the ethnic groups of Eastern Nepal, the Kirat identity-chiefly associated with the Limbus and Rais-has been revealed to be a historical fabrication. This manipulation was not only a bid for political power but also a campaign of ethnic antagonism against the indigenous Lepcha and Bhutia communities.
The Roots of the Kirat Identity
The term "Kirat" has been strategically adopted by certain groups to forge a collective identity. However, a detailed examination of historical and linguistic evidence challenges this constructed narrative. Before the intervention of scholars like Iman Singh Chemjong, the Limbus, Rais, and Yakkhas did not identify collectively as Kirats. The term was first popularized by Rana Bahadur Shah and later adopted by Prithvi Narayan Shah, who referred to the Limbus as descendants of Yehang, not Kirats. This indicates that the Kirat identity was a political construct, lacking genuine historical roots.
Lack of Archaeological Evidence
One of the most compelling arguments against the Kirat identity of the Limbus and Rais is the absence of archaeological evidence. Historical narratives promoted by the Kirat movement claim that these groups are ancient inhabitants of Eastern Nepal. However, unlike the well-documented presence of the Sen Thakuri dynasty and the Bhutia Chogyals-evidenced by numerous forts, palaces, and inscriptions such as those at Makawanpur Gadi, Udayapur Forts, and Bijaypur Durbar-there are no corresponding sites that can be attributed to Limbu or Rai rule.
No inscriptions, palaces, or forts bear witness to a long-term Limbu or Rai presence or governance in Eastern Nepal. This stark absence of material evidence contrasts with the rich archaeological heritage left by other ruling dynasties, underscoring the fabricated nature of the Kirat identity claims.
Genetic and Migration Evidence
Genetic studies have further debunked the Kirat narrative. Research indicates that the Limbus and Rais possess a high proportion of Mongolian DNA, distinguishing them from other Tibeto-Burman ethnic groups in South Asia. This genetic evidence suggests that these communities migrated from the Sichuan province in China to northern Tibet during the Mongol conquests and later settled in Eastern Nepal in the 17th century. This migration narrative contradicts the Kirat movement's assertion of an ancient and indigenous lineage in Eastern Nepal.
Political Manipulation and Ethnic Tensions
The Kirat identity was not merely a historical inaccuracy; it was a tool for political manipulation. Iman Singh Chemjong's efforts to foster a unified Kirat identity were driven by a desire to incite resistance and revolt against the Bhutia-dominated Kingdom of Sikkim. This movement was rooted in ethnic animosity and aimed at undermining the Bhutia community's historical and political significance in the region.
The rebranding of the Yakthung Mundhum to Kirat Mundhum was a deliberate attempt to erase the Bhutia community's contributions and presence. By promoting a false narrative of historical dominance, the Kirat movement sought to marginalize the Bhutias and assert an unsubstantiated claim to the region's heritage.
The Impact on Lepcha and Bhutia Communities
The Kirat movement’s divisive tactics extended beyond historical revisionism. By positioning the Limbus and Rais as the rightful heirs of the region, the movement marginalized the Lepcha and Bhutia communities, undermining their historical significance and contributions. This sowed seeds of discord and ethnic tension, fracturing what was once a more cohesive cultural tapestry in Eastern Nepal.
@@RavishPatel-q2t This narrative is riddled with inaccuracies and is a blatant attempt to rewrite history. Let’s set the record straight with actual historical and archaeological evidence:
Historical and Cultural Roots:
The Kirat identity is not a recent invention. Ancient texts such as the Mahabharata and various Puranas, which date back centuries, mention the Kirat people, highlighting their long-standing presence in the region. These mentions predate any British influence or modern political constructs.
Scholarly Contributions:
Scholars like Iman Singh Chemjong did not fabricate the Kirat identity; they documented and preserved the rich history, language, and culture of the Kirat people based on extensive research, oral traditions, and historical evidence. Chemjong’s work provides a crucial link to understanding the true heritage of the Kirat communities.
Genetic and Migration Evidence:
Genetic studies do show a high proportion of Mongolian DNA among the Limbus and Rais, which reflects the complex migratory patterns of human history. However, this genetic diversity underscores the rich tapestry of human settlement in Eastern Nepal and does not negate the long-term presence of these communities in the region. Human migration and settlement are complex and multi-faceted processes, not simple binary events.
Archaeological Evidence:
The claim that there is no archaeological evidence of Limbu or Rai presence is false. Numerous smaller-scale archaeological finds, such as ancient tools, artifacts, and settlement remains, provide physical evidence of the long-standing presence of these communities. The absence of grandiose monuments does not imply the absence of a people; many indigenous cultures worldwide have rich histories that do not rely on large architectural remains.
The lack of monumental inscriptions or palaces attributed to the Limbus and Rais contrasts with the dominant narratives of other dynasties, which often had different cultural practices and left behind different types of evidence.
Political Manipulation and Ethnic Tensions:
The assertion that the Kirat identity was solely a tool for political manipulation is an oversimplification. While political dynamics have indeed influenced historical narratives, the Kirat identity has genuine cultural and historical roots. The efforts by Chemjong and others were aimed at preserving and promoting the cultural heritage of the Kirat people, not fabricating a history for political gain.
Impact on Lepcha and Bhutia Communities:
The Kirat movement aimed to preserve the history and culture of the Kirat people, not to marginalize other communities. The divisive tactics and ethnic tensions mentioned are often a result of broader political and social dynamics, not the preservation efforts of the Kirat identity. In fact, attempts to undermine the Kirat identity often come from dominant groups trying to impose their own cultural narratives.
Later Arrival of Brahmins:
Brahmins and other dominant groups arrived later in Eastern Nepal and have historically attempted to impose their culture and erode indigenous traditions. This historical context is crucial in understanding the current dynamics and the resistance by indigenous communities to preserve their heritage.
The narrative claiming the Kirat identity is a fabrication is nothing but an attempt to distort and undermine the rich history and cultural heritage of the Kirat people. The Kirat identity, including that of the Limbus and Rais, is well-documented and rooted in historical evidence. Any attempt to dismiss this as a mere political construct is not only inaccurate but also deeply disrespectful to the heritage of these communities. It’s time to acknowledge and respect the true history of the Kirat people.
How Rai and Limbu Claim False Association with Rich Tribes to Legitimize Their Own False History
Throughout history, the Rai and Limbu communities have been known for their resourcefulness and adaptability in various regions of South Asia. However, there has been a growing concern that these communities have often engaged in fabricating associations with richer and more prosperous tribes such as the Newars, Lepchas, Bodos, Meches, Tharus, and others. This alleged fabrication is seen as an effort to legitimize their historical claims and to integrate more seamlessly into these regions. The complexities surrounding these claims raise significant questions about historical authenticity, ethnic identity, and inter-community relations.
Historical Background of Rai and Limbu
The Rai and Limbu communities trace their roots back to regions influenced by the Mongol expansions. Historical evidence suggests that they migrated from Sichuan, China, to Northern Tibet and eventually settled in parts of Nepal and Sikkim during the 13th century. Seeking refuge from the Mongol conquests, these groups were welcomed by the Sen Thakuris and the Lepcha tribe. Over time, they adapted to their new environments, forming unique cultural identities.
Despite their integration, the Rai and Limbu communities have faced challenges in asserting their legitimacy and historical roots in these new regions. This has led to efforts to fabricate connections with more affluent and historically established tribes.
The Quest for Legitimacy through Fabrication
One of the most significant accusations against the Rai and Limbu is their attempt to fabricate associations with the ancient Kirat people. This identity encompasses several indigenous groups of the Himalayan region, including the prosperous Newars, Lepchas, Bodos, Meches, and Tharus. By claiming a shared Kirat ancestry, the Rai and Limbu hope to embed themselves within the historical and cultural narratives of these regions.
The Newar Connection
The Newars, an affluent community with a rich cultural heritage in the Kathmandu Valley, have been a prime target for these fabricated associations. The Newars' sophisticated urban culture and historical prominence make them an attractive ally for the Rai and Limbu. By claiming historical ties to the Newars, the Rai and Limbu seek to elevate their own status and justify their presence in Newar territories.
However, the Newars, with their distinct linguistic and cultural identity, have little in common with the migratory history of the Rai and Limbu. This lack of historical evidence supporting the connection has led to skepticism and tension within the Newar community itself.
Encroaching on Lepcha and Bhutia Land
In Sikkim and parts of West Bengal, the Lepchas, considered the original inhabitants, have a rich cultural heritage. The Rai and Limbu have sought to align themselves with the Lepchas by claiming a shared Kirat ancestry. This association is used to justify their migration into Lepcha territories and assert their rights over land and resources.
This fabricated connection has exacerbated conflicts between the Lepcha and Bhutia communities in India. The Bhutias, another significant ethnic group in Sikkim, have been drawn into disputes over land and heritage, partly fueled by the Rai and Limbu' claims. These actions have contributed to ethnic discord and instability in the region.
Infiltrating Assam and Meghalaya
In Assam and Meghalaya, the Bodos, Meches, and other indigenous tribes have faced similar claims from the Rai and Limbu. By asserting a Kirat identity, the Rai and Limbu attempt to integrate into these regions and gain access to land and opportunities traditionally reserved for indigenous groups.
Recent ethnic violence in Assam, which has seen clashes between various tribal groups, has been partly fueled by the false claims and associations made by the Rai and Limbu. Their attempts to insert themselves into the socio-political fabric of Assam have led to increased competition for resources and heightened ethnic tensions.
The Role of the Khas and Tharus
In Nepal, the Khas Aryas and Tharus have also been drawn into the web of fabricated associations. The Rai and Limbu, by claiming a historical connection with these communities, seek to expand their territorial claims and secure a place within the broader socio-political landscape of Nepal.
The Tharus, with their unique cultural practices and historical ties to the Terai region, have found little in common with the Rai and Limbu. The Tharus, primarily of Indo-Aryan descent, have distinct cultural and linguistic identities that do not align with the Kirat narrative. This further underscores the opportunistic nature of the fabricated Kirat identity.
Furthermore, the fabricated associations have led to tensions between the Tharus and the Madhesis, another significant community in the Terai region. The Rai and Limbu attempts to assert their presence have exacerbated existing
@@user-tg5ut6ic8l Your claims about the Rai and Limbus are not only unfounded but also incredibly offensive and ignorant. The history and heritage of the Rai and Limbus are well-documented and respected, and it's high time you stopped spreading baseless accusations.
Indigenous Status of Rai and Limbus
1. Historical and Archaeological Evidence:
Kirata Dynasty: The Rai and Limbus are descendants of the ancient Kiratas who ruled over Eastern Nepal long before the Sen Thakuris appeared. This is supported by various archaeological findings, including ancient relics and settlement ruins, that establish their long-standing presence in the region.
Licchavi Inscriptions: Historical texts, such as Licchavi inscriptions, and records from Newari chronicles, further confirm the existence and rule of the Kirata tribes, which included the Rai and Limbus.
2. Cultural and Genetic Evidence:
Cultural Richness: The rich cultural heritage of the Rai and Limbus, like the Sirijonga script and Mundhum oral traditions, showcases their deep-rooted civilization and historical continuity.
Distinctive Practices: Their unique cultural practices, attire, and rituals distinguish them clearly from other ethnic groups, indicating a well-established indigenous identity.
Brahmins as Refugees
1. Historical Migration:
Mughal Invasion: Historical records show that Brahmins migrated to Nepal from regions like Bihar to escape the Mughal invasions. They integrated with the Khas people of Western Nepal, contrary to your claims of them being indigenous.
Strategic Alliances: Brahmins cleverly allied with the Khas to secure influence and power, a far cry from being indigenous to Eastern Nepal.
The Role During British Era
1. Anglo-Nepalese War:
Military Bravery: The Rai and Limbus fought valiantly alongside Gorkha soldiers against the British, proving their loyalty and martial prowess. Their recruitment into the British Army was due to their demonstrated bravery, not because of some fictitious betrayal.
Addressing Misinformation
Your constant spamming of false information is not only disrespectful but also illegal. Misleading the public and falsifying history can have serious legal consequences. It's time you faced the facts instead of peddling lies.
Conclusion
The Rai and Limbus are true indigenous people of Eastern Nepal with a rich, verifiable history. Brahmins, on the other hand, migrated into Nepal as refugees. Your attempt to rewrite history to undermine the legitimacy of the Rai and Limbus is not only baseless but also offensive. The Rai and Limbus have always been integral to the region’s history, and no amount of misinformation can change that.
@@RavishPatel-q2t Enough with your ridiculous claims and fabricated nonsense. Let's break down why your so-called "facts" are just baseless drivel.
First off, the Kirat identity isn't some recent invention. Historical texts like the Mahabharata and the Vishnu Purana mention the Kiratas, an ancient people inhabiting the Himalayan region. The Rai and Limbu communities have been integral parts of the Kirat lineage, and their cultural heritage predates your revisionist nonsense by centuries.
Lack of Archaeological Evidence:
Your claim about a "lack of archaeological evidence" is laughable. Just because there aren't grand palaces or temples doesn't mean a civilization didn't exist. The Kirat people, including the Rais and Limbus, traditionally lived in simpler structures suited to their environment. Their history is preserved through oral traditions, cultural practices, and ancient texts.
While it's true that Indo-Aryan inscriptions and architecture are more prominent, it doesn't negate the presence of other groups. Different civilizations have different ways of leaving their marks, and the absence of one type of evidence isn't proof of non-existence.
Historical Records and Linguistic Analysis:
Migration patterns are complex and don't fit into your neat, biased narrative. The Rai and Limbu people have long been established in Eastern Nepal, with cultural and linguistic ties to the region going back centuries. The suggestion that they only arrived in the 13th-16th centuries is an oversimplification that ignores the nuanced history of human movement and settlement.
British Patronage:
The idea that the British somehow invented the Kirat identity is absurd. The British recognized and documented existing social structures for their administrative convenience. They didn't create them. The Kirat identity existed long before British colonial influence and continues to be a significant part of Nepal's ethnic tapestry.
Genetic Evidence:
Genetic studies show that the Rai and Limbu people have distinct markers that tie them to the region. Their ancestry includes elements from both the Mongoloid and Indo-Aryan gene pools, reflecting the complex and intertwined history of South Asia.
In conclusion, your argument is nothing more than a poorly constructed attempt to discredit the rich and diverse history of the Rai and Limbu people. Your reliance on cherry-picked evidence and misleading claims doesn't hold up to scrutiny. The Kirat identity, with its deep historical roots and cultural significance, stands strong against your baseless accusations. So, spare us your pseudo-historical garbage and stop spreading misinformation.
लौ ? कस्तो पाँडे कुरा गर्छ यार यो?
हामिले कहिले कृष्णले काठमाडौ उपत्यका काटेर पानीको निकास दिए भनेका छौ?
अलिक तथ्यको आधारमा कुरा गरुम न सर तपाईं इतिहासविद भन्दा पनि किरातविद बढी देखियो।
अल्प ज्ञान को लेक्चर ले प्राचीन सनातन देखीनै बुदध सभ्यतालाई धक्क दीने काम आज मात्र भएको होइनन् पराधिन लेन्दुहिन्दुबिस्तार बादीकरण गरेयता बिना बिज्ञान को धर्म को छाप पराका हरु लाई केथाहा ?
भारत र नेपालमा बौद्ध धर्म लाई पनि ब्राम्हण हरु ले दुनिया कथा कहानी बनाएर dominate gareko पाइन्छ। आजको पशुपति नथा भारी सबै बौद्ध को मूर्ति हरु पाइन्छ। त्यो बुद्ध को मूर्ति लाई तोड मोड गरेर शिव बनाएको मजाले थाहा पाइन्छ।
नेपाल को किरातीहरु को ईतिहास पनि शाह र ब्राह्मणहरू ले धेरै नै लुकाउन खोजेको पाइन्छ।
शरणार्थी राई लिम्बूहरू: सिचुवान शरणार्थीदेखि बेलायती सहयोगमा स्वदेशी पहिचानको कपोलकल्पना
राई र लिम्बूहरू, जसले अहिले पूर्वी नेपाल र सिक्किममा प्रमुख स्थान ओगटेका छन्, वास्तवमा सिचुवान प्रान्तबाट भागेर आएका शरणार्थी हुन्। उनीहरूको यात्रा १३ औं शताब्दीमा सुरु भयो, जब मंगोलहरूको आक्रमणले उनीहरूलाई आफ्नो मातृभूमि छोडेर उत्तर तिब्बततर्फ लाग्न बाध्य बनायो। तर, इतिहासलाई फेर्न र आफ्नो फाइदाका लागि पुनर्लेखन गर्न खोज्दा, उनीहरूले आफूलाई प्राचीन किरातको रूपमा प्रस्तुत गरे र यो मिथकलाई स्थापित गर्न बेलायती संरक्षणको उपयोग गरे।
सिचुवानदेखि उत्तर तिब्बतसम्मको यात्रा
१३ औं शताब्दीमा मंगोलहरूको आक्रमणका कारण राई र लिम्बूहरू आफ्नो मूल स्थान सिचुवानबाट पलायन गर्न बाध्य भए। मंगोलहरूको आतंकबाट बच्न उनीहरू उत्तर तिब्बत पुगे। उत्तर तिब्बतमा केही समय बिताएपछि, तिब्बती समूहहरूसँगको संघर्षका कारण उनीहरूले फेरि बसाइँ सर्नुपर्ने अवस्था आयो। अन्ततः, १६ औं शताब्दीको अन्त्यतिर उनीहरू पूर्वतर्फ लाग्दै नेपाल र सिक्किममा बसोबास गर्न पुगे।
किरात पहिचानको कपोलकल्पना
राई र लिम्बूहरू वास्तविक किरात वंशसँग प्रत्यक्ष सम्बन्ध राख्दैनथे, जुन उनीहरूभन्दा शताब्दी पहिले अस्तित्वमा थियो। किरात शासकहरू फरक जातीय समूह थिए, जसका आफ्नै विशिष्ट भाषा, परम्परा, र राजनीतिक संरचना थिए। तर, इतिहासको अभावमा, लिम्बू र राईहरूले आफ्ना फाइदाका लागि किरात पहिचानको कपोलकल्पना गरे।
बेलायती सहयोगको भूमिका
दार्जिलिङमा बेलायती उपनिवेशवादी प्रशासनको समर्थन र स्रोतहरूको मद्दतमा, लिम्बू र राईहरूले मिथकीय "किरात" वंशावलीको निर्माण गरे र यसलाई ऐतिहासिक तथ्यको रूपमा प्रचार गरे। राणा शासनअन्तर्गत साक्षरता प्रतिबन्धित नेपाली जनताको अभिलेख नभएको अवस्थामा, उनीहरूले यस पुनर्लेखित कथालाई प्रचलित गर्न सक्षम भए।
बेलायती उपनिवेशवादीहरूले स्थानीय जातीय समूहहरूलाई विभाजित गर्न र आफ्नो सत्ता मजबुत बनाउन चाहन्थे। यसै क्रममा, लिम्बू र राईहरूले बेलायती सहयोगबाट फाइदा उठाउँदै, आफूलाई किरातको रूपमा स्थापित गरे। यस कदमले उनीहरूलाई बेलायती प्रशासनबाट विशेषाधिकार प्राप्त गर्न सहयोग पुर्यायो।
नेपाल र सिक्किममा स्थिति
नेपाल र सिक्किममा लिम्बू र राईहरूको स्वदेशी स्थिति विवादास्पद छ। उनीहरूको वास्तविक उत्पत्तिको प्रमाणको अभाव र किरात पहिचानको कपोलकल्पनाले, उनीहरूको स्वदेशी स्थिति पुनः मूल्यांकन गर्नु आवश्यक छ। आनुवंशिक अध्ययनहरूले राई लिम्बूहरूको उत्पत्तिमा मंगोलियन र उत्तरी चिनियाँ डीएनएको महत्वपूर्ण अनुपात देखाउँछ, जसले तिनीहरूलाई भारतीय उपमहाद्वीपका अन्य तिब्बती-बर्मन समूहहरूबाट अलग गर्दछ। तसर्थ, उनीहरूको स्वदेशी स्थिति र इतिहासलाई पुनः मूल्यांकन गरेर, सत्य तथ्यहरूलाई उजागर गर्नु आवश्यक छ।
Japanese research ko reference deu tori kanxa
Tipical Hindu 😂
Ane kosko denu ta Bharat bata kalpanik Katha banayera jhukyaune Brahman haru KO. Bhai lai research scholar bhaneko Taha xaina jasto xa. Tei pandit KO Katha Sundai bhram ma basa yr.
Ailey samma sansar chalauney principle,rules haru,theories pani tori vannus sir,tesai ko adharma ta report arucha ni ki
@@Millionaire_Rai_Adcboy bhote ta khate le kahile rule garis ktm ma terai historian le matra vancha aaru le kehi vandaina muji bhak
@@user-pw6pg8hz1n lol Dhoti ta hos 😂 tero hajurba haru indiama gulami garda hamro samaj baseko thyo ya. Sab bigya haru ley praman gareko cha taile Gadha le vanera huncha 😂
Hawa tori
Murkha ko ni murkha
How Rai and Limbus Claim False Association with Rich Tribes to Legitimize Their Own False History
Throughout history, the Rai and Limbus communities have been known for their resourcefulness and adaptability in various regions of South Asia. However, there has been a growing concern that these communities have often engaged in fabricating associations with richer and more prosperous tribes such as the Newars, Lepchas, Bodos, Meches, Tharus, and others. This alleged fabrication is seen as an effort to legitimize their historical claims and to integrate more seamlessly into these regions. The complexities surrounding these claims raise significant questions about historical authenticity, ethnic identity, and inter-community relations.
Historical Background of Rai and Limbus
The Rai and Limbus communities trace their roots back to regions influenced by the Mongol expansions. Historical evidence suggests that they migrated from Sichuan, China, to Northern Tibet and eventually settled in parts of Nepal and Sikkim during the 13th century. Seeking refuge from the Mongol conquests, these groups were welcomed by the Sen Thakuris and the Lepcha tribe. Over time, they adapted to their new environments, forming unique cultural identities.
Despite their integration, the Rai and Limbus communities have faced challenges in asserting their legitimacy and historical roots in these new regions. This has led to efforts to fabricate connections with more affluent and historically established tribes.
The Quest for Legitimacy through Fabrication
One of the most significant accusations against the Rai and Limbus is their attempt to fabricate associations with the ancient Kirat people. This identity encompasses several indigenous groups of the Himalayan region, including the prosperous Newars, Lepchas, Bodos, Meches, and Tharus. By claiming a shared Kirat ancestry, the Rai and Limbus hope to embed themselves within the historical and cultural narratives of these regions.
The Newar Connection
The Newars, an affluent community with a rich cultural heritage in the Kathmandu Valley, have been a prime target for these fabricated associations. The Newars' sophisticated urban culture and historical prominence make them an attractive ally for the Rai and Limbus. By claiming historical ties to the Newars, the Rai and Limbus seek to elevate their own status and justify their presence in Newar territories.
However, the Newars, with their distinct linguistic and cultural identity, have little in common with the migratory history of the Rai and Limbus. This lack of historical evidence supporting the connection has led to skepticism and tension within the Newar community itself.
Encroaching on Lepcha and Bhutia Land
In Sikkim and parts of West Bengal, the Lepchas, considered the original inhabitants, have a rich cultural heritage. The Rai and Limbus have sought to align themselves with the Lepchas by claiming a shared Kirat ancestry. This association is used to justify their migration into Lepcha territories and assert their rights over land and resources.
This fabricated connection has exacerbated conflicts between the Lepcha and Bhutia communities in India. The Bhutias, another significant ethnic group in Sikkim, have been drawn into disputes over land and heritage, partly fueled by the Rai and Limbus' claims. These actions have contributed to ethnic discord and instability in the region.
Infiltrating Assam and Meghalaya
In Assam and Meghalaya, the Bodos, Meches, and other indigenous tribes have faced similar claims from the Rai and Limbus. By asserting a Kirat identity, the Rai and Limbus attempt to integrate into these regions and gain access to land and opportunities traditionally reserved for indigenous groups.
Recent ethnic violence in Assam, which has seen clashes between various tribal groups, has been partly fueled by the false claims and associations made by the Rai and Limbus. Their attempts to insert themselves into the socio-political fabric of Assam have led to increased competition for resources and heightened ethnic tensions.
The Role of the Khas and Tharus
In Nepal, the Khas Aryas and Tharus have also been drawn into the web of fabricated associations. The Rai and Limbus, by claiming a historical connection with these communities, seek to expand their territorial claims and secure a place within the broader socio-political landscape of Nepal.
The Tharus, with their unique cultural practices and historical ties to the Terai region, have found little in common with the Rai and Limbus. The Tharus, primarily of Indo-Aryan descent, have distinct cultural and linguistic identities that do not align with the Kirat narrative. This further underscores the opportunistic nature of the fabricated Kirat identity.
Furthermore, the fabricated associations have led to tensions between the Tharus and the Madhesis, another significant community in the Terai region. The Rai and Limbus' attempts to assert their presence have exacerbated existing conflicts over land and resources, further destabilizing the region.
Consequences of Fabrication
The alleged fabrication of associations by the Rai and Limbus has significant implications for the regions they inhabit. These actions have led to increased competition for resources, heightened ethnic tensions, and challenges to the historical narratives of indigenous communities. The quest for legitimacy by the Rai and Limbus, while understandable from a socio-economic perspective, has often come at the expense of the established rights and identities of other tribes.
Reevaluating Historical Narratives
In light of these fabrications, it is essential to reevaluate the historical narratives surrounding the Rai and Limbus. While their need for stability and prosperity is valid, their methods of claiming indigeneity through fabricated associations raise ethical and historical concerns. Accurate historical documentation and respect for the identities of established indigenous groups are crucial in addressing these issues.
How Rai and Limbu Claim False Association with Rich Tribes to Legitimize Their Own False History
Throughout history, the Rai and Limbu communities have been known for their resourcefulness and adaptability in various regions of South Asia. However, there has been a growing concern that these communities have often engaged in fabricating associations with richer and more prosperous tribes such as the Newars, Lepchas, Bodos, Meches, Tharus, and others. This alleged fabrication is seen as an effort to legitimize their historical claims and to integrate more seamlessly into these regions. The complexities surrounding these claims raise significant questions about historical authenticity, ethnic identity, and inter-community relations.
Historical Background of Rai and Limbu
The Rai and Limbu communities trace their roots back to regions influenced by the Mongol expansions. Historical evidence suggests that they migrated from Sichuan, China, to Northern Tibet and eventually settled in parts of Nepal and Sikkim during the 13th century. Seeking refuge from the Mongol conquests, these groups were welcomed by the Sen Thakuris and the Lepcha tribe. Over time, they adapted to their new environments, forming unique cultural identities.
Despite their integration, the Rai and Limbu communities have faced challenges in asserting their legitimacy and historical roots in these new regions. This has led to efforts to fabricate connections with more affluent and historically established tribes.
The Quest for Legitimacy through Fabrication
One of the most significant accusations against the Rai and Limbu is their attempt to fabricate associations with the ancient Kirat people. This identity encompasses several indigenous groups of the Himalayan region, including the prosperous Newars, Lepchas, Bodos, Meches, and Tharus. By claiming a shared Kirat ancestry, the Rai and Limbu hope to embed themselves within the historical and cultural narratives of these regions.
The Newar Connection
The Newars, an affluent community with a rich cultural heritage in the Kathmandu Valley, have been a prime target for these fabricated associations. The Newars' sophisticated urban culture and historical prominence make them an attractive ally for the Rai and Limbu. By claiming historical ties to the Newars, the Rai and Limbu seek to elevate their own status and justify their presence in Newar territories.
However, the Newars, with their distinct linguistic and cultural identity, have little in common with the migratory history of the Rai and Limbu. This lack of historical evidence supporting the connection has led to skepticism and tension within the Newar community itself.
Encroaching on Lepcha and Bhutia Land
In Sikkim and parts of West Bengal, the Lepchas, considered the original inhabitants, have a rich cultural heritage. The Rai and Limbu have sought to align themselves with the Lepchas by claiming a shared Kirat ancestry. This association is used to justify their migration into Lepcha territories and assert their rights over land and resources.
This fabricated connection has exacerbated conflicts between the Lepcha and Bhutia communities in India. The Bhutias, another significant ethnic group in Sikkim, have been drawn into disputes over land and heritage, partly fueled by the Rai and Limbu' claims. These actions have contributed to ethnic discord and instability in the region.
Infiltrating Assam and Meghalaya
In Assam and Meghalaya, the Bodos, Meches, and other indigenous tribes have faced similar claims from the Rai and Limbu. By asserting a Kirat identity, the Rai and Limbu attempt to integrate into these regions and gain access to land and opportunities traditionally reserved for indigenous groups.
Recent ethnic violence in Assam, which has seen clashes between various tribal groups, has been partly fueled by the false claims and associations made by the Rai and Limbu. Their attempts to insert themselves into the socio-political fabric of Assam have led to increased competition for resources and heightened ethnic tensions.
The Role of the Khas and Tharus
In Nepal, the Khas Aryas and Tharus have also been drawn into the web of fabricated associations. The Rai and Limbu, by claiming a historical connection with these communities, seek to expand their territorial claims and secure a place within the broader socio-political landscape of Nepal.
The Tharus, with their unique cultural practices and historical ties to the Terai region, have found little in common with the Rai and Limbu. The Tharus, primarily of Indo-Aryan descent, have distinct cultural and linguistic identities that do not align with the Kirat narrative. This further underscores the opportunistic nature of the fabricated Kirat identity.
Furthermore, the fabricated associations have led to tensions between the Tharus and the Madhesis, another significant community in the Terai region. The Rai and Limbu attempts to assert their presence have exacerbated existing
किरातहरू, जो इतिहासका केही पाठहरूमा भील पनि भनिन्छ, प्राचीन काठमाडौं उपत्यकाका वासिन्दा थिए। यद्यपि, विभिन्न सामाजिक-राजनीतिक दबाबहरूको कारण, तिनीहरूलाई बसाइँ सर्न बाध्य पारियो। किरातहरूको ठूलो भाग काठमाडौंको पश्चिमतिर भागेर खसहरूसँग मिसियो। त्यस्तैगरी, किरातहरूको अर्को खण्ड पूर्वतर्फ बसाइँ सर्दै पूर्वी नेपाल र असमको क्षेत्रमा बसोबास गर्न पुग्यो। असममा, तिनीहरूले स्थानीय इन्डो-आर्यन असमिया जनसंख्यासँग अन्तरमिश्रण गरे, जसले तिनीहरूको सांस्कृतिक र भाषिक विरासतलाई अझै मिलायो। यस संयोजनले असमिया र नेपाली (खस) भाषाहरू बीचका साझा भाषिक र सांस्कृतिक विशेषताहरूमा योगदान पुर्यायो, जसले तिनीहरूको इन्डो-आर्यन सम्बन्धलाई प्रकाश पार्छ। यो संगै, भील भाषासँगका समानताहरूले पनि नेपाल र भारतका विभिन्न भागहरूबीचको ऐतिहासिक र सांस्कृतिक अन्तरक्रियालाई झल्काउँछ।
राई र लिम्बुहरू मूलतः मंगोलिया क्षेत्रबाट उत्पन्न भएका थिए। ७औं शताब्दीमा मंगोलियाबाट सिचुवान क्षेत्रमा बसाइँ सरेका थिए। मंगोल आक्रमणको कारणले गर्दा १३औं शताब्दीमा तिनीहरू उत्तर तिब्बततर्फ लागे। उत्तर तिब्बतबाट, अन्ततः तिनीहरू १६औं शताब्दीमा पूर्वी नेपाल र सिक्किमतर्फ शरणार्थीका रूपमा आइपुगे। त्यहाँ उनीहरूलाई लेप्चा भूस्वामीहरू र सेन राजाहरूले शरण दिएका थिए।
इमान सिंह चेम्जोङको प्रभाव: दार्जिलिङका प्रमुख इतिहासकार इमान सिंह चेम्जोङको प्रयासले यस कथालाई महत्वपूर्ण मोड दियो। चेम्जोङले किरात जातिको पहिचानलाई पुनः परिभाषित गर्न महत्त्वपूर्ण भूमिका खेले। उनले "किरात" शब्दलाई मूल किरातहरू मात्र नभएर राई र लिम्बु समुदायहरूलाई समावेश गर्न प्रयोग गरे। यो पुनःपरिभाषा रणनीतिक थियो, विशेषगरी सिक्किममा राजनीतिक शक्ति र प्रभाव हासिल गर्न यी समूहहरूलाई एकीकृत गर्नको लागि। चेम्जोङको कामले यी समूहहरूको राजनीतिक जुटानमा महत्त्वपूर्ण भूमिका खेले, जसले सिक्किममा चोग्याल सरकारको चुनौती र अन्ततः पल्टाउने प्रयास गर्यो। किरात पहिचानलाई समेटेर, चेम्जोङ र उनका समकालीनहरूले एकीकृत मोर्चा बनाउन सक्षम भए, तर यसले किरात जातिको मौलिक इतिहासलाई मेटाउन र परिमार्जन गर्नको लागि नेतृत्व गर्यो।
ऐतिहासिक मेटावटको पछाडिका राजनीतिक उद्देश्यहरू: किरात जातिको मौलिक इतिहासको मेटावट केवल ऐतिहासिक पुनर्व्याख्याको अनपेक्षित उपोत्पाद मात्र नभएर राजनीतिक उद्देश्यद्वारा प्रेरित योजनाबद्ध कार्य थियो। किरातको परिभाषालाई अन्य जातीय समूहहरूलाई समेटेर व्यापक बनाउने क्रममा, दार्जिलिङका इतिहासकारहरूले क्षेत्रको सामाजिक-राजनीतिक परिदृश्यमा थप शक्ति हासिल गर्न खोजे।
नेपाली भाषा, असमिया भाषा, र भील भाषाहरू बीचका समानताहरूले दुवै भाषाको इन्डो-आर्यन सम्बन्धलाई पुष्टि गर्छन्। किरात (भील) मानिसहरू काठमाडौं उपत्यकाबाट लिच्छविहरूको आक्रमणबाट भागेर खस र असमिया जनतासँग मिसिएको हुँदा, यी भाषाहरूमा धेरै साझा शब्दावली, व्याकरणिक संरचना, र उच्चारणका विशेषताहरू छन्। उदाहरणका लागि, असमिया र नेपाली भाषामा प्रयोग हुने धेरै शब्दहरू र तिनीहरूको उच्चारण शैली एकअर्कासँग मेल खान्छ। यसले भाषिक समानताहरूले किरात जातिको इन्डो-आर्यन जरा र तिनीहरूको सांस्कृतिक अन्तरक्रियालाई देखाउँछ।
Kirat bhaneko rai limbu matrai ho bhanne bhasya kina jabarjasti thoparna khojeko hola?
Full episode hernu
Rai, Limbu, tamang, gurung, magars,dhimal ... sabai tibetean-burmali bhasa bolne lai kirat bhaninxa
Faking the Kirat Identity
A Closer Look at Historical Manipulations
In recent years, the narrative surrounding the Kirat identity has come under intense scrutiny. Traditionally celebrated as a unifying force among the ethnic groups of Eastern Nepal, the Kirat identity-chiefly associated with the Limbus and Rais-has been revealed to be a historical fabrication. This manipulation was not only a bid for political power but also a campaign of ethnic antagonism against the indigenous Lepcha and Bhutia communities.
The Roots of the Kirat Identity
The term "Kirat" has been strategically adopted by certain groups to forge a collective identity. However, a detailed examination of historical and linguistic evidence challenges this constructed narrative. Before the intervention of scholars like Iman Singh Chemjong, the Limbus, Rais, and Yakkhas did not identify collectively as Kirats. The term was first popularized by Rana Bahadur Shah and later adopted by Prithvi Narayan Shah, who referred to the Limbus as descendants of Yehang, not Kirats. This indicates that the Kirat identity was a political construct, lacking genuine historical roots.
Lack of Archaeological Evidence
One of the most compelling arguments against the Kirat identity of the Limbus and Rais is the absence of archaeological evidence. Historical narratives promoted by the Kirat movement claim that these groups are ancient inhabitants of Eastern Nepal. However, unlike the well-documented presence of the Sen Thakuri dynasty and the Bhutia Chogyals-evidenced by numerous forts, palaces, and inscriptions such as those at Makawanpur Gadi, Udayapur Forts, and Bijaypur Durbar-there are no corresponding sites that can be attributed to Limbu or Rai rule.
No inscriptions, palaces, or forts bear witness to a long-term Limbu or Rai presence or governance in Eastern Nepal. This stark absence of material evidence contrasts with the rich archaeological heritage left by other ruling dynasties, underscoring the fabricated nature of the Kirat identity claims.
Genetic and Migration Evidence
Genetic studies have further debunked the Kirat narrative. Research indicates that the Limbus and Rais possess a high proportion of Mongolian DNA, distinguishing them from other Tibeto-Burman ethnic groups in South Asia. This genetic evidence suggests that these communities migrated from the Sichuan province in China to northern Tibet during the Mongol conquests and later settled in Eastern Nepal in the 17th century. This migration narrative contradicts the Kirat movement's assertion of an ancient and indigenous lineage in Eastern Nepal.
Political Manipulation and Ethnic Tensions
The Kirat identity was not merely a historical inaccuracy; it was a tool for political manipulation. Iman Singh Chemjong's efforts to foster a unified Kirat identity were driven by a desire to incite resistance and revolt against the Bhutia-dominated Kingdom of Sikkim. This movement was rooted in ethnic animosity and aimed at undermining the Bhutia community's historical and political significance in the region.
The rebranding of the Yakthung Mundhum to Kirat Mundhum was a deliberate attempt to erase the Bhutia community's contributions and presence. By promoting a false narrative of historical dominance, the Kirat movement sought to marginalize the Bhutias and assert an unsubstantiated claim to the region's heritage.
The Impact on Lepcha and Bhutia Communities
The Kirat movement’s divisive tactics extended beyond historical revisionism. By positioning the Limbus and Rais as the rightful heirs of the region, the movement marginalized the Lepcha and Bhutia communities, undermining their historical significance and contributions. This sowed seeds of discord and ethnic tension, fracturing what was once a more cohesive cultural tapestry in Eastern Nepal.
@@RavishPatel-q2t you better do research on topic of Patel😂.
@@RavishPatel-q2t This narrative is riddled with inaccuracies and is a blatant attempt to rewrite history. Let’s set the record straight with actual historical and archaeological evidence:
Historical and Cultural Roots:
The Kirat identity is not a recent invention. Ancient texts such as the Mahabharata and various Puranas, which date back centuries, mention the Kirat people, highlighting their long-standing presence in the region. These mentions predate any British influence or modern political constructs.
Scholarly Contributions:
Scholars like Iman Singh Chemjong did not fabricate the Kirat identity; they documented and preserved the rich history, language, and culture of the Kirat people based on extensive research, oral traditions, and historical evidence. Chemjong’s work provides a crucial link to understanding the true heritage of the Kirat communities.
Genetic and Migration Evidence:
Genetic studies do show a high proportion of Mongolian DNA among the Limbus and Rais, which reflects the complex migratory patterns of human history. However, this genetic diversity underscores the rich tapestry of human settlement in Eastern Nepal and does not negate the long-term presence of these communities in the region. Human migration and settlement are complex and multi-faceted processes, not simple binary events.
Archaeological Evidence:
The claim that there is no archaeological evidence of Limbu or Rai presence is false. Numerous smaller-scale archaeological finds, such as ancient tools, artifacts, and settlement remains, provide physical evidence of the long-standing presence of these communities. The absence of grandiose monuments does not imply the absence of a people; many indigenous cultures worldwide have rich histories that do not rely on large architectural remains.
The lack of monumental inscriptions or palaces attributed to the Limbus and Rais contrasts with the dominant narratives of other dynasties, which often had different cultural practices and left behind different types of evidence.
Political Manipulation and Ethnic Tensions:
The assertion that the Kirat identity was solely a tool for political manipulation is an oversimplification. While political dynamics have indeed influenced historical narratives, the Kirat identity has genuine cultural and historical roots. The efforts by Chemjong and others were aimed at preserving and promoting the cultural heritage of the Kirat people, not fabricating a history for political gain.
Impact on Lepcha and Bhutia Communities:
The Kirat movement aimed to preserve the history and culture of the Kirat people, not to marginalize other communities. The divisive tactics and ethnic tensions mentioned are often a result of broader political and social dynamics, not the preservation efforts of the Kirat identity. In fact, attempts to undermine the Kirat identity often come from dominant groups trying to impose their own cultural narratives.
Later Arrival of Brahmins:
Brahmins and other dominant groups arrived later in Eastern Nepal and have historically attempted to impose their culture and erode indigenous traditions. This historical context is crucial in understanding the current dynamics and the resistance by indigenous communities to preserve their heritage.
The narrative claiming the Kirat identity is a fabrication is nothing but an attempt to distort and undermine the rich history and cultural heritage of the Kirat people. The Kirat identity, including that of the Limbus and Rais, is well-documented and rooted in historical evidence. Any attempt to dismiss this as a mere political construct is not only inaccurate but also deeply disrespectful to the heritage of these communities. It’s time to acknowledge and respect the true history of the Kirat people.