Talk:Bihu

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

India: Assam High‑importance 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.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Assam (assessed as High-importance). Culture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CultureWikipedia:WikiProject CultureTemplate:WikiProject Cultureculture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bushu Dima was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 5 October 2020 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Bihu. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

i removed text copied directly from [1] Kingturtle 08:59 May 1, 2003 (UTC)

I have tried to get a reference to explain the Assamese Calendar to tie in with the timing of Bihu. Unfortunately my research was only preliminary and did not yield desirable results. In the meantime I have wiki linked "Assamese New Year" to the "Bengali Calendar" article. Can someone with more relevant details please point out valid references? Do look at Chaipau's observation in my talk page where he refers to [2] and the Bhaskarabda era. -Deepraj | Talk 08:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bihu is not a religious festival, its more of a cultural festival in nature. So I think the reference to Hinduism should be removed from the article. Raju Das 08:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajuonline (talk • contribs)

I agree with Raju Das. Bikram98 (talk) 17:02, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:The dancers in vibrant Bihu costume.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120117010132/http://www.efi-news.com/2012/01/celebrating-natures-bounty-magh-bihu.html to http://www.efi-news.com/2012/01/celebrating-natures-bounty-magh-bihu.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:17, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@2405:204:b103:6add:4c98:4abb:e7c9:abe1: Welcome to wikipedia. Please explain and discuss your concerns on this talk page. You added "indigenous" when the cited peer-reviewed scholarly sources do not support this. For example, the lead sentence cites Dalal's text published by Penguin: it makes no such mention. You also added some non-RS. For example, the 1932 published 'Deodhai Assam Buranji is old and non-WP:RS ' - these are not acceptable. Do you have a peer-reviewed scholarly source that discusses "indigenous" context of the Bihu festival? I would welcome it and collaborate with you to summarize it. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:27, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All sources added are scholarly sources. Bihu is a festival unique to Assam, hence indigenous. It is a harvest festival with roots in animistic faiths. It doesn't have anything to do with Hinduism. There is no such festival anywhere else. Have a look at the sources added before deleting sourced content. Deodhai Buranji is a literal translation of a historical document written in the 15th century, there is no doubt for rejecting such documents as these are plain translations, nothing to be researched.2405:204:B18E:B512:400C:B121:BB15:F592 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:49, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@2405:204:B18E:B512:400C:B121:BB15:F592 / hopping IP: The article already states the animistic links, based on two scholarly sources. It also summarizes the scholarly views of its syncretic links to Hinduism, as WP:NPOV guidelines require. The article must present both sides, because the scholarly sources do so. Please do not delete the mention of Hinduism/Hindus, as peer-reviewed sources such as Christian Roy's do verify this on pages 479-480. Please do not edit war to violate the NPOV guideline. The sources you added are without page numbers or lack any source. Please identify the page numbers for verification and add sources (if it is a non-English source, please see WP:NONENG guidelines and follow the "provide quotes and translations" part of it). Your cooperation is requested, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:20, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@2405:204:B18E:B512:400C:B121:BB15:F592 / hopping IP: I tried to locate some of your sources using google and other academic networks. I am unable to find these sources you added without ISBN / url / publisher / other details, and which you allege support your contribution: [1] Gogoi (2015), Baapoti Hahun Bihu; [2] Hakacham (2010), Origin of Bihu; [3] Gandhiya (2007), Jatiya Utsav Bihu. Please provide more citation details for further due diligence. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:24, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have retained the views about Hindus and Hiduism as per WP:NPOV guidelines along with adding proper sourced as well as quoted translated content directly from the books. Kindly, do not removed these well sourced information. Requesting your cooperation2405:204:B18E:B512:F55D:FB42:F57A:82C5 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:43, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@2405:204:B18E:B512:*:*:*:* / hopping IP: That is not my only concern. You haven't addressed the other concerns above. Please see my suggestions on how you can and please read the links. Thank you for adding the two quotes, one from Gogoi and another from Gandhiya. Please do provide ISBN or other equivalent information. This information will help WP:V effort, establish that it is not WP:SPS nor other questionable sources. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:10, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given all the edit-warring, which apparently started with the block of Shreeshan999Saikia (talk · contribs) for sockpuppetry, I've requested partial protection of the article. I strongly urge the ip's to stop edit-warring and address the policy concerns above. Basic verification is required, and changing the point of view without verification violates multiple content policies. Even if we are able to verify the refs with the content, if other refs differ, we may have to present multiple viewpoints. --Ronz (talk) 16:03, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some IP-users are trying to use HbE to claim the Tibeto-Burman origin of Bihu. Genetics should be used carefully, since it is a complex issue, and we should not end up mixing linguistics, and ethnology with genetics recklessly. Specifically, HbE cannot be used indiscriminately. Chaipau (talk) 21:17, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tibeto-Burmans are the true natives of the land. There are currently no Austro-asiatic lingusitic group in Assam. Except Tibeto-Burman Bodos, no other group has any trace of Austro-asiatic/Austric DNA which is clearly stated in the article. Bihu is the festival of mixed Austro-asiatic and Tibeto-Burman origin. Had it been just Austro-asiatic, tribes like Khasis and Jaintias would also celebrate similar festivals which is not the case. Spring harvest festivals are celebrated all throughout Asia including Tibet in this period of time. The reason Bihu falls in line with other festivals in Southeast Asia is because of Indian influence in the Southeast. There are harvest festivals in the same period celebrated in other parts of India too, nothing to do with Austro-asiatics.2405:204:B18C:908D:25D0:E718:F92B:5107 (talk) 16:31, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, not true. The aborigines are the Austorasiatic speaking people, and there are people who still speak such languages—Khasi language. The Khasi people have strong Y-chromosomal (and cultural) affinity with the Garos, who today speak a Tibeto-Burman language. But that does not mean all Tibeto-Burman people are aborigines. Furthermore, HbE frequency changes due to natural selection and exposure to Malaria. As a result, some Tibeto-Burman people have higher HbE frequency than the Khasis, even though the HbE mutation originated with the Austroasiatic people. Some examples and an explanation is given in Sikdar's review article. Furthermore, the tradition of Bihu is not uniform in all Tibeto-Burman groups—it is more prevalent in the eastern groups. Chaipau (talk) 17:11, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let me make my point clear here.

1. Tell me. Is there any Austro-Asiatic group presently living in Assam?? No. What is the definition of Aboriginals?? It means the natives or the oldest settlers of the land?? Which groups do you think are presently the oldest settlers of Assam?? Humans have all migrated from Africa and in time moved from one place to another. Austro-asiatics were the first to cross the Indian subcontinent and spread to SE Asia. Does that mean there are aboriginals of entire lands from Middleeast to SE Asia even if they aren't present in majority of these regions. Are they aboriginals of Punjab or Rajasthan?? Austro-Asiatics had once resided in Assam. But, after certain time they either migrated to regions like Southest Asia, Meghalaya or were absorbed by the Sino-tibetans(I will deal l with this in the later section). This makes the Sino-tibetans the natives or the oldest inhabitants of Assam as the remaining Austro-asiatics(not absorbed) are either in Meghalaya hills or SE Asia. Otherwise, we would have called Homo sapiens native solely to Africa because Asia was inhabitated by Homo-erectus.

2. Do the Khasis celebrate any festival similar to Bihu??No. Bihu has no relation being Austro-asiatic because it is a harvest festival which evolved after the arrival of Sino-tibetans similar to the others like Chinese, Burmese or Tibetans. Sure, some features like fertility rites are vestiges of Austro-asiatics, but the festival as a whole is present only among Bodo-kacharis.

3. Now, coming to the point of HbE mutation. Kindly, read the article properly. It clearly states that HbE mutation occured only among the Austro-asiatics in Northeast who later spread to Southeast Asia. The reason the frequency among Khasis is less compared to Bodo-Kacharis is a purely evolutionary one. As stated in the article Malaria is a disease of tropical humid climate. The Khasis migrated to higher altitudes and hence there was no need of the HbE mutation there. Therefore, over time the frequency decreased among Khasis. But on the other hand, the presence of higher frequency among Bodo-Kacharis(particularly Boros) show that a significant part of these groups indeed have Austro-asiatic origins. You can check for the HbE levels among Austro-asiatics like Khmer of Southeast Asia. They have almost the same frequency as the Bodo-Kacharis(0.3-0.5). Bodo-Kacharis isn't a group found somewhere outside Northeast. Their culture is a mix of Austro-asiatic and Sino-tibetan customs. These groups were formed in Northeast itself over thousands of years by absorbtion and intermixing.

4. Lastly, Bihu is not just a festival among the eastern Bodo-Kacharis. Kindly study about festivals like Baisagu, Bisu, Pisu, etc of Boros, Dimasas, Tripuris or Tiwas. They are almost identical to the rituals of Bihu. Merely, giving these festivals different names doesn't change the fact that all these are almost the same.

Bodo53.cn (talk)

Are you a WP:SOCK?

1. The Austro-asiatic people in the Brahmaputra valley did not disappear into thin air. They have left their genetic, linguistic and cultural legacies in the people of Brahmaputra valley, in the peoples who now speak Tibeto-Burman and Indo-Aryan languages.
2. Bihu is more prevalent among the Assamese of upper Assam than it is to the Bodos in northwest Assam. The Bihu comes mostly from the Chutiya people.
3. HbE is a very bad measure of Austro-asiatic content. (Sikdar 2016, p256) reports that the Totos from Assam-Bengal border increased their HbE frequency from 0.099 in 1962 to 0.438 in 2013. There was no sudden flowering of Austro-asiatic blood in these people in 50 years, just consanguineous marriages.
4. Sure, these are Bihus of the other western Bodo-Kachari groups, but they are not as important as among the eastern groups, such as Dimasas. The Bihu contribution of the Dimasas is well recorded.

Chaipau (talk) 21:51, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a salty Indo-aryan immigrant? Did you see me saying that Austro-Asiatics have vanished?? A large number of them have obviously migrated to SE Asia which is why we get to see the mutation among the Austro-Asiatic s there. The Mundas of East India donot have the mutation that is why it is believed that the mutation occurred in Northeast India and spread over to SE Asia along with the population.

The Info aryans are recent immigrants to the Northeast and by the time they arrived, the Austro-Asiatics of Assam were well intermixed within the Bodo-kacharis. Therefore, there is hardly any trace of the mutation among the Info Aryans. You are talking about Totos. Let me tell you a simple fact. Frequency depends on the number of individuals taken under consideration. It is a simple case of statistics. The higher thr number of cases used, the greater the chances of accurate results. The single case of Toto anamoly may be a case of varied sample populations or some other social factors. This single case cannot be used to dismiss an entire report recording data from researches done over 50 years. It is clearly stated in the article how the Tibeto-Burman natives are the only ones with Austro-Asiatic genes. None of the other populations including Indo-Aryans like Brahmins or Kalitas have any such mutations. Do you really want people to dismiss these obvious observations?? Had it been an erroneous indicator we would have seen random frequencies like higher percentages among some Indo-aryan groups or lower among Tibeto-Burmans. But, none of these observed in the report which clearly points to its accuracy.

Moreover, Chutias and Dimasas both belong to the same family of Bodo-kacharis. There is no separate contributions from any group. It's just that few rituals were preserved by some and few by others. Kindly, go through the Bihus of Boros. The rituals are almost similar to the mainstream/eastern Bihu. Mind you, the Khasis or Jaintias don't have any such festivals. So, the origin is clear. Bodo53.cn (talk)

Bihu origin history was falsly given here so i delete all.. In the name of bihu origin only chutiya history was given Krishna231 (talk) 17:58, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're going to need a better explanation than "it's false" to delete that much sourced material. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:00, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1. Matak is not ethnic group but rather a accumulation of different tribes. And Matak as a group was formed in 18th century so it is not related to the Chutia kingdom. 2. Also i have added citation in the proper place. 3. Bihu is not related to Hinduism. Bodos celebrate Bihu as Bwasigu and Dimasa celebrate it as Bishu dima, these group dont celebrate the festival as a HINDU FESTIVAL. 4. The Authencity of Chutia King Ratnadhwajpal is still in question Homogenie (talk) 01:33, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]