It is a Popular Belief that Chandragupta Maurya was a Shudra By Birth.

Truth, As Always, is something else.

#Thread

First, we examine Foreign Accounts.

Curtius ans Diodous Agree that "Present (Nanda) King was a Son of Barber" (shudra Himself).

Furthermore, we also Get to Know that, "He was a Man of Quite worthless Character"

Moving on, Puranas Specifically Mention that Nanda rulers Were Shudra.

It is also Mentioned that "They were Immoral people. The Founder of Nanda Dynasty is mentioned as Offspring of Sudra women."

Furthermore, Puranas Inform Us that, "Previous Shishunaga kings were Kshatriyas who were Treacherously Displaced By Nandas."

It is Further mentioned that "This race of Irreligious Kings would be Uprooted by a Certain Dvija (Chanakya)."

Furthermore, if a Brahmin (Chanakya) Consecrated Chandragupta Maurya as King, It seems Highly Improbable that He'd Choose A person of Low Birth for The Job.

Chanakya Himself Supporter the Varnashrama Dharma, which Rules Out Royalty for Shudras.

It is Quite Absurd to Think That Chanakya Would Dethrone One Shudra, to make Another Shudra, a King.

So, If Chandragupta was a Kshatriya, Then Who Popularised Him as a Shudra King?

Firstly, a Commentator, in order to explain the word "Maurya", ASSUMED that "Maurya was the Son of Mura, a Wife of Nanda King"

It is Completely FALSE.

You CANNOT derive the Word "Maurya" From Mura.
The derived word would be, "Maureya".

A 17th Century Commentator of MudraRakshas, Dhundhiraja, INVENTED a Women named "Mura" as Mother of Chandragupta.

As Last evidence, 3 Buddhist Works, Mahavamsa, Digha Nikaya, Divyavadana, ALL point to fact that Chandragupta was a KSHATRIYA.

To summarize the Thread,

> Chandragupta Maurya was a KSHATRIYA.

>Nandas were SHUDRAS and IMMORAL People.

> It is a Very Recent Creation That Chandragupta was a Shudra, which is, Of course, WRONG.

***END OF THREAD***