Talk:Kirati people

What do you mean by Tibetans are highly civilized people and Kirat are Kirat...actually the writer who tried to associate Lepchas with Kirat might have found similarity because when sikkim was not influenced by Buddhism its religion was shamanism but after sikkim was introduced Buddhism lots of its ethnic tribe converted to Buddhism and they try to consider themselves Tibetan.

Incorporation of Lepchas in the Kirat section is wrong
Lepchas are distinct ethnic community and are not Kiratis. Regs Barun Roy RE: They are related to kirantis just like goorung and newars. -Bigen182 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigen182 (talk • contribs) 13:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed move
(discussion copied from WP:RM)


 * Kirant → Kirat — 'Kirat' is the officially recognized spelling for the article Kirant. 'Kirat' is the widely used spelling at present in national and international documents. See also two social organizations Kirat Rai Yayokkha and Kirat Yakthung Chumlung. — --TheDreamSky (talk) 11:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Kirat has been moved to a Kirat_(disambiguation). --TheDreamSky (talk) 11:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I have my petition for this.Kirat is the real spelling,so Kirant must be replaced by Kirat.---Kirat Hang--- 16:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirat hang (talk • contribs)
 * I support this move as it is correct.--Dilipbantawa (talk) 17:13, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I support to the objective of this petition.--Rabi Khambu--90.210.175.175 (talk) 02:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

The article "Kirat" is the umbrella article that includes subtopics such as Kirat people, Kirat culture, Kirat history, and other similar topics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhilung (talk • contribs) 19:47, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Kirati_people → Kirat (Undo previous move of "Kirat" to "Kirati people")

Unacceptable Hypotheses for me
In the article please note the following lines with their respective references:

In their tradition, they claim migrating from China(Yunnan) (via North Burma and Assam) and settling in Nepal.[1]P. 33 Nepalese Culture: Annual Journal of NeHCA By Tribhuvana Viśvavidyālaya Nepālī Itihāsa, Saṃskr̥ti, ra Purātatva Śikshaṇa Samiti, Tribhuvana Viśvavidyālaya

The Kirat Veda describes them as coming from Mongolia via China.[2]The Administrative System of Nepal: From Tradition to Modernity By Hem Narayan Agrawal

Are the above sources (research works?) from which the references are derived based on any genetic or any extensive studies? It is not clear that 1.which clan/tribe/faction/confederation of the Kirats in their tradition     claim that they migrated from China 2.Kirat Veda (written? or as dictated by the priests) belonging to which clan/tribe/faction/confederation of the Kirats mentions that they came from Mongolia.

I'd be highly obliged if someone edited the article with more reliable references.

Suman Rai Ugrabadi (talk) 11:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure about kirat veda etc. and can not give references apart from Prof. Dor Bahadur Bista's famous book Fatalism and development and Prof Suniti kumar Chatterjee's famous book Kirata-Jana-Krti.Both say Kirats came from east along mid-hills(not high mountains)via Assam along with their pigs in ancient times. We do not have to be rocket scientists to understand the fact that there are dozens of ethnic groups in Yunnan,North Burma and north- east India who look like kirats,live like kirats,dance like kirats,speak tibeto-burmese languages and love pork and raksi. I think Mongolia is too far away.

Thanks

Kirawa Rai —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.5.193 (talk) 20:33, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Kirat are not Tibetan or Tibetan descendants. Tibetans are highly civilised people with rich culture and great history but Kirat are kirat, not Tibetan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khasnepali (talk • contribs) 10:52, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I also find this hypothesis unacceptable, if Kirat people inhabited and ruled Kathmandu valley for over 1000 years then they most likely came from the North and not from the East. Only later they got pushed Eastwards out of Kathmandu valley.

It seems to me theory of Eastern migration is purely based on convenience and without any competent research. As someone have mentioned above that the people of North East India, parts of Burma and China looks like us and eats like us. That is true but not the whole truth because this is just a geographical traits, the topography of all these lands are very similar and thus the animal they would eat would be similar as well. Just like how the Turks of modern Turkey now look and eat food similar to their neighbours but that doesn't mean their origin was from that part of the world, as we know the Turks migrated from Central Asia. What if Kirats are the same? As for raksi, I believe it came from Kirats. Also rice wine is prevelant throughout Asia so these geographical traits cannot be the evidence.

One has to look at the cultural traditions in order to trace back the origin, for example in Mongolia before they drink their homemade alcohol they flick off the liquid using their thumb and third finger as an offering to the nature, just like how Limbu people do.

We cannot be incompetent and be lazy and just accept what the foreigners have labelled Kirats. We must research our own history and find a lasting proper conclusion without any biases. Nepalpatriot (talk) 04:22, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Ashoka was not a kirat
Since when did Ashoka become a Kirat? The whole section is malicious and subject to removal. The nepalis are going far in their new found nationalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akuap2001 (talk • contribs) 13:19, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Fantasy over Fact
Who on earth has been writing such fiction on this page? Nepal is not some sharp divide from India so utterly distinct from India and its Hindus. The Nationalist undertones are so very blatantly obvious. The Kiratas are not factually the first earliest inhabitants of Nepal. In fact there are references to Gopalas and Abhiras inhabiting the Kathmandu valley who were subsequently supplanted by Kirata tribes. http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query2/r?frd/cstdy:@field%28DOCID+np0014%29

Balinese Hinduism has little if any connection with the Kiratas. There is no direct comparison. Balinese Hinduism was propopgated by the Javanese who earlier adopted the faith from South India. Also Manjusri is a known Bodhisattva in India. The fact that a few Balinese may worhip the diety has everything to do with Hindu-Buddhist synctretism in Sumatra-Java-Bali and nothing to do with Nepal and north India which had no direct contact with those people.--86.6.192.54 (talk) 19:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Article is a bluff
This whole article is written by a single person within one day. Does not have total truth whatsoever. No references nothing. Too many claims that are false. WP: Puffery. I propose deletion or major rewording and reorganization.HasperHunter (talk) 01:08, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Requested move to Kirat

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Although there appear to be a greater number of support !votes, I have concerns about *puppetry, especially regarding the last two comments. Also, 's comment that we do not typically use a solitary adjective as an article title carries more weight with existing community consensus. &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 14:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Kirati people → Kirat – This move was requested by User:Dhilung at WP:RM as a technical move. However the page is now at its third title in six months. It *was* at Kirat, then was moved to Kiranti people and is now at Kirati people. Consensus ought be sought for the best title. I have no opinion. EdJohnston (talk) 01:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * For background, see for an old move discussion from 2008. EdJohnston (talk) 01:45, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - Kirat people gets considerably more GB hits than Kiranti people/Kirant people/Kirata people. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Kirat *was* the umbrella article for a long time that included subtopics about Kirat people, Kirat religion, Kirat culture, Kirat history, and other similar topics. However, recently, without any discussion/consensus in the talk page, it was moved to "Kiranti people" and later to "Kirati people". "Kirat" is an identity that collectively represents its people, religion, culture, language, etc. Please refer for the discussion regarding the proper spelling ( 'Kirat' vs. 'Kirant' ). Dhilung (talk) 11:45, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose Kirat - Your comment is evidently correct on spelling of Kirat vs Kirant. However we don't normally have umbrella topics that have "Basque" as the umbrella for Basque people, Basque Country etc. Kirat people is more natural than "Kirat X" In ictu oculi (talk) 12:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I repeat my argument again. Kirat does not just represent people, but more than 30 different languages (see), independent religion (see Religion in Nepal), historic kingdoms (see Kirat Kingdom ), etc. The title 'Kirat people' does not include all the perspectives for the article. Dhilung (talk) 18:41, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * But Dhilung what is "Kirat" if it is not people?
 * What would the equivalent be for "French"? We have French people French country French language But we don't have "French" except as French (disambiguation)
 * We already have 3 articles for Kirat people and Kirat language and Kirat Kingdom (plus the Kirata) and Kirat (disambiguation) . talk) 19:12, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I support the move of the page to original Kirat which encompasses the greater of Kirat Culture,Religion,Language than just People.We are not talking about particular people and their trait. Kirat is a whole living culture.---Kirat Hang--- 12:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I too support requested move from Kirati people to Kirat. As the terms like Goths or Huns, Kirat also represents its culture, history, legacy and more or less anything that is related to Kirati people. 'NHkirat (talk) 15:57, 21 December 2012 (UTC)'
 * I support the move of the page to original 'Kirat' in order to justify the proposed term with a much broader meaning and honor which the current one seems to have completely failed to do.---Rabi Rai--- 11:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabi rai (talk • contribs)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merge discussion at Talk:Kirata
I added support there since that's how the merge tag was set up, but actually this page is older and more complete, the merge should probably go in this direction, and much of Kirata is duplicated at Kirata Kingdom. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:14, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I support the merge of Kirata in to Kirat. Kirat, and Kirata are simply the same entity with different romanized spellings of the word (किरात) /kirɑːt/. The argument that Kirata encompasses beyond Kirat is simply incorrect. Dhilung (talk) 17:39, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kirati people. 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/20070418141058/http://www.kiratisaathi.com/ to http://www.kiratisaathi.com/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Kirata, Kirat people page should be same
I am so disappointed to see the fake claims of Kirat people and their identity. I am sure it is edit by non kirat people who is trying to create false claim about being Kirat.

Rai, Limbu, Sunuwar and Yakka are the true origin Kirat or kirata people and always will be. There was one kirat tribe but after kirat kingdom was defeated. They form 2 groups Limbu and Rai(form 2 group made them weak). Sunuwar and Yakka are separated from Rai. Some still use Rai as their surname. Before formation of Nepal, the place they live in Eastern Nepal was broken and ruled by many kings in each district. ( they were alreadly weakest) They are ancient inseparable brothers. They are living together ever since formation of kirata kingdom. True kirata people practice and respect Kirat mundhum like their ancestors did. Ancient Kirat in books are known for great hunting skills, excellent archery and bravery. Even today they are in Gurkha army for their hard work,brave and loyal fought during world war even risking their lifes. Kirat people are working in security guards, army in many countries. Kirat may leave their places but never surround to their enemies. There are so many false ethinic groups claiming to be kirat but they are not and will never be.

Kirat people and kirata must be in one page. Risingsun121 (talk) 13:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

I need answers
From what source supports Bodo-Kirati or Kachari, Sherpas Paleo-Newar population and North Indian Mongolian ethnic group to be Kirats ? Because they have small eyes ?

Risingsun121 (talk) 14:56, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

The term Kirat, Kirat, Kirata
There many names used when describing one kirati people and Ianguage. These many names has brought confusion among Kirati people.

'Kirat' is the original term they used to describe such as "Kirat king " "Kirat kingdom" "Kirat culture" "Kirat dresses" whereas "Kirati" is used as to describe of its people, their cuisine and language.

Other given names (1)'Kirant' is Nepali language used by shah kings only after formation of Nepal to describe Kirati people. (2)'Kirata' is from Ancient Mahabarata(India), a word used to describe Kirati people. Mahabharata often add 'a' at the last when they refering to people. Example: They used Cina or Cinas word which means Chinese people in Mahabharata. This page need fixation. Risingsun121 (talk) 02:19, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Keraites in Mongolia
There is mention of Kirat people & their history in Mahabharat, Nepal, India & modern Mongolia. Linguistically, culturally they are similar. Did they originate from Indian Tribe & migrated towards Mongolia thousands of years back?

The Keraites (also Kerait, Kereit, Khereid; Mongolian: Хэрэйд) were one of the five dominant Mongol or Turco-Mongol tribal confederations (khanates) in the Altai-Sayan region during the 12th century.

I think some DNA Analysis will help establish 10000 years old relation of the tribes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.196.34.144 (talk) 21:32, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keraites — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.196.34.144 (talk) 21:19, 4 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I'll leave a message on your User talk page that you probably just confused two ethnicities based on accidental similarity in spelling. Beyond that, you shouldn't be using the Talk page in order to push your personal musings; Wikipedia is not a forum for general discussion about the article topic. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 07:20, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:51, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sunuwar koich.png

Page should be Semi-protected
Seems like this is an overdue Nepalpatriot (talk) 05:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Is
Hi 2601:644:1:1CF0:E8D9:B563:F547:34C6 (talk) 23:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Fantasy?

 * "It is said that the Khukuri [weapon] was first used by Kiratis who came to power in Nepal before the Lichchhavi age, around the 7th century."


 * 1) Unsourced.
 * 2) C7 BCE or CE?
 * 3) According to enWiki, the Licchavi kingdom existed between c. 400-750 CE, so C7 is not BEFORE that.
 * 4) The republic of the Licchavi tribe existed c. 7th century – c. 468 BCE.

Unclear what era was meant, none of the two option fits, unsourced. All fantasy? Arminden (talk) 22:00, 4 November 2023 (UTC)