Talk:Mihirakula

Untitled
'''His name is from Sanskrit and he is a known follower of Siva. In Sanskrit his name means from the clan of sun. Mihra in Sanskrit is Sun and Kula Clan. Thus he was a Suryavanshi Kshatriya (Rajput). 19:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mihirakula. 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 tag to http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/dictionary/define?tid=760
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130418175218/http://chronica.swhu.tk/huns/histwhitehuns.htm to http://chronica.swhu.tk/huns/histwhitehuns.htm

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

'''He was a staunch follower of Lord Shiva. In Sanskrit Mihira means sun and Kula is clan. Thus he was a Suryavanshi in the Indian tradition.'''

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:13, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Mihirakula Iranian PoV Pushing
User at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HistoryofIran, is bent on making this claim:-

The name "Mihirakula" is *most likely* of Iranian origin and may have the meaning "Mithra's Begotten", as translated by Janos Harmatta.

The pre-existing Alternative (and the most obvious to anyone literate in Sanskrit across the length and breath of Indian subcontinent):-

"Cognates are also known from Sanskrit sources. He was a follower of Lord Shiva. In Sanskrit Mihir means Sun and Kula is Clan ."

Was removed on by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ms_Sarah_Welch

As such a completely Iranian narrative of a well known "antagonistic figure" of Indian history, operating his whole life and career in South Asia is pushed.

The statements "Cognates are also..." being removed are a grave mistake. The most conclusive work on Huna presence in India :- The Hūṇas in India, Volume 58 by Upendra Thakur states this on page Page 133:- "This name was later on Sanskritised into 'Mihirakula' which is also mentioned by Yuan Chwang." Direct source:-

Another critically acclaimed work:- Political history of India from the earliest times to the 7th century A.D. by J. Filliozat states this on Page 180:- "However, it is possible that Mihirakula is to be interpreted as meaning "of the family of Mitra"... "

Moving on, what is actually controversial is that a User devoted to "History of Iran" by their own admission is obsessed to the point of irrationality on stating *most likely* in:- "The name "Mihirakula" is *most likely* of Iranian origin and may have the meaning "Mithra's Begotten", as translated by Janos Harmatta."

On being demanded and allowed to be left unchallenged to keep it so *after* citing the exact statement from the so-called source:-

[Janos Harmatta, "The Rise of the Old Persian Empire: Cyrus the Great," AAASH Acta Antiqua Acadamie Scientiarum Hungaricae 19, 197, pp. 4-15.]

The User reverts first without any statement:- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mihirakula&diff=876324348&oldid=876324104

Then on being demanded to give the exact phrase from the source, states this, playing the poor comprehension card to obfuscate the matter and reverts it again. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mihirakula&diff=876324681&oldid=876324608 Statement:- "it literally has a source on it, stop pov pushing or you will eventually get blocked, thanks"

An obvious obfuscation play, when clearly the citation *from* the source was requested, the User resorts to a rookie Class-Individual Fallacy in comprehension unable to grasp that Citations are *within* Sources and that Sources by themselves do not give the literary freedom to declare "most likely* on any single theory unless the source also states the same clearly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mihirakula&diff=876326179&oldid=876325624

Here the base crass unprofessional nature gets exposed:- rv, removal of sourced information; why would a random ip with 5 edits know anything about wikipedia rules? lemme guess, your account got banned and now you're here pov pushing? removed what sanskrit origin? what are you honestly on about? stop trolling

As such the situation clear from this much ado about nothing. Logic Fallacies, Mudslinging, and PoV Pushing galore. 103.239.169.141 (talk) 11:30, 2 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I requested temporary page protection so you and this IP-user can solve content dispute here. IP-user opened this section and waiting for your reply. --Wario-Man (talk) 14:17, 2 January 2019 (UTC)


 * A user with a battleground mentality that is IP-hopping and uses 'sources' like Britannica and a dictionary, I don't think there's more to be said than that. If he had acted properly/mature from the start then perhaps I wouldn't have reverted him. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:23, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * If source #13 mentions Iranian origin of the name, then what's the issue? Your thoughts on this? --Wario-Man (talk) 14:39, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I dunno if it does or not, but I'm certainly not gonna the trust the word of a random IP that starts out his first removal of information with the sentence 'removed bullshit PoV'. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:48, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * If the source support Iranian, then text should remain there. Iranica says this: The name Mihirakula possibly represents a Sanskritization of a Turkish designation mihr-qul “slave of Mithra,” a familiar theophoric formation. --Wario-Man (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Sadly HistoryofIran continues to display a immature dismissal approach to every attempt at conversing to him directly. Random IP, is touted repeatedly from a imaginary high ground of experience and seasoning, when this user clearly has no understanding of Ad Hominem basic Logic bound discussion. Battleground mentality along with other obfuscation bilge allegations are hurled at me, when this user froths rabidly at the mere removal of *PoV*s "Most Likely" in a statement which is otherwise totally unmolested. Has even a single letter regarding Iranian connection to Mihirakula been removed? Also, Encyclopedia Britannica has been considered a classic source across Wikipedia. There is no count of how many statements across Wikipedia have been sourced to Britannica. Giving the Sanskrit dictionary as a link was to explain the "Sanskritization" to the laymen readers. The source does NOT mention "most likely" at all. The onus of proving it does is on the revert-er not the original editor. 103.239.169.141 (talk) 11:50, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Britannica is not a reliable source though, that has been confirmed many times. Also stop acting like such a hostile child, you're lucky that you haven't been blocked yet. Looking at your POV-pushing edits/reverts and its summaries, you clearly aren't new here, I wouldn't be surprised if you were the IP of a banned account. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:46, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * "A name like Toramana and his son's name Mihirakula interpreted by North Iranian (and not by Western Iranian) are clearly Iranian." - H.W. Bailey (1983). Culture of the Sakas in Ancient Iranian Khotan. p. 81
 * - LouisAragon (talk) 15:18, 10 January 2019 (UTC)