Talk:Vikramaditya/Archive 1

Inscription in the Kaaba in Mecca
'A reference to king Vikramaditya comes in an inscription found in the Kaaba in Mecca. The text of the inscription, supposedly found inscribed on a gold dish hung inside the Kaaba shrine, is said to have recorded in a volume known as Sayar-ul-Okul (meaning, memorable words) treasured in the Makhtab-e-Sultania library in Istanbul, Turkey.

Following are the Arabic wording of the inscription reproduced in Roman script:

"...Itrashaphai Santu Ibikramatul Phahalameen Karimun Yartapheeha Wayosassaru Bihillahaya Samaini Ela Motakabberen Sihillaha Yuhee Quid min howa Yapakhara phajjal asari nahone osirom bayjayhalem. Yundan blabin Kajan blnaya khtoryaha sadunya kanateph netephi bejehalin Atadari bilamasa- rateen phakef tasabuhu kaunnieja majekaralhada walador. As hmiman burukankad toluho watastaru hihila Yakajibaymana balay kulk amarena phaneya jaunabilamary Bikramatum..." (Sayar-ul-okul, pg. 315).

Rendered in free English the inscription reads as follows:

"...Fortunate are those who were born (and lived) during king [Vikramaditya’s] reign. He was a noble, generous dutiful ruler, devoted to the welfare of his subjects. But at that time we Arabs, oblivious of God, were lost in sensual pleasures. Plotting and torture were rampant. The darkness of ignorance had enveloped our country. Like the lamb struggling for her life in the cruel paws of a wolf we Arabs were caught up in ignorance. The entire country was enveloped in a darkness so intense as on a new moon night. But the present dawn and pleasant sunshine of education is the result of the favour of the noble king Vikramaditya whose benevolent supervision did not lose sight of us - foreigners as we were. He spread his sacred religion amongst us and sent scholars whose brilliance shone like that of the sun from his country to ours. These scholars and preceptors through whose benevolence we were once again made cognisant of the presence of God, introduced to His sacred existence and put on the road of Truth, had come to our country to preach their religion and impart education at king Vikramaditya’s behest..."

However, the book (from which the above quotation comes) remains a controvertial issue, with some Muslim communities having a skeptical view about the existance of the book. Which makes it uncertain if the so called golden dish was present inside or associated with the shrine (in its modern sense) as claimed. It may be noted though that the era of Vikramaditya, if placed in the 1st Century BC, makes him predate the origins of Islam by a few centuries, and hence, there may not be any direct association between the king and Islam.'

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.170.10.119 (talk) 08:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

This claim is a universally rejected piece of propaganda from P.N. Oak who many academics rejected and openly call a crackpot. P.N. Oak mostly resorted to claiming a giant "conspiracy" to explain why all his right wing Hindutva promoted nonsense was rejected by all real scholars, historians, and academia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P.N._Oak

The refutation to Oak's claims about the Kaaba are here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P.N._Oak#Kaaba_Theory:_Vedic_origins

Oak derives a claim of a "Vedic past of Arabia" based on an alleged inscription mentioning a supposed legendary Indian king Vikramāditya that Oak claims was found inside a dish inside the Kaaba. According to Oak, the text of the alleged "inscription" is taken from an anthology of poetry entitled Sayar-ul-Okul,[24] compiled in 1742 on the orders of a "Sultan Salim" (the actual Sultan at the time being Mahmud I), and first edited in 1864 in Berlin. Oak goes on to state that the anthology is kept in the Makhtab-e-Sultania Library in Istanbul, Turkey. No one else outside of Oak or his followers has every mentioned either the alleged inscription or the alleged Ottoman book Oak claims was written in 1742 CE leading many to conclude that Oak made them up himself out of whole cloth. Also not only is there no evidence of the supposed book Sayar-ul-Okul that Oak claims (and which many believe is a fake book title Oak himself again made up, as all search results for this supposed book title simply redirect to Oak and his Hindutva followers and different websites of there's) there is also no known library with the title "Makhtab-e-Sultania" in Istanbul (again much less having the book or a book containing the supposed information that Oak alleges exists). Oak further claims, with no source, that Muhammad was born to a Hindu family.[25]

Oak's claims based on the Sayar ul-Okul (a supposed book which only Oak mentions and most believe Oak made up himself along with the supposed "inscription" on a dish he alleges as well) have since been propagated by author, speaker and Hindutva activist Stephen Knapp alias Sri Nandan-ananda Das.[26] Knapp is a writer and a disciple of Swami Prabhupada, founder of the International Society of Krishna Consciousness; however, he is not known to be an expert on the pertinent Arabic works. Historylover4 (talk) 12:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Greatness
The section Greatness has a sentence that reads "His Bethala Pachisi and Dwathrimshati are popular stories about him." Later, in the section "The Legend of Vikramaditya", the works referred to are 'Vetala Panchvimshati' and 'Simhasana-Dwatrimshika'. It is unclear whether the names in the section "Greatness" are alternate accepted names for the works referred to in the latter section. This could be clarified with a citation or reference. -- Beta - Talk 08:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Purpose
This site is saying

'''This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. '''

So you are saying articles should include original research as well as imaginary info.If it contains that THEN WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS SITE? 14.99.31.107 (talk) 17:27, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Quote is too long
The quotation in Vikramaditya is far too big and may even breach our fair use terms. Please can someone who is familiar with the story have a go at paraphrasing the thing. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 11:38, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Historical Information
In addition to all the stories and legends, Vikramaditya was a real king. However, there is no objective historical information, corroborated by history, records, inscriptions, and archaeology. It would be great if someone inserted this in sometime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.15.20.154 (talk) 07:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Coin
I've removed this - only one short article mentions this and talks about "Maharaja Vikramaditya ShodhPeeth" - can't find anything about this person or group, and the name itself suggests it isn't impartial. Dougweller (talk) 19:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Needs Cleanup : Mythology or History
All the content written in this article reads like mythology with divine birth to legendary stories. Also he is mentioned as the second son of Ujjain's King Gandharvasena of the Paramara dynasty but the Paramara dynasty started in 800 C.E. while his birth was in 1st century B.C.! Hrihr (talk) 19:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Vikramāditya and Yashodharman Vikramaditya - Same or different?
The nine jewels mentioned in his court doesn't find any mention around first century B.C. But further exploring their biographies, it could be found that Varahamihira was one of the jewel of Yashodharman Vikramaditya. The birth of famous poet Kalidasa is also speculated at the same time. Also according to some scholars the birth of Amarasimha was near 6th Century. Vararuci birth too was around that of Yashodharman. Also both Kings ruled the Malwa region of central India. So it is quite probable that both of these rulers are same. Therefore more research is needed to find out the relationship if there is any. Hrihr (talk) 19:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC) Hrihr (talk) 13:33, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose that Vikramāditya be merged into Yashodharman Vikramaditya. The two personalities overlap each other quite well due to number of factors and after searching it further, I'm now pretty convinced that these two are same. Like the nine jewels mentioned in Vikramāditya's court doesn't find any mention around first century B.C but these personalities were present in the court of Yashodharman. Also after further exploring their biographies, it could be found that Varahamihira was one of the jewel of Yashodharman Vikramaditya. The birth of famous poet Kalidasa is also speculated at the same time. Also according to some scholars the birth of Amarasimha was near 6th Century. Vararuchi birth too was around that of Yashodharman. Also both Kings ruled the Malwa region of central India. Hence I'm proposing to merge these articles. Hrihr (talk) 20:05, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Different
These two kings are different,Vikramaditya was king in 1st century BC but Yashodharman was king in the early part of 6th century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VibrantBabhan (talk • contribs) 07:39, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Ujjain
I think it's interesting that no where does the inscription mention polytheism, but seems to promote monotheism. Archaeology from Ujjain has unearthed symbols resembling a cross. Vikramaditya's stepbrother Bhartrihari name is similar to Balthasar, the way Gondophares is realted to Gaspar. He is known for wise sayings. All are from the 1st century B.C. - 1st century A.D. era. I wouldn't be surprised if the Kaaba would be returned to the True Faith of Abraham by fellow monotheists (Indo-Parthian Zoroastrians?) looking for the expected Messiah (Saoshyant). Gondophares and India is also associated with visits from the apostle Thomas, who may have been Jesus' brother Jude (Judas Thomas).Barney Hill (talk) 22:26, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Rubbish
There's a difference between Vikramaditya and Chandragupta II, the real Vikramaditya didn't had navaratnas Kunal Singh Solanki Nathawat (talk) 05:57, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vikramaditya. 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/20160617064610/http://dli.serc.iisc.ernet.in:8080/handle/2015/131352 to http://dli.serc.iisc.ernet.in:8080/handle/2015/131352

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) 10:19, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Kaaba Theory: Vedic origins
In a 13-page pamphlet titled Was Kaaba a Hindu Temple?, Oak derives a claim of a "Vedic past of Arabia" based on an inscription mentioning the legendary Indian king Vikramāditya that Oak claims was found inside a dish inside the Kaaba. According to Oak, the text of the alleged inscription is taken from the page 315 of an anthology of poetry entitled Sayar-ul-Okul (Se’-arul Oqul meaning the memorable words),[28] compiled in 1742 on the orders of a "Sultan Salim" (the actual Sultan at the time being Mahmud I, sultan Selim III lived from 1761 to 1808) from the earlier work of prophet Muhammed's uncle Amr ibn Hishām (poetic name "Abu al-Ḥakam" or ابوالحكم meaning the "Father of wisdom") who had refused to convert to Islam, and, first modern version published in 1864 in Berlin and a subsequent edition was published in Beirut in 1932.[29] Oak goes on to state that the anthology is kept in the "Makhtab-e-Sultania Library" (Galatasaray Mekteb-i Sultani or Galatasaray Imperial School) in Istanbul in Turkey, which is now also known as Galatasaray Lisesi school.[30] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:4900:1049:CCF9:8CF6:2895:283F:82A4 (talk) 14:47, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Portraying Vikramditya as Mythological Character.
Portraying Vikramditya as Mythological Character. This is wrong. To glorify other characters this is commonly adopted system by historians of other countries and unfortunately of our country. Especially lefties. Possible1919 (talk) 07:10, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 July 2022
Please add SAMRATH before their name 2409:4043:2117:DF7F:308:7E98:3E39:EAA6 (talk) 06:20, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Why? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:59, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 July 2022
I have Images For Vikramdityas Empire 2405:204:578E:1E96:0:0:1DE7:C8AC (talk) 14:17, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:42, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Please Add Vikramaditya's Empire was 25,167,309 km²
Please Add Vikramaditya Empire was 25,167,309 km² And He Ruled From 70Bce To 4 Ce President Chad (talk) 14:29, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Area captured
He covered 45 million square km of area In whole Asia 🌏 2409:4063:2288:1B48:0:0:BCE:28A1 (talk) 02:46, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Vikram aditya emperor Map
Mr.google owner you must be add Vikram aditya emperor Map.if you get get all details about Vikram aditya. You just not give vikram aditya emperor Map Area Photo One Islamic youtuber telling is Vikram aditya emperor is a myth. Please add in Vikram aditya wikipedia Vikram aditya emperor map 103.48.104.171 (talk) 03:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 August 2022
2409:4041:8E83:80EB:EE25:9453:ACA6:98ED (talk) 17:11, 29 August 2022 (UTC)I want Add The photo of Great Empire of samrat vikramaditya
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:23, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2023
Mathsmaster707 (talk) 08:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello I would like to edit this page because there is a slight mistake in his name .I have noticed that he has a different name after Vikramaditya because in some books they refer it as Chetana Vikramaditya and Maharaja Vikrama Chetanaditya
 * Hello. Can you state exactly which books you found this usage in, so that we can use them as sources to support this claim? Please ping me when/if you respond, so that I can add it to the article. – small jars 12:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 February 2023
223.190.167.157 (talk) 08:49, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Vikramaditya's son name was Devabhakta not Vikramsena. Please fix this
 * Source? Slatersteven (talk) 10:37, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because there are many Hindu nationalists who believe that believe that the Vikramaditya Empire existed, but didn't. --ThePartOfLife123 (talk) 04:51, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Its not been nominated for speedy deletion. But I see you did so.Slatersteven (talk) 10:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Editing of Vikramaditya page
ScienceNerd1995timetraveller (talk) 10:46, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 June 2023
In ancient times, Indian mothers used to tell stories to their children about the name of a king called Vikramaditya. At that time, the name Vikramaditya was very popular. But King Vikramaditya was fictional. At that time, ancient Indian mothers used to tell their children that King Vikramaditya ruled the whole of Asia. But nothing like that. Indian people of that time named Chandragupta II as Vikramaditya. The name of Chandragupta II's kingdom was Gupta Empire. This Gupta Empire was not so big. Youshan Ahmed (talk) 07:23, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  07:58, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2023
Change legendary king to ambitious king 192.23.22.185 (talk) 20:16, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: "legendary" in this context is not referring to their accomplishments, but rather that they are described in legends. Tollens (talk) 20:45, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Vikramaditya
It’s fictional king Youshan Ahmed (talk) 07:45, 15 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. SKAG123 (talk) 03:15, 9 August 2023 (UTC)