![]() | Nepal B‑class Top‑importance | |||||||||
|
![]() | India: History B‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||||
|
Suryavamsha does not imply sun-worship.
The kshatriyas (warrior caste) can broadly be divided into two. some dynasties claim descent from the sun. (suryavamsha) other dynasties claim descent from the moon. (chandravamsha) The sun was only one of the hindu pantheon, equally revered by all branches.
Here is another article in the wikipedia which also contains the word suryavamsha. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasishta
Munda ancestor
Expanding Munda ancestor sources 117.198.118.95 (talk) 11:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
"The founder of the Sakya clan, King Ikṣvāku (Pāli: Okkāka) has a Munda name, suggesting that the Sakyas were at least bilingual (Kuiper 1991, 7;Mayrhofer 1992, vol. 1, 185). Many of the Sakya village names are believed to be non-IA in origin (Thomas 1960, 23), and the very word for town or city (nagara; cf.the Sakya village Nagakara, the locus of theCūḷasuññata Sutta ) is of Dravidian stock (Mayrhofer 1963, vol. 2, 125)." - "The Sakya clan derive their ancestry from King Ikṣvāku, whose name is of Austro-Asiatic Munda origin. While the Sakyans’ rough speech and Munda ancestors do not prove that they spoke a non-IA language, there is a lot of other evidence suggesting that they were indeed a separate ethnic (and probably linguistic) group." - "Okkāka was the legendary progenitor of the Sakyas, and bears a name of Munda ancestry"
https://journals.equinoxpub.com/BSR/article/view/17899
Levman on Witzels Scytian theory
Levman on Witzels Shakya and Sakas.
"Michael Witzel believes that the practice of incest marriage is an Iranian (Zoroastrian) custom and that the Buddhist Sakya clan ‘cannot be separated from the designation of the northern Iranian Śaka that entered India only after c. 140 BCE, via Sistan (Saka-stāna) in southern Afghanistan’. He is referring to what are commonly known as the Indo-Scythians who apparently enter India several centuries after the Buddha. In Witzel 1997, 312–313, he suggests that the Sakyas may be a non-orthoprax Indo-Aryan tribe from northern Iran who ‘then constitute an earlier, apparently the first wave of the later Śaka invasions from Central Asia’. The origin of the Sakyas is however, ‘not as clear’ as that of the Malla and Vṛjji who he feels are Indo-Aryan in origin, but also not orthoprax (312), represent-ing, along with the Sakyas, a ‘last wave of immigration which overran northern India in Vedic time’ (1989, §10.3, page 237). The evidence for this final wave is however, very slim and there is no evidence for it in the Vedic texts; for their western origin, Witzel relies on a reference in Pāṇini (4.2.131, madravṛjyoḥ) to the Vṛjjis in dual relation with the Madras who are from the northwest, and to the Mallas in the Jaiminīya Brāhamaṇa (§198) as arising from the dust of Rajasthan. Neither the Sakyas nor any of the other eastern tribes are mentioned, and ofcourse there is no proof that any of these are Indo-Aryan groups. I view the Sakyas and the later Sakas as two separate groups, the former being aboriginal."
https://journals.equinoxpub.com/BSR/article/view/17899 pg 166.
I have included this source under Sythian source now. 117.198.118.95 (talk) 11:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Vandalism?
Hello @Joshua Jonathan:, I want to bring to your attention that this page has been completely reformed by someone. Please take note of this. 117.198.115.170 (talk) 16:55, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
@Antiquistik: - Hello. Your use of old source "Sharma 1968" on several pages and with claims of Vaidehas, Licchavikas, Mallakas, Shakya whos "original homeland was in the western regions" is very bizarre since even by textual sources of Sanskrit/Pali literature they are mentioned/grouped as "Easterners". There is no "original homeland" in the western south asia of these tribes. Recent works by Bronkshorst, Romila Thapar, Levman do not place their origins in the west either.
We are aware of Indo-Aryan migration but these names and tribes emerged much much later. These tribes are native eastern Indo-Aryans as noted by Bronkshorst and Romila Thapar, their tribal identity and culture emerged in the east, reason why they are seen as "easterners" by western Indo-Aryans in literature.
This is same as claiming Pitsh, Gauls, welsh tribe as "original homeland" in eastern europe steppe, when they are from western europe and their tribal identity formed there.
Bronkhorst, Thapar have addressed these issues repeatedly in : "Greater Magadha Studies in the Culture of Early India By Johannes Bronkhorst · 2007" and "The Past Before Us By Romila Thapar · 2013"
Entire Videha page is sourced from "Sharma 1968" with brahmanical legend of Videah king Māthava - Recent work by Bronkhorst and Witzel have pointed out regrading Videha Mathava legend :- "This is not a legend of the Indo-Aryan settlement of the east in (early post-Rgvedic) tribes but it is a tale of sanskritization, of the arrival of Vedic (Kuru-Panchcala) orthopraxy in the east" (page 7)
@Joshua Jonathan:, @Kautilya3: - Hello, please look into these edits. There is considerable use of old source and odd claims of "original homeland" in western south asia for these eastern indo-aryan tribes. 117.198.116.172 (talk) 16:37, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I will correct these pages as soon as I can. Antiquistik (talk) 16:55, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I also noticed the source; placing the Buddha in the sixth century BCE is outdated. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 17:13, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Requested move 14 June 2022
Shakya → Sakya (tribe) – The Pali name Sakya is used in the majority of contemporary writing, both academic and non-academic, pertaining to this tribe, while the Sanskrit form Shakya is less often used. This is visible in the list of sources used for this article, where the majority spelling is the Pali rather then the Sanskrit one. The name of the entry should therefore accurately reflect this use of the tribe's name. This would also facilitate searches by individuals, given that they would likely be more familiar with the Pali spelling that is the most prevalent form of the name used in contemporary writing. Antiquistik (talk) 21:04, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support: The article is only titled 'Shakya', but goes on to use Sakya in the body copy.
Tertiary literature and its sources seem to be supportive of a move.Iskandar323 (talk) 03:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Iskandar323, "Tertiary literature and its sources seem to be supportive of a move" is about Sakya, the Buddhist school. The IAST Śākya or the English equivalent Shakya
- Britannica[1] uses Shakya in its Buddha article
- Government of India site
- UNESCO
- Dallas museum of art
- Sharma, J. P. (1968), Attwood, Jayarava (2012) and Gellner, David (1989) use the IAST form v/s Levman, Bryan G. (2014) that uses Sakya. Luders, Heinrich (1963) uses both forms (rest could not check).--Redtigerxyz Talk 17:13, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, oops, my mistake. In any case, my point remains about usage within the article. Sakya is also closer to the Pali and a more authentic transliteration. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:18, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Iskandar323Refer to 11 May version Shakya was consitently used. The article was WP:BOLDly moved to Sakya (tribe) in June for some time. At that time, Sakya was changed to Shakya. I am changing it back to Shakya for consistency. Redtigerxyz Talk 15:42, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, oops, my mistake. In any case, my point remains about usage within the article. Sakya is also closer to the Pali and a more authentic transliteration. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:18, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Disputed information
Recent changes to this page, now insinuate that the shakyans are an indo aryan tribe with Vedic religion being stated as one of the faiths being followed in their republic. All of this is disputed information and the "Non Vedic Origins" section has been completely removed which had references from multiple authors including Bronkhorst. This is blatant POV pushing. The page must be restored to the version thats on or before the 11th of May.
On a lighter note, someone please remove the devanagari transliterarion for the corresponding Pali words. The script was never historically used to write Pali.
The current changes would simply mislead readers. Bodhiupasaka (talk) 07:35, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Fowler&fowler: Perhaps something - pertaining to Pali and its scripts - that may you know about/have some thoughts on. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:08, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Bodhiupasaka: I have corrected these issues. Let me know if there are any remaining, and I'll correct them too. Antiquistik (talk) 13:37, 17 June 2022 (UTC)