Talk:Mithra

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 September 2020 and 9 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Seamusmcinnisfleming.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

No mention of Jesus Christ

Jesus is a plagiarised version of this Mithra, he should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.96.159 (talk) 20:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree, something should be written about the significance of the Mithra stories as one of the precursors to the Jesus of Nazareth stories. The late Dr. Alan Dundes did a lot of great scholarship about this.

-CFW Cfwschmidt (talk) 19:55, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Dundes was an expert on folklore and legend, not dead religions, so why would we defer to him? The idea that Jesus is a clone of Mithra is really historical gibberish. That is probably why this article makes no mention of it.Farsight001 (talk) 01:44, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I think the historical jesus simply tried to re-enact mithra's legend towards his own goal , which of course was the creation or continuation of a proto-semitic religion.

Mithra was an iranian figure and the romans were at conflict with iranians , mithraism was only popular in the roman army and certainly had its critics among other romans , that's i believe how jesus , a jew , exploited this fact and copied mithra on many occasions during his life. Kermanii (talk) 15:24, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

This article isn't the most scholarly looking thing I've ever seen, but he cites sources for quotes and some of his points stem from obviously true things. Definitely worth a read: http://www.sullivan-county.com/bush/travilocity1.htm The connection to Jesus is a conspiracy theory, much in the vein of the whole Jesus-Horus business. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.162.234.245 (talk) 06:54, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Mithra has the following in common with the Jesus character:

• Mithra was born on December 25th of the virgin Anahita.
• The babe was wrapped in swaddling clothes, placed in a manger and attended by shepherds.
• He was considered a great traveling teacher and master.
• He had 12 companions or "disciples."
• He performed miracles.
• As the "great bull of the Sun," Mithra sacrificed himself for world peace.
• He ascended to heaven.
• Mithra was viewed as the Good Shepherd, the "Way, the Truth and the Light," the Redeemer, the Savior, the Messiah.
• Mithra is omniscient, as he "hears all, sees all, knows all: none can deceive him."
• He was identified with both the Lion and the Lamb.
• His sacred day was Sunday, "the Lord's Day," hundreds of years before the appearance of Christ.
• His religion had a eucharist or "Lord's Supper."
• Mithra "sets his marks on the foreheads of his soldiers."
• Mithraism emphasized baptism.

Dgharmon (talk) 00:30, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Any sources, specifically was he born on December 25th? I don't think so. Popish Plot (talk) 14:43, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

In the Roman Mithras, Mitras and his counter-part, Sol Invictus were held to be born on December 25th. Therefore, the way Romans believed it, the 25th was Mithras birthday, and that's what matters, as it still supports the, nevertheless undeniable, influence from Mithrism towards Christianity. 2601:882:100:D7B0:10AD:E063:4674:9FE1 (talk) 14:26, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

References

Why no discussion of connection to the Roman Mithras?

Presumably there is some connection to the Roman Mithras of the Mithraic Mysteries; this certainly merits mention if not discussion. Likewise, if there is no connection (unlikely) that deserves mention as well. However, I am not the one to do this since I know nothing about either deity except what's in the Wikipedia. jackbrown (talk) 09:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

could be just a coincidence with the name. Popish Plot (talk) 14:44, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Faulty Graphics

Please consider removing the MISIDENTIFIED graphic at the head of the article. It is NOT "Mithra" but rather the Roman "god" Mithras if you take a look at the credits for the photo itself. A proper photo of a sculpture of Mithra/Mitra appears later in the article and you will see that he is a bearded elder in Persian garb and not a beardless youth in a Parthian cap as Mithras is traditionally portrayed. Thank you for your consideration... Emyth (talk) 20:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Avestan script

Where can I get a True Type font to properly render Avestan? I just downloaded a bunch of Avestan script fonts from St. Catherine's, but they don't work here.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 04:58, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mithra. 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/20070621133350/http://www.religionswissenschaft.unizh.ch/idd/prepublications/e_idd_mithra.pdf to http://www.religionswissenschaft.unizh.ch/idd/prepublications/e_idd_mithra.pdf

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:00, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Get the Avestan Keyboard plugin on Android, if you can. Shadzad (talk) 01:13, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Mithra and Mitra is a same God in hindunism and Iranian religion

In both religion, Mithra is a god of truth and honesty Nittin Das (talk) 12:22, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

The cuneiform

While it is known that a spelling in cuneiform was Miça, the cuneiform here literally says 'Miθra'. For anyone unable to read Persian cuneiform, I felt you should know. Shadzad (talk) 01:08, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Mithraism, like Zoroastrianism, is a wide spread faith, historically. But it has a single origin. Shadzad (talk) 01:14, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Mithra means friend

In Sanskrit the word "mitra" or "mithra" means "friend". Why is this pot pointed out here? Sooku (talk) 08:33, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Divinity of Contract

What does this mean? I can find no explanation, unless it is meaningful it should be removed. treesmill (talk) 12:12, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Mithra a Zoroastrian deity?

It doesn't appear very logical to me to list Mithra under Zoroastrianism and as Zoroastrian deity. If Mithra clearly not only predates Zoroastrianism but also seems to be part of the wider Indo-Iranian believe systems. As Mithra is also found in Sanskrit texts.

I want to use Britannica as source here.

"Mithraism, the worship of Mithra, the Iranian god of the sun, justice, contract, and war in pre-Zoroastrian Iran. " https://www.britannica.com/topic/Mithraism

Other well known Iranologists like Prof. Dr. Kreyebroek also point out the fact that Mithraism is a pre-Zoroastrian Iranian religion which was common among the people in West Iran and Mesopotamia. Merdoz (talk) 13:24, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Because Mithra is a Zoroastrian god too? One thing does not exclude the other. Britannica is not WP:RS either. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:43, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Abraham is a muslim prophet too. Still does it make logical sense to introduce Abraham as the muslim prophet in an article specifically dedicated to Abraham while knowing very well Abraham predates Islam and is the prophet of all major Abrahamic religions. Merdoz (talk) 01:40, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but that made no sense, it's a rather random comparison. Ultimately, we follow what WP:RS says, something you tried to do the opposite of it. You altered sourced information and added a non-WP:RS which didn't even mention the changed info. See WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:46, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

That is not a random comparison it makes 100% sense. Because it is Illogical to introduce a prophet or deity in a way which makes it appear like this Prophet is specific to certain religion. I have big issues with the whole articles on itself. It reads amateurish, like it is written by individuals with shallow knowledge about the topic and who still to this day believe Iranian is synonym with Persian.

This is the main article about Mithra as the deity. Yet this article specifically talks about Mithra in the contexts of Zoroastrianism. It creates the notion, Mithra is a deity introduce by Zoroastrian religion. There is too little information about Mithra outside the Zoroastrian bracket. Which is how I came with the comparison of the main article about Abraham being in the context of Islam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merdoz (talk • contribs) 01:54, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

You can disagree with it as much as you want, however, you can't add your own words into an article. Look, just stick to using WP:RS and not removing/altering sourced info, and there shouldn't be a problem. Just be on the safe side, I would highly advise you to read WP:POV and WP:DUE as well. --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

"You can disagree with it as much as you want, however, " I did not expect anything else as a response. I am already used to this kind of responses by people, who to this day stll can not tell the difference between Iran - Persia and Iranic - Persian

"you can't add your own words into an article"

I literally used the wording of Britannica did you even bother to open the link? Merdoz (talk) 02:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

"I did not expect anything else as a response. I am already used to this kind of responses by people, who to this day stll can not tell the difference between Iran - Persia and Iranic - Persian"

Good for you.

"I literally used the wording of Britannica did you even bother to open the link?"

Britannica is not WP:RS (that discussion has been beaten to death at WP:RSN), I believe I have said that thrice now. And you did not, you simply changed the words in a text referenced to another source (Iranica) and randomly cited Britannica to it. Do you mean to tell me that Britannica says that very line but instead conveniently use the words that you agree with the most? --HistoryofIran (talk) 02:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)