A Shift in Mithya: An Implication of Euhemerism in Amish Tripathi’s<i>Shiva Trilogy</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mithya is living myth. Myth is an absence of mithya. The difference between the modern individual who expressly chooses to believe in or look for myth and aboriginal cultures still living in myth is the difference between myth and mithya. Hindu mythology is mithya and therefore remaking myth in Indian fiction is often conforming and seldom deviant. But lately Indian popular fiction has produced mythopoeic versions of its mithya. Amish Tripathi’s Shiva Trilogy is an example of this trend. Tripathi in his series demythologizes and remythologizes Lord Shiva into a revolutionary tribal chief of the Indus Valley Civilization who was elevated to divinity over time. Such a euhemeristic deliverance transcribes a polytheistic deity as apotheosis. This mythopoeic version, although unorthodox, is produced and consumed in popular fiction. Such popular production and consumption of an alternate mythopoeia in spite of an extant mithya predicates a shift in mithya.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".