The register rules: Pūṣan
The internet spells Pūṣan more ways than one, and only one of them is the name the sources wrote. This is the register's ruling — canonical, fallback, contested, and false, each in its proper place.
At a Glance
- Canonical form: Pūṣan
- Original script: पूषन्
- Pantheon: Sanskrit
- Convention: IAST — macrons for long vowels, underdots for retroflexes, the International Alphabet of Sanskrit Transliteration
- False forms on record: 2
- Contested forms: none attested
- Series: The Canonical Register, No. 214 of 287
The Canonical Form
The attested form is पूषन्, from the tradition's own record. The canonical transliteration is Pūṣan.
Every mark is evidence, and every piece of evidence is checkable:
- u → ū — Macron marks the long vowel: the vowel length, as the sources give it.
Where the Flattened Form Stands
The plain form pusan is not false — it is a fallback, and the register is exact about what that means. In systems that cannot carry diacritics (legacy databases, older tooling, parts of the address-bar pipeline) the flattened form is the accepted vehicle, and the rulebook names it explicitly as the final rung of the fallback hierarchy: full restoration first, circumflex where attested, macron-only by the academic standard, an attested variant, and only then plain ASCII.
What the fallback status forbids is promotion: pusan may carry the name where marks are impossible, but it may not represent the name where marks are possible. Every mark it drops — u → ū — is a fact the sources recorded. A fallback is a vehicle, never the primary.
The Register of False Forms
False form 1: Pusan
Origin: the publisher compromise — older books and hurried websites that print the "English equivalent" as if it were the name itself.
Violation: every substitution here (ū→u, ṣ→s) is a romanization of convenience, not an attested spelling — it teaches the reader to guess, not to read.
False form 2: Púṣan
Origin: the near-miss — a form that looks right at a glance and circulates on wikis and forums.
Violation: a macron marks length; an acute marks tone — different facts.
The Contested Forms
No alternate form of this name carries documented scholarly support in the lexicon's record. The convention here — IAST — macrons for long vowels, underdots for retroflexes, the International Alphabet of Sanskrit Transliteration — produces exactly one defensible transliteration: Pūṣan. Forms that differ from it are not contested; they are simply wrong.
The Convention's Own History
IAST — the International Alphabet of Sanskrit Transliteration — was settled in 1912 at the International Congress of Orientalists in Athens, but its logic is far older: Sanskrit grammar (Pāṇini's Aṣṭādhyāyī, fourth century BCE) is the most precise phonological system the ancient world produced, and it distinguishes retroflex from dental consonants as carriers of meaning. The underdots of IAST (ṭ, ḍ, ṇ, ṣ, ṛ) exist because Sanskrit treats those as different letters, not flavors of one letter. The macrons mark long vowels that are, again, phonemically distinct. A romanization that flattens them does not simplify Sanskrit; it misspells it.
What the Address Bar Allows
IDNA 2008 permits the letters these restorations use — macrons, acutes, underdots, thorn, ogonek, the lot — and the DNS carries them as punycode (`xn--` labels). Two honest constraints remain. First, registrar inventory: the protocol permits a character; the registrar's stock decides whether the exact domain can be bought today. Second, combined marks: forms like Apṓllōn (acute stacked on a macron) are philologically ideal yet effectively untypeable on phones and unsupported across much of the registration system.
That is why the rulebook keeps a fallback hierarchy — full restoration first, then the circumflex when the source carries one, then the macron-only academic standard, then an attested variant, and only as a last resort the plain ASCII form. Every step down the ladder is still defensible; nothing on the ladder is a wrong mark. A fallback is a choice among attested forms. A false form is not on the ladder at all.
Where the Name Stood First
An aniconic Vedic god has no statues, but his world has strata: the pastoral economy of the Ṛgvedic Punjab — cattle-counts, drove-roads, the archaeology of the Painted Grey Ware and earlier Harappan cattle iconography — is the social ground of his cult. The goat-drawn chariot of his hymns is remembered in later folk vehicles of Rajasthani pastoral gods like Pabuji, whose own oral epic of rustled and recovered cattle keeps Pūṣan's oldest story-pattern alive. The temple on the web is the newest of these addresses — the first one that fits in a pocket.
The Verdict
The register rules for Pūṣan, and the ruling is checkable: every mark sourced, every violation stated, every borderline form given its honest standing. pusan is the sanctioned fallback for systems without marks — a vehicle, never the scholarly primary. Anything else in circulation has its origin and its failure recorded above. That is the whole of the law on this name — and the temple at /sites/pusan/ enforces it.
The docket for this ruling: 2 false forms ruled against, Pusan first on the docket; 1 preserved mark verified: u → ū; no contested forms attested; the attestation rests on 6 cited sources — Rigveda, Brāhmaṇas, Monier-Williams.
The Register Continues
This is one of 287 entries in the Canonical Register — the authoritative reference for every flagship temple. The temple's founding dispatch tells the name's story; its Restoration File details the marks; its Resonance File reads the archetype into the industries. The blog index holds the whole archive, and the Rulebook states the convention this register enforces.
Continue the register — previous entry: Ptḥ (read it) · next entry: Pŷr (read it).
The Canonical Register is written from the same canonical record as the lexicon itself. If a false form is missing from this page, it is because the evidence does not support calling it false — or because we have not seen it yet. Show us, with a citation, and the register will answer.