ing
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by ing on May 11, 2022 3:12:26 GMT -6
Is the translation of sayana comment correct in rig veda 1.164.9? Greetings ing, Welcome to the symposium. Hope you will find lots to read and think about and, of course, to question. In answer to your question concerning Sayana (d. 1387) I would have to say that it is quite unlikely that his commentary is "correct" on the Vedas. He wrote about 3000 years after the likely time of the composition and/or compilation of the Vedic texts (~1500-1000 BCE). He also, along with his brother, Madhava (aka Vidyaranya), is responsible for turning Sankaracarya into a Saivite/incarnation of Siva. They were ministers of the kings of Vijayanagara Empire (~1200 to 1643), specifically Bukka Ray I and Harihara. As prominent Advaita-vadins they naturally gave a non-dualist spin to everything they wrote and commented on. Coming so late and being so much influenced by the Advaita tradition he inherited, it is unlikely that he has given the Vedas their due consideration as pre-Sankara, pre-Buddhist, and even pre-Hindu texts. But, his commentary is one of the few on the whole expanse of Veda texts. There is another commentator named Skandha-svamin, but his commentary is not as complete as Sayana's. I don't know much about him, but his Hindupedia entry says: He was the son of one Bhartṛdhruva and belonged to the country of Valabhī.[1] He was the guru of Harisvāmin, the well-known commentator of Śatapatha Brāhmana. He might have lived around A. D. 625.Anyway, the Vedas are archaic and the language in them is proto-Sanskrit. The classical language of India only became called Sanskrit (Made-whole) after the work of the grammarian Panini in the 4-5th cents. BCE. The language before that is simply called Vedic. There are many words in the Vedas we no longer know the meaning of. Sayana makes guesses based on similar words in the later language. but considering how languages change over time. that is a sketchy methodology. is it true that the omniform cow is the earth diversified by various plants as a consequence of the combination of three elements: clouds, wind and sunlight. because I saw that Sayana said like that about Rig Veda 1.164.9?
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 11, 2022 10:49:30 GMT -6
Greetings ing, Welcome to the symposium. Hope you will find lots to read and think about and, of course, to question. In answer to your question concerning Sayana (d. 1387) I would have to say that it is quite unlikely that his commentary is "correct" on the Vedas. He wrote about 3000 years after the likely time of the composition and/or compilation of the Vedic texts (~1500-1000 BCE). He also, along with his brother, Madhava (aka Vidyaranya), is responsible for turning Sankaracarya into a Saivite/incarnation of Siva. They were ministers of the kings of Vijayanagara Empire (~1200 to 1643), specifically Bukka Ray I and Harihara. As prominent Advaita-vadins they naturally gave a non-dualist spin to everything they wrote and commented on. Coming so late and being so much influenced by the Advaita tradition he inherited, it is unlikely that he has given the Vedas their due consideration as pre-Sankara, pre-Buddhist, and even pre-Hindu texts. But, his commentary is one of the few on the whole expanse of Veda texts. There is another commentator named Skandha-svamin, but his commentary is not as complete as Sayana's. I don't know much about him, but his Hindupedia entry says: He was the son of one Bhartṛdhruva and belonged to the country of Valabhī.[1] He was the guru of Harisvāmin, the well-known commentator of Śatapatha Brāhmana. He might have lived around A. D. 625.Anyway, the Vedas are archaic and the language in them is proto-Sanskrit. The classical language of India only became called Sanskrit (Made-whole) after the work of the grammarian Panini in the 4-5th cents. BCE. The language before that is simply called Vedic. There are many words in the Vedas we no longer know the meaning of. Sayana makes guesses based on similar words in the later language. but considering how languages change over time. that is a sketchy methodology. is it true that the omniform cow is the earth diversified by various plants as a consequence of the combination of three elements: clouds, wind and sunlight. because I saw that Sayana said like that about Rig Veda 1.164.9? I'm sorry. I failed to notice that you were asking about a comment on a specific verse. Instead, I gave you a lecture on Sayana and Skanda Swami. Maph koro kripayA. I will check that verse's commentary and see what is up. I will post my results a little later.
|
|
ing
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by ing on May 11, 2022 12:18:16 GMT -6
is it true that the omniform cow is the earth diversified by various plants as a consequence of the combination of three elements: clouds, wind and sunlight. because I saw that Sayana said like that about Rig Veda 1.164.9? I'm sorry. I failed to notice that you were asking about a comment on a specific verse. Instead, I gave you a lecture on Sayana and Skanda Swami. Maph koro kripayA. I will check that verse's commentary and see what is up. I will post my results a little later. Right away, because I need sayana comments and skandawasmi on rig veda 1.164.9
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 11, 2022 15:29:42 GMT -6
I'm sorry. I failed to notice that you were asking about a comment on a specific verse. Instead, I gave you a lecture on Sayana and Skanda Swami. Maph koro kripayA. I will check that verse's commentary and see what is up. I will post my results a little later. Right away, because I need sayana comments and skandawasmi on rig veda 1.164.9 अनन्तरं वत्सः पुत्रस्थानीय उदकसंघः त्रिषु योजनेषु मेघरश्मिवायुषु संयुक्तेषु सत्सु अमीमेत् वर्षणसमये शब्दयति । अनंतरं विश्वरूप्यं विश्वरूपवतीं गां अनु अपश्यत् अनुक्रमेण पश्यति । वर्षतीत्यर्थः । यद्वा त्रिषु योजनेषु सत्सु वत्सो मेघो वर्षणाय गां भूमिं प्रत्यमीमेत् । अनन्तरं सर्वो जनो अनुक्रमेण विश्वरूप्यं सस्यादिभिर्नानारूपवतीं भूमिमपश्यत् पश्यति ॥Here is the text of Sayana's comm. I don't have Skandhasvamin's comm. on this, if there is one. I don't think razmi means sunlight. It more likely means lightning: so, cloud, lightning, and wind. The multi-formed cow is the earth covered by many kinds of grains. Sayana's alternative interpretation is to take yojana in its more common meaning of a measurement of distance. So the cloud sounds its thunder (like the lowing of a calf towards its cow/mother) over three yojanas (eight or nine miles x 3). After the rain all people see the earth as possessing many forms in the form of grains, and so forth. By the way, ing, please introduce yourself to the forum.
|
|
ing
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by ing on May 11, 2022 17:16:47 GMT -6
Right away, because I need sayana comments and skandawasmi on rig veda 1.164.9 अनन्तरं वत्सः पुत्रस्थानीय उदकसंघः त्रिषु योजनेषु मेघरश्मिवायुषु संयुक्तेषु सत्सु अमीमेत् वर्षणसमये शब्दयति । अनंतरं विश्वरूप्यं विश्वरूपवतीं गां अनु अपश्यत् अनुक्रमेण पश्यति । वर्षतीत्यर्थः । यद्वा त्रिषु योजनेषु सत्सु वत्सो मेघो वर्षणाय गां भूमिं प्रत्यमीमेत् । अनन्तरं सर्वो जनो अनुक्रमेण विश्वरूप्यं सस्यादिभिर्नानारूपवतीं भूमिमपश्यत् पश्यति ॥Here is the text of Sayana's comm. I don't have Skandhasvamin's comm. on this, if there is one. I don't think razmi means sunlight. It more likely means lightning: so, cloud, lightning, and wind. The multi-formed cow is the earth covered by many kinds of grains. Sayana's alternative interpretation is to take yojana in its more common meaning of a measurement of distance. So the cloud sounds its thunder (like the lowing of a calf towards its cow/mother) over three yojanas (eight or nine miles x 3). After the rain all people see the earth as possessing many forms in the form of grains, and so forth. By the way, ing, please introduce yourself to the forum. This is the correct version isn't it? Because many on the web state that sayana comment on rig veda 1,164.9 said something like this "The calf bellowed: the cloud thundered; the omniform cow: viśvarūpyam gām triṣu yojaneṣu = the earth diversified by various crops in consequence of the co-operation of the cloud, the wind, and the rays of the sun"
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 11, 2022 18:48:20 GMT -6
अनन्तरं वत्सः पुत्रस्थानीय उदकसंघः त्रिषु योजनेषु मेघरश्मिवायुषु संयुक्तेषु सत्सु अमीमेत् वर्षणसमये शब्दयति । अनंतरं विश्वरूप्यं विश्वरूपवतीं गां अनु अपश्यत् अनुक्रमेण पश्यति । वर्षतीत्यर्थः । यद्वा त्रिषु योजनेषु सत्सु वत्सो मेघो वर्षणाय गां भूमिं प्रत्यमीमेत् । अनन्तरं सर्वो जनो अनुक्रमेण विश्वरूप्यं सस्यादिभिर्नानारूपवतीं भूमिमपश्यत् पश्यति ॥Here is the text of Sayana's comm. I don't have Skandhasvamin's comm. on this, if there is one. I don't think razmi means sunlight. It more likely means lightning: so, cloud, lightning, and wind. The multi-formed cow is the earth covered by many kinds of grains. Sayana's alternative interpretation is to take yojana in its more common meaning of a measurement of distance. So the cloud sounds its thunder (like the lowing of a calf towards its cow/mother) over three yojanas (eight or nine miles x 3). After the rain all people see the earth as possessing many forms in the form of grains, and so forth. By the way, ing, please introduce yourself to the forum. This is the correct version isn't it? Because many on the web state that sayana comment on rig veda 1,164.9 said something like this "The calf bellowed: the cloud thundered; the omniform cow: viśvarūpyam gām triṣu yojaneṣu = the earth diversified by various crops in consequence of the co-operation of the cloud, the wind, and the rays of the sun" I think that is a rather loose translation of Sayana's comm. Sayana identifies the calf with a rain cloud which thunders in conjunction with [other] clouds, light rays [lightning], and wind at the time of a downpour of rain. The verse compares the cloud's thunder with the lowing of a calf for its mother (the earth). The father of the calf is the sky (dyaus) and its mother, the cow (gAM) is the earth (bhUmi). As a result of the downpour, all people gradually see the earth as multi-formed, being covered with crops of various sorts.
|
|
ing
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by ing on May 11, 2022 19:05:19 GMT -6
This is the correct version isn't it? Because many on the web state that sayana comment on rig veda 1,164.9 said something like this "The calf bellowed: the cloud thundered; the omniform cow: viśvarūpyam gām triṣu yojaneṣu = the earth diversified by various crops in consequence of the co-operation of the cloud, the wind, and the rays of the sun" I think that is a rather loose translation of Sayana's comm. Sayana identifies the calf with a rain cloud which thunders in conjunction with [other] clouds, light rays [lightning], and wind at the time of a downpour of rain. The verse compares the cloud's thunder with the lowing of a calf for its mother (the earth). The father of the calf is the sky (dyaus) and its mother, the cow (gAM) is the earth (bhUmi). As a result of the downpour, all people gradually see the earth as multi-formed, being covered with crops of various sorts. because in H.H Wilson's translation, sayana commented on rig veda 1,164.9 saying something like this "The calf screams: the clouds roar; the cow is omniform: viśvarūpyam gām triṣu yojaneṣu = the earth is varied by various plants as a result of the cooperation of clouds, wind and sunlight"
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 12, 2022 11:40:19 GMT -6
I think that is a rather loose translation of Sayana's comm. Sayana identifies the calf with a rain cloud which thunders in conjunction with [other] clouds, light rays [lightning], and wind at the time of a downpour of rain. The verse compares the cloud's thunder with the lowing of a calf for its mother (the earth). The father of the calf is the sky (dyaus) and its mother, the cow (gAM) is the earth (bhUmi). As a result of the downpour, all people gradually see the earth as multi-formed, being covered with crops of various sorts. because in H.H Wilson's translation, sayana commented on rig veda 1,164.9 saying something like this "The calf screams: the clouds roar; the cow is omniform: viśvarūpyam gām triṣu yojaneṣu = the earth is varied by various plants as a result of the cooperation of clouds, wind and sunlight" I really don't understand your fixation on this verse and its commentary. What does it mean to you? Clouds and sunlight really don't go together. Lightning is really more likely in a rain storm.
|
|
ing
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by ing on May 12, 2022 16:35:34 GMT -6
because in H.H Wilson's translation, sayana commented on rig veda 1,164.9 saying something like this "The calf screams: the clouds roar; the cow is omniform: viśvarūpyam gām triṣu yojaneṣu = the earth is varied by various plants as a result of the cooperation of clouds, wind and sunlight" I really don't understand your fixation on this verse and its commentary. What does it mean to you? Clouds and sunlight really don't go together. Lightning is really more likely in a rain storm. www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/rig-veda-english-translation/d/doc830752.htmlThere sayana comment on rig veda 1.164.9 is different from what you said. So which one is correct?
|
|
ing
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by ing on May 15, 2022 0:03:31 GMT -6
So which one is correct? [/quote]
|
|
ing
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by ing on May 15, 2022 2:15:14 GMT -6
This is the correct version isn't it? Because many on the web state that sayana comment on rig veda 1,164.9 said something like this "The calf bellowed: the cloud thundered; the omniform cow: viśvarūpyam gām triṣu yojaneṣu = the earth diversified by various crops in consequence of the co-operation of the cloud, the wind, and the rays of the sun" I think that is a rather loose translation of Sayana's comm. Sayana identifies the calf with a rain cloud which thunders in conjunction with [other] clouds, light rays [lightning], and wind at the time of a downpour of rain. The verse compares the cloud's thunder with the lowing of a calf for its mother (the earth). The father of the calf is the sky (dyaus) and its mother, the cow (gAM) is the earth (bhUmi). As a result of the downpour, all people gradually see the earth as multi-formed, being covered with crops of various sorts. viśvarūpyam gām triṣu yojaneṣu = the earth is varied by various plants as a result of the cooperation of clouds, wind, and sunlight" So, is the translation of sayana comment translated by H.H.Wilson wrong?
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 15, 2022 9:39:51 GMT -6
I think that is a rather loose translation of Sayana's comm. Sayana identifies the calf with a rain cloud which thunders in conjunction with [other] clouds, light rays [lightning], and wind at the time of a downpour of rain. The verse compares the cloud's thunder with the lowing of a calf for its mother (the earth). The father of the calf is the sky (dyaus) and its mother, the cow (gAM) is the earth (bhUmi). As a result of the downpour, all people gradually see the earth as multi-formed, being covered with crops of various sorts. viśvarūpyam gām triṣu yojaneṣu = the earth is varied by various plants as a result of the cooperation of clouds, wind, and sunlight" So, is the translation of sayana comment translated by H.H.Wilson wrong? So you want something to be correct and everything else to be wrong. This is not the way Vedic interpretation works. No one really knows what the author of the verse really meant, Everyone is guessing. Basically, Sayana gives two interpretations of the word yojana, one in which he uses a fanciful interpretation of yojana (cloud, ray of light, and wind) and one in which he uses the most common meaning of yojana as a measurement of distance (eight or nine miles times 3, "the sound of the calf extended over three yojanas."). So Sayana himself gives two options for the meaning of the passage. Which of those is correct? He says either of them are workable. Now I do think that H H Wilson's translation is misleading. For one thing the word he translates as "screams" is a form of the root mIm which does not mean scream. It means "to make a sound." Secondly, the combination of cloud, ray of light, and wind does not automatically make light sunlight. The Indic traditon recognizes the moon, for instance, as the giver of nectar to vegetables, as per the Bhagavad-gita, not the sun. So why not translate razmi as rays of moonlight here? There is, in my view, no reason to translate mIm as screams or razmi as sunlight here. Also, there is no reason to attribute causality to the triad (cloud, ray of light, and wind) in making the cow multi-formed. The word vizvarUpya merely modifies gAm. The cow is already multiformed. There is no reason to even take cow as the earth. This could be a multicolored cloud formation in the sky formed of cloud, light, and wind. Sayana's glossing the cow as earth is also the application of the much later idea of the Puranic representation of the earth as cow-formed. That it meant that to the poet Dirghatamas is highly unlikely. So, in summary, no, I don't think that either Sayana or Wilson's translation of Sayana are "correct" in sense you are seeking. This is the beauty of poetry and especially of ancient poetry like the Vedic poems. But I guess you are really interested in challenging my ability as a Vedic scholar. I am the first to admit that I am not a Vedic scholar. I can and do read classical Sanskrit which is the language that the commentators on the Veda write in. I can see what they are saying about the hymns, but the hymns themselves are beyond my humble capacities and, sadly, theirs as well. So there is really no "correct" here.
|
|
ing
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by ing on May 16, 2022 1:28:37 GMT -6
viśvarūpyam gām triṣu yojaneṣu = the earth is varied by various plants as a result of the cooperation of clouds, wind, and sunlight" So, is the translation of sayana comment translated by H.H.Wilson wrong? So you want something to be correct and everything else to be wrong. This is not the way Vedic interpretation works. No one really knows what the author of the verse really meant, Everyone is guessing. Basically, Sayana gives two interpretations of the word yojana, one in which he uses a fanciful interpretation of yojana (cloud, ray of light, and wind) and one in which he uses the most common meaning of yojana as a measurement of distance (eight or nine miles times 3, "the sound of the calf extended over three yojanas."). So Sayana himself gives two options for the meaning of the passage. Which of those is correct? He says either of them are workable. Now I do think that H H Wilson's translation is misleading. For one thing the word he translates as "screams" is a form of the root mIm which does not mean scream. It means "to make a sound." Secondly, the combination of cloud, ray of light, and wind does not automatically make light sunlight. The Indic traditon recognizes the moon, for instance, as the giver of nectar to vegetables, as per the Bhagavad-gita, not the sun. So why not translate razmi as rays of moonlight here? There is, in my view, no reason to translate mIm as screams or razmi as sunlight here. Also, there is no reason to attribute causality to the triad (cloud, ray of light, and wind) in making the cow multi-formed. The word vizvarUpya merely modifies gAm. The cow is already multiformed. There is no reason to even take cow as the earth. This could be a multicolored cloud formation in the sky formed of cloud, light, and wind. Sayana's glossing the cow as earth is also the application of the much later idea of the Puranic representation of the earth as cow-formed. That it meant that to the poet Dirghatamas is highly unlikely. So, in summary, no, I don't think that either Sayana or Wilson's translation of Sayana are "correct" in sense you are seeking. This is the beauty of poetry and especially of ancient poetry like the Vedic poems. But I guess you are really interested in challenging my ability as a Vedic scholar. I am the first to admit that I am not a Vedic scholar. I can and do read classical Sanskrit which is the language that the commentators on the Veda write in. I can see what they are saying about the hymns, but the hymns themselves are beyond my humble capacities and, sadly, theirs as well. So there is really no "correct" here. (सायणभाष्यम्) माता। निर्मीयन्ते अस्मिन् भूतानीति माता द्यौः। दक्षिणायाः अभिमतपूरणसमर्थायाः पृथिव्याः धुरि निर्वहणे युक्ता आसीत् वर्षणाय समर्थाभूदित्यर्थः। कथमिति तदुच्यते। गर्भः गर्भस्थानीयः उदकसंघः वृजनीषु उदकवत्सु मेघपङ्क्तिषु अन्तः मध्ये अतिष्ठत् तिष्ठति। अनन्तरं वत्सः पुत्रस्थानीयः उदकसंघः त्रिषु योजनेषु मेघरश्मिवायुषु संयुक्तेषु सत्सु अमीमेत् वर्षणसमये शब्दयति। अनन्तरं विश्वरूप्यं विश्वरूपवतीं गाम् अनु अपश्यत् अनुक्रमेण पश्यति वर्षतीत्यर्थः। यद्वा। त्रिषु योजनेषु सत्सु वत्सो मेघो वर्षणाय गां भूमिं प्रति अमीमेत्। अनन्तरं सर्वो जनोऽनुक्रमेण विश्वरूप्यं सस्यादिभिर्नानारूपवतीं भूमिम् अपश्यत् पश्यति॥ What is the translation of sayana comment about rig veda 1.164.9?
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 16, 2022 13:44:22 GMT -6
So you want something to be correct and everything else to be wrong. This is not the way Vedic interpretation works. No one really knows what the author of the verse really meant, Everyone is guessing. Basically, Sayana gives two interpretations of the word yojana, one in which he uses a fanciful interpretation of yojana (cloud, ray of light, and wind) and one in which he uses the most common meaning of yojana as a measurement of distance (eight or nine miles times 3, "the sound of the calf extended over three yojanas."). So Sayana himself gives two options for the meaning of the passage. Which of those is correct? He says either of them are workable. Now I do think that H H Wilson's translation is misleading. For one thing the word he translates as "screams" is a form of the root mIm which does not mean scream. It means "to make a sound." Secondly, the combination of cloud, ray of light, and wind does not automatically make light sunlight. The Indic traditon recognizes the moon, for instance, as the giver of nectar to vegetables, as per the Bhagavad-gita, not the sun. So why not translate razmi as rays of moonlight here? There is, in my view, no reason to translate mIm as screams or razmi as sunlight here. Also, there is no reason to attribute causality to the triad (cloud, ray of light, and wind) in making the cow multi-formed. The word vizvarUpya merely modifies gAm. The cow is already multiformed. There is no reason to even take cow as the earth. This could be a multicolored cloud formation in the sky formed of cloud, light, and wind. Sayana's glossing the cow as earth is also the application of the much later idea of the Puranic representation of the earth as cow-formed. That it meant that to the poet Dirghatamas is highly unlikely. So, in summary, no, I don't think that either Sayana or Wilson's translation of Sayana are "correct" in sense you are seeking. This is the beauty of poetry and especially of ancient poetry like the Vedic poems. But I guess you are really interested in challenging my ability as a Vedic scholar. I am the first to admit that I am not a Vedic scholar. I can and do read classical Sanskrit which is the language that the commentators on the Veda write in. I can see what they are saying about the hymns, but the hymns themselves are beyond my humble capacities and, sadly, theirs as well. So there is really no "correct" here. (सायणभाष्यम्) माता। निर्मीयन्ते अस्मिन् भूतानीति माता द्यौः। दक्षिणायाः अभिमतपूरणसमर्थायाः पृथिव्याः धुरि निर्वहणे युक्ता आसीत् वर्षणाय समर्थाभूदित्यर्थः। कथमिति तदुच्यते। गर्भः गर्भस्थानीयः उदकसंघः वृजनीषु उदकवत्सु मेघपङ्क्तिषु अन्तः मध्ये अतिष्ठत् तिष्ठति। अनन्तरं वत्सः पुत्रस्थानीयः उदकसंघः त्रिषु योजनेषु मेघरश्मिवायुषु संयुक्तेषु सत्सु अमीमेत् वर्षणसमये शब्दयति। अनन्तरं विश्वरूप्यं विश्वरूपवतीं गाम् अनु अपश्यत् अनुक्रमेण पश्यति वर्षतीत्यर्थः। यद्वा। त्रिषु योजनेषु सत्सु वत्सो मेघो वर्षणाय गां भूमिं प्रति अमीमेत्। अनन्तरं सर्वो जनोऽनुक्रमेण विश्वरूप्यं सस्यादिभिर्नानारूपवतीं भूमिम् अपश्यत् पश्यति॥ What is the translation of sayana comment about rig veda 1.164.9? Look, Professor ing, we have been over this a hundred times. I don't have any more time to waste on this. I have other, more important things to do. Let me summarize: I would not say that Wilson's translation is wrong. It is an interpretation of the commentary that in my view is a bit of a stretch. There are other interpretations that I have already mentioned that I prefer. It would be interesting to see what Jamison and Brereton have made of this verse in their recent translation of the verse. Does any other member of the forum have access to their translation? If so, please post it. I have their translation, but I am not at home at present. For now, I am done with this topic.
|
|
ing
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by ing on May 16, 2022 16:14:02 GMT -6
(सायणभाष्यम्) माता। निर्मीयन्ते अस्मिन् भूतानीति माता द्यौः। दक्षिणायाः अभिमतपूरणसमर्थायाः पृथिव्याः धुरि निर्वहणे युक्ता आसीत् वर्षणाय समर्थाभूदित्यर्थः। कथमिति तदुच्यते। गर्भः गर्भस्थानीयः उदकसंघः वृजनीषु उदकवत्सु मेघपङ्क्तिषु अन्तः मध्ये अतिष्ठत् तिष्ठति। अनन्तरं वत्सः पुत्रस्थानीयः उदकसंघः त्रिषु योजनेषु मेघरश्मिवायुषु संयुक्तेषु सत्सु अमीमेत् वर्षणसमये शब्दयति। अनन्तरं विश्वरूप्यं विश्वरूपवतीं गाम् अनु अपश्यत् अनुक्रमेण पश्यति वर्षतीत्यर्थः। यद्वा। त्रिषु योजनेषु सत्सु वत्सो मेघो वर्षणाय गां भूमिं प्रति अमीमेत्। अनन्तरं सर्वो जनोऽनुक्रमेण विश्वरूप्यं सस्यादिभिर्नानारूपवतीं भूमिम् अपश्यत् पश्यति॥ What is the translation of sayana comment about rig veda 1.164.9? Look, Professor ing, we have been over this a hundred times. I don't have any more time to waste on this. I have other, more important things to do. Let me summarize: I would not say that Wilson's translation is wrong. It is an interpretation of the commentary that in my view is a bit of a stretch. There are other interpretations that I have already mentioned that I prefer. It would be interesting to see what Jamison and Brereton have made of this verse in their recent translation of the verse. Does any other member of the forum have access to their translation? If so, please post it. I have their translation, but I am not at home at present. For now, I am done with this topic. This is for the last Please the translation I sent
|
|