about parjanya

[cardona at unagi.cis.upenn.edu]

>in RV VIII, 25, 14-15:
>        uta naH sindhur apaam tan marutas tad azvinaa /
>        indro viSNur miiDhvaamsaH sajoSasaH //
>        te hi Smaa vanuSo naro 'bhimaatim kayasya cit /
>        tigmam na kSodaH pratighnanti bhuurNayaH //
>A. Langlois in his translation (Rig Veda, Paris, 1872, VI, II, V, p. 419)
>include _sindhur apaam_ in this list of warrior gods and translate him by
>_le (dieu) qui lance la pluie_ (the god who throws the rain) and, in a
>subsequent note, as being Parjanya!
>        I would like to know if:
>        1) the inclusion is syntactically correct ?
>        2) _sindhur apaam_ is an elsewhere attested designation for Parjanya ?
>I would prefer the general meaning:
>        for us the waters because:
>        1) some gods are with us
>        2) in battle they act as furious waters
>But I am not a specialist (I don't understand very well the two _tad_) and
>an expert advice would help me!
>        many thanks,
>
SAyaNa does take sindhuH as referring to Parjanya: sindhuH syandanaxIlaH
parjanyaH.  However, sindhur apAm can also appropriately be taken as
involving a genitive of the type xUrANAM xUratamaH (the Sindhu among the
waters), which is the construction Geldner seems to assume.  On the other
hand, Renou (Etudes vediques et panineennes vol. 7, p. 69) seems to assume
that apAm is construed with an understood term (napAt ?).  As for tad, this
is the corelative to yad of the preceding verse.  Regards, George Cardona