Read Book Online : http://www.archive.org/stream/vedicconcordance00bloouoft#page/n7/mode/2up

Download pdf Book : http://ia700409.us.archive.org/22/items/vedicconcordance00bloouoft/vedicconcordance00bloouoft.pdf

A Vedic Word Concordance (Sanskrit: Vaidika-Padānukrama-Koṣa ) is a multi-volume concordance of the corpus of Vedic Sanskrit texts. It has been under preparation from 1930 and was published in 1935-1965 under the guidance of Viśvabandhu Śāstrī (d. 1973), with an introduction in Sanskrit and English. It aims to be "a universal vocabulary register" of "Vedic works, with complete textual reference and critical commentary bearing on phonology, accent, etymo-morphology, grammar, metre, text-criticism, and Ur-Aryan philology". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Vedic_Word_Concordance

Presenting an Enlarged Electronic Version of Bloomfield's A Vedic Concordance The files contained in the freely downloadable archive presented in this site are the result of a research project undertaken by Marco Franceschini at the Department of Oriental Studies of the University of Turin: an enlarged electronic version of Bloomfield's 1906 A Vedic Concordance is now available, five years after the first electronic version of Bloomfield’s original work. Some 20,000 mantras have been added to the already considerable bulk of textual material contained in Bloomfield’s Concordance: the "new" mantras are taken from six Vedic texts which were not included in the previous version or were in need of major revision, namely Paippalada-Samhita (books 1-15), Jaiminiya-Brahmana, Katha-Aranyaka, Manava-Srautasutra, Jaiminiya-Grhyasutra and Varaha-Grhyasutra. The inner architecture of Bloomfield’s work has been preserved as far as possible, with all added, emended or modified text being visualized in red. http://orient.dslo.unibo.it/OSite/vedicconc2005.html

This is a BIG book - 101 mb download !!

Indra is the god most mentioned in the Rig Vedas, with Agni, the God of Fire also given large devotion. This would place the creation of this collection in the Indus valley, while the Ganges plain was still unstable and general forest, but slowly getting cleared out with the help of fire as forests were cleared. The geological record shows that when the Deccan plate hit Eurasia, the Indus-Ganges trough was formed, most of it submerged under the Indian Ocean. Then, over thousands of years, and many moons later, as the rubble and silt and rock came down the Indus and Ganges Valleys floodwaters and landslides, we now have a 800 foot layer of mud around Panipat, Haridwar and Najibabad. It is 375 feet thick a south as Lucknow and Kanpur, and 275 feet thick at Varanasi. That, BTH, is a lot of mud to play with as the Ganges plain is re-landscaped to yield a 3x topology in the next river-sculptor (circa 2100), as the Ganges is brought under control in an architecture similar to the how the Rhine was rengineered (recommend you take a Google map trip)... Just a thought.

Switzerland, germany, france border (on the River Rhine) is at: Lat: 47°34'57.75"N; Long: 7°35'12.62"E http://maps.google.com/maps?q=47.584226,7.585888&iwloc=A&hl=en&biw=1371&bih=873&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=il

@ Qamar: Many thanks for sharing this info about the formation of the Ganges doab and it's future.It is fascinating to learn of this most fertile of river valleys on the face of this planet.The fertile alluvium washed down from the Himalyas has since times immemorial increased the fertility of the Gangetic basin. Btw : Indra is not a god but a dev (archangel if you may) His title is Devendra (First among the dev (angels) Indra in fact is a post not a position held in perpetuity.And so is Agni he too is a Dev.The Vedas speak of ONE god only Parbrahmm.All are his manifestations and avtars over time in the sanatan Dharma.

Will it help in my reading of the Rigveda? Will have to try.

Where do you get the samhitas in devnagari?

Gorakhpur In UP is the biggest centre for most religious text.

@Digvijay, I have usually seen Indra and Agni referred to as the chief gods of the Rig-Veda period. Here are three links that you should revise to clarify: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigvedic_deities http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indra#In_the_Rig_Veda http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni

@ QR May I please humbly point out that Wikipedia is NOT the place to look for information or clarification on complex and arcane issues like the ones relating to Indian religious philosophy or Vedic studies? The article is at best pedestrian and at worst useless. The place to go is of, course, the Rig Veda and its commentaries to understand what is written in it. Then again texts can be read and understood at many levels. DSK's understanding is at a deeper and more metaphysical level which takes into account more than just the literal meaning of some of the words in the hymns. From what I have read of the Rig Veda up till now it has struck me as a very down to earth depiction of earthly concerns with flashes of acute metaphysical insight. The concept the parambrahma is very clear to anyone who reads Vedic and Upanishadic texts and Hindu religious texts. The Bhagwat Geeta , for example, explains it at length. There is a difference between 'Gods' or Devas/Devtas and Parambrahma. ' Gods ' should not be confused with the 'God' of monotheistic religions. Nor is there any real correspondence between 'God' and parambrahma. ( An absorbing issue which I can elaborate upon if anyone is interested. :)

@Sumedha, by 2010, Wikipedia has emerged as the most visited online encyclopaedia. It is where the acolyte of knowledge may savor the introductory musings about a concept or phenomenon, as one attempts to move toward the most scholarly priesthood standing guard at the most prestigious journal on that topic. While the contents Wikipedia may be pedestrian in the hierarchy of freshness of information or degree of precision, it behooves all experts to make it accurate and inviting to read ala Occam's razor metaphor. I encourage you to elaborate in Wikipedia, where your entry will be accessible more easily. :)

...'Wikipedia' is a quite brilliant invention... and anybody who has half a brain cell realises it's only 'the starting point' for further/deeper exploration... only pseudo-academic snobs pretend otherwise...

Well, Julian Craig, I will have to candidly admit that i do not have even half a brain cell as per your formulation. I wonder where they migrated as I do remember starting out with quite a few. Should make it a point to look for them in your posts perhaps? Or will trying to find the employment of brain cells in your posts be a wasted endeavor? @ QR I do not think I can accept your encouragement to do something about Wikipedia since i dont really care enough about it. Why should i waste my time on it? I do not refer to it or need it. (Except when someone tries to make a point using a link when i visit it and find it as pedestrian and limited as ever.) I would like to alert you to the dangers of reading and believing Wikipedia on serious topics. Specially those which require in depth study. The introductory musings may lead you off to follow dozens of red herrings and you may never find your way back. Rather than freshness of information or degree of precision the problem lies more in the degree of understanding of complex religious, philosophical, historical and social issues. Again I am afraid i do not subscribe to the view that facts exist in some kind of democracy and that if a great number of people believe in something it is bound to be true or correct. What has the number of visits to do with the correctness of facts? By the way why have you jumped to the defense of Wikipedia like lioness saving her cub ?! I foresee a thread on Wikipedia instead of the topic we were discussing!

Wikipedia's influence on the internet masses is quite simply astounding ! It has over the years improvised the credibility of its content by setting up systems wherein random editing does not go unchecked. It is definitely not the last word....but certainly the most credible information to start with. Sufficient for most people with casual interest.

Sumedha Verma....we are listening. Please go on with your exposition... : )

...ha ha ha ~ that's the spirit, Sumedha ! All this 'love & peace & understanding' is making me feel quite giddy....

Am sorry to pitch in like this but i seem to agree with what Sumedha says ...wiki does send you on a wild goose chase sometimes and cannot be for serious readers.It can at best be used as a reference to then delve deeper.

@ JC Any time... :) @ RBSI Wikipedia has too many champions..perhaps i had better retire while i am still unhurt?! :) Did you mean the exposition on Wikipedia or the one on parambrahma ?

SVO : Your thought-process on the concept of Parabrahma...ofcourse.

@ Sumedha: I am all ears please.I think all of us stand to gain.

Have to go out for dinner but watch this space... Social life interferes with FB!! Should one become an FB 'hermit'?!

Have fun !! We can wait...

@Sumedha, My comments were regarding the Rig-Veda, which I place around 3500 years ago - or our Indo-Aryan ancestor nomads 175 generations ago... I certainly managed to evoke a passionate response from you. Re wikiP, I volunteer to revise their entries from the richer depth and breadth that I hope will be expressed on this thread. Please expound on your construct. I am intrigued by your assertion regarding the non-correspondence between 'God' and parambrahma.

Can't stay in the wings for too long! Metaphysics exists for every mundane word, howsoever mundane or profound. Metaphysics, by definition, really does not exist, but can make mountains of mole-hills. I tend to agree with SVO (I don't like acronyms, as they always lend credence to "meta") when she says Rigveda is "very down to earth depiction of earthly concerns". I will heavily discount "flashes of insights and metaphysics" as, to some, it us full of insights and only metaphysics, to some others, it is all mumbo- jumbo. I take the SVO middle-path. Brahman and Para-brahman are two shining examples.

Shekar : But....why do you have to stay in the wings ?? Go ahead and dazzle us with the brilliance of a thousand suns (now, thats beginning to sound like metaphysics ). An inspiring bit of information to my avid and brilliant commentors...the latest FB stats on RBSI indicate : Monthly Active Users : 6205 Daily Post Views : 54702 Monthly Post Views : 1,000,342 !! Whatever this means...it is quite evident that you have a HUGE and silent audience reading your generally absorbing discussions and those ocassional "flashes of insights" ! To all my articulate members...do share your knowledge without any hesitation...you have an audience of a lifetime.

@RBSI: Eyeballs!! Notwithstanding them, I took delight in Sumedha Verma Ojha's observation "i do not subscribe to the view that facts exist in some kind of democracy and that if a great number of people believe in something it is bound to be true or correct". So much for majority, which rules in a democratic governance structure, not in science and superstition. And I take delight in the numbers you attract.

@Amita Roy: Gitapress,not of much use. Mostly religious reprints after reprints. Where should really look for samhitas?

Shekar : Will post a few Samhitas on RBSI soon. Have kept them ready..

gr8

Sorry for the delay but here are some thoughts on 'God' and Parmeshwar. Parmeshwar/Paramatma/Parabrahma I have written in a post above that ‘God’ and ‘Gods’ are different and Parmeshwar/ Paramatma / Parabrahma is a concept without any analogies in monotheistic systems. Let me expand. Creation consists of the two forces of Purush and Prakriti and, beyond them, Parmeshwar. These can also be called ‘Jeev’, ‘Jagat’ and Parmeshwar. (Some believe these are the same in essence, others that Jeev and Jagat are different, either slightly or greatly, and so arise the Advaita, Vishisht Advaita and Dvaita schools of thought. I am a firm believer of Advaita as the following will show.) Parmeshwar is one, eternal, universal and non material. Divinity is unmanifest and manifest, Nirguna and Saguna, व्यक्त and अव्यक्त. Worshipping Lord Vishnu or Lord Shiva or Goddess Durga are ways of worshipping the many forms of the manifest which is a more accessible form of worship for those whose minds do not easily grasp the abstract. They are part of the Vibhutis of parmeshwar. Vibhuti is difficult to translate accurately; maybe its sense can be conveyed by using the English word extension or enlargement, maybe not. The Brihataraynakopanishad’s famous Neti, Neti formulation first names manifestations of Parmeshwar and then tells the seeker that Parmeshwar is none of these but something beyond. The tenth chapter of the Bhagwat Geeta describes the Vibhutis of Parmeshwar in great detail, Chapter Seven to Chapter Seventeen explain ज्ञान- विज्ञान, क्षर -अक्षर ,क्षेत्र- क्षेत्रज्ञ which is the conceptual philosophical understanding of the nature of the world and its phenomena as well as the knowing and understanding of the nature of Parmeshwar. There is no ‘God’ or prophets/sons of God in this understanding; all are manifestations of the same underlying inexplicable essence, or force which is Parmeshwar. The so called 33 crore gods and goddesses are all part of Parmeshwar. Chapter 11 verse 15 to 22 of the BG can be read for a description of this reality. ‘God’ has no extensions; he does not share ‘godhood’ with anyone or anything else. Parmeshwar’s Vibhuti is part of all creation and beyond. मयि सर्वमिदं प्रोतं सूत्रे मणिगणा इव (BG 7.7) i.e. like jewels intertwined in a single thread of divinity is all of creation and by one atom of Parmeshwar is the world pervaded; विष्टभ्याहमिदं कृत्स्नमेकान्शेन स्थितो जगत ( BG 10.42). Polytheism is therefore a form of worship and understanding that reveres and respects diversity in the experienced reality and also posits a basic unity in all of creation.

I am reserving a comment. I must meditate before offering an immediate quip. :|

RBSI, Digvijay Singh Kushwaha and Quamar Rehmani I hope you guys did not lose interest because of the delay in the post! QR, this will not fit exactly into any article on the Rig Veda so the editing you had volunteered to do will have to wait!

Good piece Sumedha! You have a deeper knowledge of Parabrahma. He is 'Para'Brahma, who illuminates us during 'Para', during our life-time, not 'Apara' after our death! However, one life time is not enough to see that 'Parabrahma'! Let us continue our hunt for him!!!

Forgot to thank you! you ignited my mind to analyse 'Para' and 'Brahma'!!! Thanks again! Keep me busy, let more thoughts ignite ('Agni') my mind!!!

In actual fact Gauri it was a learning and philosophical experience for me to articulate my somewhat inchoate thoughts in a clear way. Writing this piece helped me, too. So thanks are due to Qamar Rehmani for being the catalyst!

Thank you Sumedha Verma...truly enlightening !