Talk:Nadistuti Sukta

Hinduism Low‑importance

	Hinduism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

India: Literature Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian literature workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

India: What can It Teach Us? Link

"Satadru (Sutlej)". "Parushni (Iravati, Ravi)". "Asikni, which means black". "It is the modern Chinab". " Marudvridha, a general name for river. According to Roth the combined course of the Akesines and Hydaspes". Vitasta, the last of the rivers of the Punjab, changed in Greek into Hydaspes"."It is the modern Behat or Jilam". "According to Yaska the Arjikiya is the Vipas". "Its modern name is Bias or Bejah". "According to Yaska the Sushoma is the Indus". http://books.google.co.in/books/about/India.html?id=bgZQBr1RzbgC&redir_esc=y — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirjhara (talk • contribs) 15:41, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Order of the rivers

Is the order of the rivers correct? I remember having read somewhere that the Griffith translation has not the correct order. The Sanskrit original has a different order than the Griffith translation (RV.75.5):

इमं मे गङगे यमुने सरस्वति शुतुद्रि सतेमं सचता परुष्ण्या | असिक्न्या मरुद्व्र्धे वितस्तयार्जीकीये शर्णुह्यासुषोमया || imaṃ me ghaṅghe yamune sarasvati śutudri stemaṃ sacatā paruṣṇyā | asiknyā marudvṛdhe vitastayārjīkīye śṛṇuhyāsuṣomayā ||

--Rayfield 22:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my mistake, sorry, I didn't pay attention [1]. dab (ᛏ) 07:26, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template removed

Removed “original research” template. As the subject concerned is narrow and doesn’t require many sources

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Nadistutisukta.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:08, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]