: To be clear, I can't fault Seeraj for not picking up the additional bits of
: interpretation or the reverse 117 reference. She couldn't have translated
: it herself since she used a pre-existing translation, and that's necessary
: since the Sanskrit of the Rigveda ceased to be common speech over 3,000
: years ago and uses words not found in present-day Sanskrit. For example,
: the word "Atharyum" for "fire" or "flame" in
: that particular verse appears to be a hapax legomenon since it's a word
: for fire found in the related Avestan language, but not Sanskrit.

: Long story short, it took me multiple searches on internet Sanskrit
: dictionaries to come up with a straightforward literal translation that
: sounded meaningful. Sanskrit is a highly inflected language to the point
: that word order can be essentially randomized, so rendering ancient poetic
: Sanskrit in a sensible form in English is not easy! It really makes me
: wonder how much research went into the inclusion of this brief half-verse.

: I'm happy that this was a constructive addition, especially since ancient
: languages are one of my areas of interest. I think this more meaningful
: than the wild speculation I took part in half a lifetime ago. :)

: P.S. Happy New Year to Snipe and thanks for the heads-up!

Happy new year to you too!! :)