नहुस्
यन्त्रोपारोपितकोशांशः
सम्पाद्यताम्Apte
सम्पाद्यताम्
 पृष्ठभागोऽयं यन्त्रेण केनचित् काले काले मार्जयित्वा यथास्रोतः परिवर्तयिष्यते। तेन मा भूदत्र शोधनसम्भ्रमः। सज्जनैः मूलमेव शोध्यताम्। |
नहुस् [nahus], m.
A neighbour.
A man.
Monier-Williams
सम्पाद्यताम्|
पृष्ठभागोऽयं यन्त्रेण केनचित् काले काले मार्जयित्वा यथास्रोतः परिवर्तयिष्यते। तेन मा भूदत्र शोधनसम्भ्रमः। सज्जनैः मूलमेव शोध्यताम्। |
नहुस् m. neighbour , fellow-creature , man , ( comp. हुष्-टर, nearer than a -nnearer , x , 49 , 8 )
नहुस् m. (collect. , also pl. )neighbourhood , mankind RV. (See. Naigh. ii , 2 ).
Vedic Index of Names and Subjects
सम्पाद्यताम्|
पृष्ठभागोऽयं यन्त्रेण केनचित् काले काले मार्जयित्वा यथास्रोतः परिवर्तयिष्यते। तेन मा भूदत्र शोधनसम्भ्रमः। सज्जनैः मूलमेव शोध्यताम्। |
Nahus occurs several times in the Rigveda, but the exact sense is not certain. Ludwig[१] sees in the Nahus a tribe on the Sindhu (Indus)[२] or Sarasvatī,[३] rich in horses,[४] allied with the Bharatas and Śimyus,[५] connected with Kakṣīvant and the Vārṣāgiras,[६] and having as kings Maśarśāra and Āyavasa.[७] Roth,[८] on the other hand, sees in Nahus the general sense of ‘neighbour’ as opposed to a member of one's own people (Viś); this interpretation is supported by the occurrence of the phrase nahuṣo nahuṣṭara,[९] ‘closer than a neighbour.’ Nahuṣa has the same sense as Nahus in two passages of the Rigveda,[१०] but in one it seems to be intended for the proper name of a man.[११] Possibly Nahus was originally a man like Manu.[१२]
- ↑ Translation of the Rigveda, 3, 206.
- ↑ Rv. i. 31, 11;
vi. 22, 10;
46, 7;
x. 80, 6. - ↑ Rv. vii. 95, 2. Cf. ix. 88, 2;
91, 2. - ↑ Rv. viii. 6, 24.
- ↑ Rv. i. 100, 18;
vii. 18, 5. - ↑ Rv. i. 100, 16. 17.
- ↑ Rv. i. 122, 15. Cf. also nahuṣo viśaḥ, Rv. vii. 6, 5;
x. 49, 8;
99, 7, etc. - ↑ St. Petersburg Dictionary, s.v.
- ↑ Rv. x. 49, 8. Cf. also viii. 8, 3.
- ↑ i. 31, 11;
v. 12, 6. - ↑ Rv. viii. 46, 27.
- ↑ Oldenberg, Sacred Books of the East, 46, 28;
Bergaigne, Religion Védique, 2, 324. But Nahus, if it was originally the name of a mythic forefather, cannot have been that of a forefather recognized by all the tribes, for there is no passage in which it applies to all men. Geldner, Ṛgveda, Glossar, 92, regards Nahus as a tribe, Nahuṣa as a king. Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, 128, leaves the question open. Cf. Muir, Sanskrit Texts, 1^2, 165, n. 7;
179 et seq.;
307 et seq.