Artic Home of the Aryans by Lokamanya Bal ... - Mandhata Global

307
explained by Yâska, to mean shepah iva nirveshtitah, or “enveloped
like the private parts,” or “with rays obscured” (apratipanna-rashmih).
Yâska, however, suggests an alternative interpretation and observes
that shipivishta may be taken as a laudatory appellation, meaning
“one whose rays (shipayah) are displayed (âvishtâh).” It is inferred by
some scholars from this passage that the meaning of the word
shipivishta had already become uncertain in the days of Yâska; but I
do not think it probable, for even in later literature shipivishta is an
opprobrious appellation meaning either “one whose hair has fallen
off,” or “one who is afflicted with an incurable skin disease.” The exact
nature of the affliction may be uncertain; but there can be no doubt
that shipivishta has a bad meaning even in later Sanskrit literature.
But in days when the origin of this phrase, as applied to Vishnu, was
forgotten, theologians and scholars naturally tried to divest the phrase
of its opprobrious import by proposing alternative meanings; and
Yâska was probably the first Nairukta to formulate a good meaning
for shipivishta by suggesting that shipi may be taken to mean “rays.”
That is why the passage from the Mahâbhârata (Shânti-Parvan,
Chap. 342, vv. 69-71), quoted by Muir, tells us that Yâska was the
first to apply the epithet to Vishnu; and it is unreasonable to infer from
it, as Muir has done, that the writer of the Mahâbhârata “was not a
particularly good Vedic scholar.” In the Taittirîya Samhitâ, we are told
that Vishnu was worshipped as Shipivishta (II, 2, 12, 4 and 5), and
that shipi means cattle or pashavah (II, 5, 5, 2; Tân. Br. XVIII, 16, 26).
Shipivishta is thus explained as a laudatory appellation by taking shipi
equal to “cattle,” “sacrifice” or “rays.” But these etymological devices
have failed to invest the word with a good sense in Sanskrit literature;
and this fact by itself is sufficient to show that the word shipivishta
originally was, and has always been, a term of reproach indicating
some bodily affliction, though the nature of it was not exactly known.
The theological scholars, it is true, have tried to explain the word in a
different sense; but this is due to their unwillingness to give
opprobrious names