Regarding Chandogya verse

[TruthSeeker]

The admin of this site forwarded me a mail and asked for my opinion: I am posting it here just to get more opinion.

OK, you say Islamist saying your Krishna is a piece of **** is offending and you want to debate him and show his place. Now consider this, tasya yathâ kapyâsam pundarîkam evam akshinî - , this is from caandogya upanishad. I say this means, Lord eyes resembles the flower bloomed by the one that sucks water (sun), thus indicating, Lord eyes resembles Lotus flower.
Now, pls do find out what sankaracharya says - (Veda belittles by saying,)Lord eyes resembles the bottom back (You want me to spell it out)of monkey
Now, to tell you, all advaitin has moved away from this remark and embrace the visishtadvaita interpretation fully going against their philosophy, that is OK, they need to change, however, do tell me, is not it the interpretation offensive??

The issue is the Chandogya 1.6.7 verse.

The standard Advaitin translations for the verse is "The two eyes of that golden Purusha are like two lotuses which are red like the bottom of a monkey"

The Vishsitadvaitin commentary given by Ramanuja is "The eyes of the golden Purusha are as lovely as the lotuses blossomed by the rays of the Sun."

From a superficial glance, both translations are read and concluded that Shankaracharya belittled the vedas by choosing an offensive when the
much more lovely translation given by Ramanujacharya was available. The word that is translated by them differently is kapyAsaM, Shankara as "monkey bottom" and Ramanuja as "blossomed by the (rays of the) sun".

Shankara's uses kapeH(of the monkey) AsaH(bottom) = kapyAsaM( bottom of the monkey)

Ramanuja's uses kapinA(by the sun) AsaH(blossom) = kapyAsaM (blossomed by the sun)

Both the meanings have been based on the same term kapiH. Shankara uses the standard meaning of kapiH - monkey and cannot be faulted.

Ramanuja uses the meaning sun for kapiH.

To comment on this mail, I have to say this:

Point 1.
I am not convinced of Ramanuja's meaning for kapyAsaM

I think sun as a meaning for kapiH is not possibly correct, and is not found in standard dictionaries. I did not find this meaning listed on Amarakosha, so it maybe a latter addition. It is not listed in Apte's dictionary either.

The meaning kapiH for sun is derived from kaM( water) pipati(drinks) -kapaH (one who drinks water). Thus sun gets the meaning from "one who drinks water" ( by evaporation) and it is kapaH and not kapiH. If we use kapaH along with AsaM, we would get only kapAsaM and not kapyAsaM.
Thus, technically, Ramnauja's meaning of Sun there would not be correct unless Sun has a direct meaning from kapiH( which I cant verify from major dictionaries of Apte and Amarakosha). The meaning maybe found in less authentic dictionaries, however, so Ramanuja's meaning maybe accepted. In any case if kapiH is supposed to mean "one who drinks water", then it is grammatically incorrect.

Point 2.

Shankaracharya's interpretation is not offensive.

Shankaracharya intends to say only this, and I dont know why Advaitins are "embracing the visishtadvaita interpretation". Yes, I did see some Advaitin translations using Ramanuja's translation, and was surprised at their deserting Shankaracharya when it was not necessary at all.

Are the eyes of the golden Purusha comparable with the lotuses? Yes, they are comparable in the same way as the lotus is comparable to the monkey's bottom. This is the gist of the Chandogya verse. No comparisons of the Purusha with the lotus is possible and is as offensive as comparing the lotus with the bottom of the monkey. I would personally prefer Shankaracharya's commentary over Ramanuja's in this context.

I request Satay to pass this on to the original poster of the mail, and let us know his opinion.

[tatvam]

The meaning kapiH for sun is derived from kaM( water) pipati(drinks) -kapaH (one who drinks water). Thus sun gets the meaning from "one who drinks water" ( by evaporation) and it is kapaH and not kapiH. If we use kapaH along with AsaM, we would get only kapAsaM and not kapyAsaM.

Namaste Truthseekr,
Here KA-Means water and PIBATI -means to drink. Water-drinker is thus 'KAPI' .
I don't how did you get word 'KapaH' .
Yes , you are true that KapiH has the meaning "monkey' in all Sanskrit dictionaries..but here not only the dictionary can give you the exact meaning for Shruthi..but also your love towards God.
Think in common way..does Shruthi compare eyes of Purusha with bottom of Moneky?
let us don't follow blindly anybody's philosophy(either Shankara or Ramanuja).

[sarabhanga]

tasya yathA kapyAsaM puNDarIkamevamakshiNI |
tasyoditi nAma |
sa eSa sarvebhyaH pApmabhya uditaH |
udeti ha vai sarvebhyaH pApmabhyo ya evaM veda ||

That very one whose eyes are just like the blue lotus,
His name is ut,
For he has risen (udita) above all evil.
He also who knows this, rises above all evil.

puNDarIka generally refers to the white lotus, and kapyAsa here indicates the particular shade of this flower. With kapyAsam puNDarIkam translating simply as “monkey-seat lotus”.

kapyAsa is a simple compound ~ kapya-Asa or “ape-seat”. And “seat” here assumes the sense of “throne” (i.e. from which one rises).

[TruthSeeker]

Namaste Truthseekr,
Here KA-Means water and PIBATI -means to drink. Water-drinker is thus 'KAPI' .
I don't how did you get word 'KapaH' .

We get kapaH from the Astadhyayi sutra - 3.02.003 (ATaH anupasarge KaH) . kapiH is not a valid rendering of kaM pibhati, according to Panini grammar. It might be valid in a pre paninian context, so we can accept Ramanuja's words. ( that is why major dictionairies do not approve that meaning for kapiH, as it breaks Panini grammar). Vedas can be interpreted without regards to strict grammer for this reason.

Yes , you are true that KapiH has the meaning "monkey' in all Sanskrit dictionaries..but here not only the dictionary can give you the exact meaning for Shruthi..but also your love towards God.
Think in common way..does Shruthi compare eyes of Purusha with bottom of Moneky?
let us don't follow blindly anybody's philosophy(either Shankara or Ramanuja).

I find Shankaracharya's translation more correct for the reasons I gave earlier: - Not blind following.

Purusha's eyes are comparable to the lotus in the same way as the lotus is comparable to the monkey bottom. Meaning, apart from the redness that is common to the lotus and the monkey bottom, there is nothing common between lotus and Purusha. Purusha is incomparable to the lotus in anyway - that is the essence. Comparing any earthly object with Purusha ( even the lotus) is a shame, and is explicitly indicated by Shankara in his commentary.(by the term parihAsaM)

Let us more objective in judging the merits of different systems, and judge them on their own merit. Please dont put words in the mouth of others, and please stop your unhealthy attitude.

[Sudarshan]

This is the original author's comments(Jalasayanan) on the other forum:

kapyAsaM has a different root, is defined as ka aapa asyam pibati iti

kaM referring to Water is erronous understanding for ka does not refer to earthly water but water in the river MaitrS specifically

51 kapi m. (%{kamp} Un2. iv , 143) , an ape , monkey RV. x , 86 , 5 AV. Mn. Sus3r. &c. ; an elephant L. ; Emblica Officinalis L. ; a species of Karan5ja L. ; Olibanum L. ; the sun L. ; N. of Vishn2u or Kr2ishn2a MBh. xiii , 7045 ; N. of several men ; (%{ayas}) m. pl.N. of a school ; (%{i} , %{I}) f. a female ape L. ; (mfn.) brown Comm. on Un2. ; [cf. Gk. $ &78154[250 ,3] $ $ $ Old Germ. {affo} ; Angl. Sax. {apa} ; Eng. {ape}.]

shrii raamaaNujaa has given explation why the word means so, thus "you are true that KapiH has the meaning "monkey' in all Sanskrit dictionaries" the statement by tattvam is wrong and doubt of Truthseeker "Ramnauja's meaning of Sun there would not be correct unless Sun has a direct meaning from kapiH" is clarified

Purusha's eyes are comparable to the lotus in the same way as the lotus is comparable to the monkey bottom. Meaning, apart from the redness that is common to the lotus and the monkey bottom, there is nothing common between lotus and Purusha. Purusha is incomparable to the lotus in anyway - that is the essence

This is wrong as redness of monkey bottom is blood red and lotus is not so, if the phrases lists all redness then statement should read, kapyaasam pundariikam ca akshinii thus falling in the group of lists, where in usage of evam referes to one to one comparison, of courser, I am not going here by the literal meaing of the word evam, but in the essence of brahmana and saMhita, where this word is used to denote "know from the root", thus where ever the word evam is used in comparison, the object used as example as to be splitted down to roots to know the meaning, thus sha.nkara using literal well known meaning of kapiH is wrong.

[sarabhanga]

tasya yathA kapyAsaM puNDarIkamevamakshiNI

That very one whose eyes are like the blushful lotus

kapyAsa is (very simply) kapi (ape) + Asa (seat) = kapyAsa (ape-seat).

And thus Shankaracarya is entirely correct !

sa eSa sarvebhyaH pApmabhya uditaH |
udeti ha vai sarvebhyaH pApmabhyo ya evaM veda ||

For he has risen above all evil.
He also who knows this, rises above all evil.

[TruthSeeker]

kapyAsaM has a different root, is defined as ka aapa asyam pibati iti

Should be worded as kaM aapa asyAm pibati iti
Which is an essential rehash of kaM pibati. Which root is different? So that leads only to kapaH. If you so sure it is kapiH, why dont you demonstrate from which sutra this is based on?

kaM referring to Water is erronous understanding for ka does not refer to earthly water but water in the river MaitrS specifically

What difference does it make? kaH means water, and has many other meanings. Does not change any derivations either.

Originally Posted by Online sanskrit dictionary
51 kapi m. (%{kamp} Un2. iv , 143) , an ape , monkey RV. x , 86 , 5 AV. Mn. Sus3r. &c. ; an elephant L. ; Emblica Officinalis L. ; a species of Karan5ja L. ; Olibanum L. ; the sun L. ; N. of Vishn2u or Kr2ishn2a MBh. xiii , 7045 ; N. of several men ; (%{ayas}) m. pl.N. of a school ; (%{i} , %{I}) f. a female ape L. ; (mfn.) brown Comm. on Un2. ; [cf. Gk. $ &78154[250 ,3] $ $ $ Old Germ. {affo} ; Angl. Sax. {apa} ; Eng. {ape}.]

kapiH without a demonstrated yaugikArta cannot stand for the Sun. Please show a reference from traditional dictionaries like Amarakosha, niruktam etc. Or please demonstrate a valid derivation.(the above is wrong, and if you are correct, please cite the sutra used)

This is wrong as redness of monkey bottom is blood red and lotus is not so, if the phrases lists all redness then statement should read, kapyaasam pundariikam ca akshinii thus falling in the group of lists, where in usage of evam referes to one to one comparison, of courser, I am not going here by the literal meaing of the word evam, but in the essence of brahmana and saMhita, where this word is used to denote "know from the root", thus where ever the word evam is used in comparison, the object used as example as to be splitted down to roots to know the meaning, thus sha.nkara using literal well known meaning of kapiH is wrong.

Not relevant. Ramanuja's derivation for kapiH has not been demonstrated yet by you - what you have written is grammatically erroneous. Even if you manage to do it, it follows from a secondary meaning, while kapiH as monkey is direct primary meaning. The "blood redness" has nothing to do with the comparison. The kind of comparison used by Shankara is hIna upamAna, where a comparison is altogether abandoned in the absence of a yard stick of comparison. God::Lotus::Lotus:Monkey is the same as Beautiful:Ugly::Beautiful:Ugly. By celestial standards, the lotus is very ugly(incomparable) compared to the Purusha.

________________________

Note:

As I pondered over this, Ramanuja's meaning can be derived as kaM pIyate kapIH. Note that the root for pibati is pA, and that for pIyate is pI, and they are different roots leading to kapaH and kapIH. So Sun would be kapIH or kapaH and not kapiH. kapIH + Asam = kapyAsaM is therefore correct.

[sarabhanga]

Namaste TS,

kapiH is nominative and Asam is accusative, and if they were combined the result would be kapirAsam ~ not kapyAsam.

But the term is a simple compound of kapi and Asa (i.e. kapyAsam, in accusative case)

And you have suggested kapIH, which specifically indicates a female monkey, although both kapi + Asa and kapI + Asa would equally give the desired kapyAsa.

kapi is derived from kamp (to quiver or quicken) ~ cf. kampe (I am shaking or hastening).

[TruthSeeker]

kapiH and Asam cannot be combined, a suitable form of kapiH has to be used like kapeH or kapinA, as I indicated earler.

By kapIH, I meant the Sun. ( Ramanuja's way)

[sarabhanga]

A suitable form of kapiH is kapi, and kapi + Asa = kapyAsa