[Advaita-l] Yatha kapyasam pundarikamevakshini.

[Srikanta Narayanaswami]

Kapyasam pundarikamevakshiniHere is the entire text of the slokah nthe Chandogyopanishath,"tasya yatha kapyasam Pundarikamevakshini,which SriRamauja is said to have take exception to SriShakara's interpretation:






Chandogyopanishath,"Kapyasampundarikamevakshini",as "The two eyes 
of that Supremebeing are like lotuses resembling the buttocks of a 
monkey(kapyasam)".

This is wrong.First of all this interpretation is not by SriShankara,but
 by the vrttikara on Chandogyopanishath,Acharya Tank or Tankatreya ,who has written a vrtti on Chandogyopanishath.In his 
vrtti,Brahmanandin has given "six"interpretations on this statement.

The actual statement from the Chandogyopanishath is as follows:

"Tasya yatha kapyasam pundarikamevashini tasyoditi nama sa esha 
sarvebhyaha papmabhyaha udita udeti havai sarvebhya papmabhyo ya evam 
veda".

The Bhasya of Sri.Shankara is as follows:



"Tasya evam sarvatah suvarnavarnasyapi akshovisheshaha.Katham?Tasya 
yatha kapeh markatasya aasaha kapyasaha.Aaserupaveshanarthasya karane 
'ghang'.Kapi prstantantaha yena upavishati.Kapyasa iva pundarikam 
atyantatejasvi evam asya devasya akshini.Upamitoupamanatvat na 
hiinopama.Tasya evam gunavishishtasya gaunamidam nama ut iti.Katham 
gaunatvam?Sa esha devah sarvebhyaha papmabhyaha papmana saha 
tatkaryebhyah ityarthaha."Ya Atmaapahatapapma"(8-7-1)ityadi vakshati."



From the above,it is clear that Sri.Shankara has not used a 
"Neechopama"(an inferior simile.He explains,"Upamitopmanatvat na 
hiinopama",which means ,this simile is used just for comparision of one 
upamana to another,and not for direct comparision.

>From the point of view of academic interest,the point uder cosideration is the eyes of the 'Hiranyagarbha"which is red like the suvarna varna.It is the eyes which are red that is referred to.It is not the "prstabhaga"which is compared to the redess of the Lotus flower,but the rednessof the" prstanta "which is also red in colourrom the point of view of" vyakarana"which SriShankara explains:Asherupaveshaarthasya karane "ghang"(ghang pratyaya).Further He says:upamitoupamaatvat-na hinopama-it is ot an inferior simile.

The vrttikara-Tankatreya has given six interpretations:
1)Two interpretatios according to above.
2)kam pibhati iti kapih-nalah,the stem of the Lotus which drinks water.
3)kapayah asam pundarikamevakshini-the Lotus flower which blooms by the sun-kapayah
4)kap-which drinks water-the Lotus which is on water.
Sri.Ramanuja gives the iterpretatio i his SriBhashya as follows:"Gambhirambha samudbhuta ravikaravikasita sumrstanala pundarikadalakshinau"

However,all of the above interpretatios fits the statement,and it has been observed by a western scholar,that the above has emerged from the brai of a clever pundit(Refer:SriBhashya by Karmarkar)
N.Srikanta.