Page 488 - Lokmanya Tilak Samagra (khand 2)

VEDIC MYTHS-THE MATUTINAL DEITIES 269
But apart from the sleep of Vi~h~u which is Pura~ic, we
have a Vedic legend which has the same meaning. In the Rig-
Veda (VII, 100, 6 ), Vi~hp.u is represented as having a bad
name, viz., shipivi~Na. Thus the poet says, " 0 Vi~hp.u ! what
was there to be blamed in thee when thou declaredest 'I am
shipivis_h(a' ? " Yaska records ( Nir. V, 7- 9) an old tradition
that according to Aupamanyava, Vi~hp.u has two names Shipivi~h~a
and Vi~h1JU, of which the former has a bad sense ( kutsitarth£yam );
and then quotes the aforesaid verse which he explains in two
ways. The first of these two interpretations accords with that of
Aupamanyava; and shipivi~h~a is there explained by Yaska, to
mean shepa!z iva nirve~hti~a!z, or " enveloped like the private
parts, " or" with rays obscured", ( apratipanna-rashmih ). Yaska.
however, suggests an alternative interpretation and observes
that shipivi~h(a may be taken as a laudatory appellation, meaning
" one whose rays ( shipaya!z) are displayed ( avi~h~a!z )." It is
inferred by some scholars from this passage that the meaning
of the word shipivi~h(a had already become uncertain in the days
of Yaska; but I do not think it probable, for even in later litera-
ture shipivi~h~a 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 shipivi~h~a has a
bad meaning even in later Sanskrit literature. But in days when
the origin of this phrase, as applied to Vi~hJ].u, was forgotten,
theologians and scholars naturally tried to divest the phrase of
its opprobrious import by proposing alternative meanings; and
Yaska was probably the first Nairukta to formulate a good
meaning for shipivi~h~a by suggesting that shipi may be taken
to mean " rays". That is why the passage from the Mahabharata
( Shanti-Parvan, Chap. 342. vv. 69-71 ), quoted by Muir, tells
us that Yaska was the first to apply the epithet to Vi~h~u; and it
is unreasonable to infer from it, as Muir has done, that the writer
of the MaMbhArata "was not a particularly good Vedic scholar. "
In the Taittirtya Sarilhita, we are told that Vi~h~u was worshipped
as Shipivi~h(a ( II, 2, 12, 4 and 5 ), and that shipi means cattle or
pashava!z ( II, 5, 5, 2; Tan. Br. XVIII, 6, 26 ). Shipivi~h(a is thus
explained as a laudatory appellation by taking shipi equal to
' cattle ', ' sacrifice ' or ' rays '. But these etymological devices have
ailed to invest the word with a good sense in Sanskrit litera-