[Advaita-l] Yadhava Prakasha

venkata subramanian venkat_advaita at rediffmail.com
Mon May 12 05:08:34 CDT 2003

Dear all,

  It is as i am told, difficult to identify Yadhava Prkasha as an 
advaitin, rather some hold him as a one belonging to the School of 
Bhedabheda - identity cum difference.

be it so....coming to the point

1.  His Meaning on Kapyasam, appearing in the Chandogya Upanishad, 
has been commented by Bhagavan Sri Shankaracarya in the way as 
shown.  Kapyasam according to the Acharya is a compound.  Kapi is 
Monkey ( it is a Rudi - Meaning by identification and not 
etimology)  Asam is etymologically derived as the Nates.
Thus Kapyasam means the Nates of a monkey.

The Acharya as a true all-knower, has rightly forecasted such an 
objection like that from sri ramanuja and thus has made his remark 
: the comparison is not directly between God's Eyes and the Nates 
of a Monkey, but the God's Eyes are like a lotus, where, for the 
redness of the Lotus, the Nates of a monkey is given as an 
example. Thus there is no inferior Comparison  ( Hina Upamana)

Ramanuja is by no way original - see Brahma Vidya Abharanam 
(Commentary on Brahma Sutra Bhashya of Sri Shankaracharya ; 
published by Sanskrit Education Society, Madras)  in the Anta Tat 
Dharma Adhikaranam ( The immediately next to the Anandamaya 
Adhikarana) in the I Adhyaya, wherein, the Writer clearly shows 
the School running in this line.  In fact, the Acharya might have 
been aware of this school, but he did not approve it, as so took 
the other school.

  That the Ramanuja's stand is not correct

  - grammatically - is well proved in the manual kapyasa koumudi 
published in Sanskrit way back in the early 20th Century from 
South Tamil Nadu.

  - by alankara and other niyamas also,is well shown in the 
commentary Brahma Vidya Abaranam.

Also, see how the issue is captionised by Pranthiyangarai Sri 
Subrahmanya Shastrigal in his footnotes to the Mahesh Reasearch 
Institute Publication, Varanasi. (Chandogya Upanishad Bhasya 


On Mon, 12 May 2003 bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com wrote :
>Hare Krishna
>With the kind permission of Sri Jaldhar prabhuji, I am passing 
>              following web page info. for the kind clarification 
>of the
>              learned members of this list.  Kindly pardon me if 
>it is
>              outside the scope of list activities.
>Hari Hari Hari Bol!!
>Yadavaprakasha was such a rigid  Advaitin, that he would not 
>God with form. Unlike Shankaracharya, he  would not even regard 
>universe as a maya. To him it was totally  insignificant.
>Ramanuja humbly, but firmly disagreed with  Yadava Prakasha on 
>interpretation of one of the rather confusing mantra  from the 
>Upanishad.  The mantra was "tasya yatha kapyasam  
>Even it seems Shankaracharya interpreted the meaning  of 
>"kapyasam" as
>"nates of a monkey".
>Yadavaprakasha explained the passage as  follows:
>'The two eyes of that golden Purusha are like two lotuses which 
>are  red
>the nates of a monkey."  Hearing this interpretation, tears  
>rolled down
> from
>the corners of Ramanuja's eyes likes flames of fire  and fell on 
>the thigh
>Yadavaprakasha. Yadava understood that something  troubled his 
>Ramanuja.  When asked for the cause of  his  anguish, Ramanuja 
>answered, " Revered Sir,  from the  mouth of a wise person like 
>you, I
>expected to hear the comparison of  the eyes of the Supreme 
>Godhead with
>posterior of  a  monkey."
>yadava considered this as a display of arrogance by Ramanuja 
>him to give his interpretation. Ramanuja proceeded to  give  
>interpretation of Kapyasam, the troublesome word in the mantra.
>Kapih= Kam jalam pibatiti Kapih: he who drinks  water=  Suryah, 
>Thus, Kapyasam=Sun blossomed or  blossomed by the Sun
>Now the mantra he translated as : The eyes  of the golden Purusha 
>are as
>lovely as the lotuses blossomed by the rays of  the Sun. Hearing 
>said that it is not a direct meaning but only a  derived 
>Nevertheless, he recognized the skill of his student.
>The trend continued. One of the  famous Upanishadic mahavakyas 
>anantam Brahma" was interpreted  by Yadava as Brahman is truth,
>and Infinitude.
>Ramanuja,  again disagreed with Yadava and interpreted it as 
>Brahman is
>endowed with the  quality of truth, intelligence and infinitude. 
>It is not
>correct to hold that  all these qualities are He Himself. These 
>His, but not He, just  as the body is mine, I am not the body.
>want to unsubscribe or change your options? See:
>Need assistance? Contact:
>listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

Mr. S. Venkata Subramanian
        Chartered Accountant
Impress your clients! Send mail from me @ mycompany.com .
Just Rs.1499/year.
Click http://www.rediffmailpro.com to know more.

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list