Simply means one who is very secret, as in guhyatamaṃ, see BG, guhya meaning secret btw is also used in saṁskṛtam to mean private parts. So Yāska only clarifies there is no scope for kutsitārtha.
More from Tilak on 'Shipivishta':
"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 to their gods, rather than to any uncertainty about the real meaning of the word. It was thus that the word shipivishta, which is originally a bad name (kutsitârthiyam) according to Aupamanyava, was converted into a. mysterious (guhya) name for the deity.
But this transition of meaning is confined only to the theological literature, and did not pass over into the non-theological works, for the obvious reason that in ordinary language the bad meaning of the word was sufficiently familiar to the people. There can, therefore, be little doubt that, in VII, 100, 5 and 6, shipivishta is used in a bad sense as, stated by Aupamanyava. These verses have been translated by Muir as follows: “I, a devoted worshipper, who know the sacred rites, today celebrate this thy name shipivishta, I, who am weak, laud thee who are strong and dwell beyond this lower world (kshayantam asya rajasah parâke). What, Vishnu, hast thou to blame, that thou declare, ‘I am Shipivishta. Do not conceal from us this form (varpas) since thou did assume another shape in the battle.” The phrase “dwelling in the lower world” (rajasah parâke), or “beyond this world,” furnishes us with a clue to the real meaning of the passage. It was in the nether world that Vishnu bore this bad name.
And what was the bad name after all? Shipivishta, or “enveloped like shepa,” meaning that his rays were obscured, or that he was temporarily concealed in a dark cover. The poet, therefore, asks Vishnu not to be ashamed of the epithet, because, says he, the form indicated by the bad name is only temporarily assumed, as a dark armor, for the purpose of fighting with the Asuras, and as it was no longer needed, Vishnu is invoked to reveal his true form (varpas) to the worshipper. That is the real meaning of the verses quoted above, and in spite of the attempt of Yâska and other scholars to convert the bad name of Vishnu into a good one by the help of etymological speculations, it is plain that shipivishta was a bad name, and that it signified the dark outer appearance of Vishnu in his fight with the demons in the nether world. If the sun is called brihach-chhepas when moving in regions above the horizon, he can be very well described as shipivishta or enveloped like shepa, “when moving in the nether world” and there is hardly anything therein of which the deity or his worshippers should be ashamed."
Well Aup ji, Tilak expressedly states his indebtedness to Mueller who has explicitly stated his object and intent of (mis)translating the Vedas to undermine their importance - regretted by himself later ..
Don't be so harsh on Max Mueller. Even Dhundhakari and Ajamil were pardoned by Lord Vishnu. The important thing is that he repented. Let the modern scholars right his wrongs.
Nice hypothesis, Donnigers and their ilk might appreciate your efforts in propagating their ideologies.
Don't blame me for what is written in RigVeda.
त्रि यच छता महिषाणाम अघो मास त्रि सरांसि मघवा सोम्यापाः l
कारं न विश्वे अह्वन्त देवा भरम इन्द्राय यद अहिं जघान ll
trī yac chatā mahiṣāṇām agho māsa trī sarāṃsi maghavā somyāpāḥ l
kāraṃ na viśve ahvanta devā bharama indrāya yad ahiṃ jaghāna ll
When thou had eaten three hundred buffaloes' flesh, and drunk, as Maghavan, three lakes of Soma,
All the Gods raised as it were a shout of triumph to Indra praise because he slew the Dragon.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv05029.htm
Actually I do not see any problem in this. The Aryans, when they were outside India were beef-eaters. When they settled in India where cows were respected, they changed their tradition and went along with the indigenous tradition of the majority. They also took up worship of Rama, Krishna, Shiva and Durga, who are non-Vedic deities, in preference to the worship of Indra, Agni and Soma. Like we say 'if in Rome, do as Romans do'.
Doesn't make it any less valid.
Oh yes, it does not. What I was trying to say is that Purusha Sukta for me is a 'klishta' hymn. I have not been able to get into the mind of the writer.