Trayee vidyaa

[Siva Senani Nori]

sarvebhyo namah!

I used to wonder about the usage ''trayee vidyaa" (knowledge of the three, if at all this phrase requires a translation on this forum) which refers to Vedas, while the Vedas are well known to be four in number. Where this term is not used, others like ''rigyajussaamapaaragah'' (master of the rik, yajus and saaman, used in the 13th sloka of Aditya Hridayam, itself a part of the Yuddha Kanda, Ramayana to described the Sun god) seem to convey a similar meaning. All this seemed to make the fourth veda, the Atharvan, slightly inferior, or like an appendage. (*Foortnote 1*)

Yesterday, I attended a sabha on the topic "Vedagangatarnaginee" at The Sanskrit Academy, Hyderabad, where Br. Sri. Kuppa Srinivasa Sastryavadhani (a kramaantasvaadhyaayin and teacher at the Keesara Veda Pathashala), speaking on the influence of Vedas on literature dropped a hint suggesting that Veda mantras are of three types - rik, saaman, yajus; and that each of the three vedas Rigveda, Samaveda and Yajurveda are a mixture of all the three types of mantras but with a preponderance of a particular type. The Atharvanaveda cannot be characterised by a preponderance of any such types of mantras.

By rights, such an explanation should close the matter, but the Atharvanaveda does have a preponderance of riks, or rik-like hymns, that is songs of praise. I wonder if the learned members of this forum could throw more light on the subject.

budhajanavidheyah
Senani

Footnote 1: Two Upanishads from the Atharvanaveda - Mundaka and Prasna - are included in the list of Ten Upanishads commentated by Sri Sankaracharya. So, in the tradition of Advaita, the Atharvanaveda is on the same footing as the other three.

[Sunil Bhattacharjya]

Namaste,

It is not proper to sat that Atharva Veda has a lower status. In fact Lord Rama had told Hanuman that if one has to read only one Upanishad then that must be the Mandukya Upanishad, which belongs to the Atharva Veda. Mundak Upanishad has told of the Brahman positivelty and I think anybody must read the Mundaka Upanishad. I feel that in no way the Atharva Veda can be considered to be below the other three Vedas..

Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Sun, 8/2/09, Siva Senani Nori <sivasenani-/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

From: Siva Senani Nori <sivasenani-/***@public.gmane.org>
Subject: [Advaita-l] Trayee vidyaa
To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l-4gKAAF5ltrLLd2BZh+***@public.gmane.orgta.org>
Date: Sunday, August 2, 2009, 10:46 PM

sarvebhyo namah!

I used to wonder about the usage ''trayee vidyaa" (knowledge of the three, if at all this phrase requires a translation on this forum) which refers to Vedas, while the Vedas are well known to be four in number. Where this term is not used, others like ''rigyajussaamapaaragah'' (master of the rik, yajus and saaman, used in the 13th sloka of Aditya Hridayam, itself a part of the Yuddha Kanda, Ramayana to described the Sun god) seem to convey a similar meaning. All this seemed to make the fourth veda, the Atharvan, slightly inferior, or like an appendage. (*Foortnote 1*)

Yesterday, I attended a sabha on the topic "Vedagangatarnaginee" at The Sanskrit Academy, Hyderabad, where Br. Sri. Kuppa Srinivasa Sastryavadhani (a kramaantasvaadhyaayin and teacher at the Keesara Veda Pathashala), speaking on the influence of Vedas on literature dropped a hint suggesting that Veda mantras are of three types - rik, saaman, yajus; and that each of the three vedas Rigveda, Samaveda and Yajurveda are a mixture of all the three types of mantras but with a preponderance of a particular type. The Atharvanaveda cannot be characterised by a preponderance of any such types of mantras.

By rights, such an explanation should close the matter, but the Atharvanaveda does have a preponderance of riks, or rik-like hymns, that is songs of praise. I wonder if the learned members of this forum could throw more light on the subject.

budhajanavidheyah
Senani

Footnote 1: Two Upanishads from the Atharvanaveda - Mundaka and Prasna - are included in the list of Ten Upanishads commentated by Sri Sankaracharya. So, in the tradition of Advaita, the Atharvanaveda is on the same footing as the other three.


     
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita

To unsubscribe or change your options:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
listmaster-wFjFOH+xtB+LP2KLBgAKiEB+***@public.gmane.org

[Ramesh Krishnamurthy]

The term "veda trayii" indeed refers to the 3 types of vaidika
mantra-s - R^ik, yajush and saaman.

As the names of the first 3 Veda-s are associated with the mantra type
dominant in them, there has arisen a misconception that the term term
"veda trayii" excludes the Atharvaveda but it is not so. It is
actually a reference to the 3 types of vaidika mantra-s rather than 3
Veda-s per se.

<< Two Upanishads from the Atharvanaveda - Mundaka and Prasna - are
included in the list of Ten Upanishads commentated by Sri
Sankaracharya. >>

Add the Mandukya too.

[Sundaresan, Vidyasankar (GE Infra, Water)]

One should not look at the corpus of the veda-s only with reference to
vedAnta. Instead, if one turns to the vast amount of literature that
makes up the vaidika karma-kANDa and the associated ritual practices,
the term "trayI" makes perfect sense.

In Srauta yAga-s, the hotA and his assistants are Rgveda specialists,
the adhvaryu and his assistants are yajurveda specialists and the udgAtA
and his assistants are sAmaveda specialists. The brahma priest can be
from any of the four veda-s including the atharva, but after giving his
assent at the beginning of the ritual, he has to remain silent during
its performance. His assistant priests, in practice, assist the hotA and
the adhvaryu for various ritual actions. The verses of the atharvaveda,
properly called atharvAngirasa-s, or just Angirasa-s are not recited as
part of Srauta ritual.

On the other hand, it should also be noted that this does not indicate
any "later" origin of the atharvAngirasa hymns. In the taittirIya
AraNyaka, for example, they are quoted, "atha pavitrAngirasaH -
pavitravantaH ..." In the bRhadAraNyaka, atharvAngirasa is referred
immediately after sAmaveda and before itihAsa-purANa, as having been
breathed out by brahman. However, in the SIkshAvallI of the taittirIya
upanishat, which has many references to ritual practice, we find
"bhUriti vA RcaH, bhuva iti sAmAni, suvar iti yajUMshi" - no reference
to the atharvAngirasa here. So, the references to atharvaveda or lack
thereof are quite context-dependent.

Socially, people have always found some reason or the other to find
themselves superior and others inferior, but that is an entirely
different thing. It is easy to imagine how, in a community of ritual
specialists, the economic opportunities for an atharvavedin would be
relatively much more limited and he would then be looked down upon by
his peers, especially as how he can be sidelined even in the choice of a
brahma priest for the Srauta ritual!

Regards,
Vidyasankar