vikrama
0
Dear All,
I have a few doubts, which I request the scholars in this forum to clear.
1 Valmiki says, on the oratorical skill of Hanuman, through the mouth of Rama, that only those who have mastered the Rik, Yajur and Sama vedas can have such eloquence. Does it mean that Atharva veda was composed later than Valmiki? or, the study of Atharva is not required to gain that skill?
2 Nachinarkiniyar says that what Tholkappiar mentions as four vedas were not Rik, Yajur, Sama and Atharva. They refer to Thaithriyam, Thalavakaram, Poudikam and Samam. The present classification as Rik, Yajur, Sama and Atharva came into existence only after Tholkappiar. Does it mean that Vyasa was later than Tholkappiar?
3 Rig veda and Yajur veda contains words such as Rik, Yajur, and Sama. It can mean either of the two following things.
i. This portion of the veda was attached after Vyasa made the classification.
ii. Vyasa made use of these vedic words to name his classification.
If ii is correct, in the vedas, they can refer, not to the future classification, but something else. In what sense were these words used in the vedas?
I have a few doubts, which I request the scholars in this forum to clear.
1 Valmiki says, on the oratorical skill of Hanuman, through the mouth of Rama, that only those who have mastered the Rik, Yajur and Sama vedas can have such eloquence. Does it mean that Atharva veda was composed later than Valmiki? or, the study of Atharva is not required to gain that skill?
2 Nachinarkiniyar says that what Tholkappiar mentions as four vedas were not Rik, Yajur, Sama and Atharva. They refer to Thaithriyam, Thalavakaram, Poudikam and Samam. The present classification as Rik, Yajur, Sama and Atharva came into existence only after Tholkappiar. Does it mean that Vyasa was later than Tholkappiar?
3 Rig veda and Yajur veda contains words such as Rik, Yajur, and Sama. It can mean either of the two following things.
i. This portion of the veda was attached after Vyasa made the classification.
ii. Vyasa made use of these vedic words to name his classification.
If ii is correct, in the vedas, they can refer, not to the future classification, but something else. In what sense were these words used in the vedas?
