Note on Vedic shAkhAs

[Anand V. Hudli]

>Yajnavalkyar agreed and "vomitted" it all out (which is no mean feat - to
>unlearn all that was learnt! - that Yajnavalykya was the only one capable
of
>finding out his guru's command was evident. however, the guru wanted to
instruct
>Yajnavalykar in humility, at the same time showing the others Yajnavalkyar
>greatness) . THis "vomit" was eaten by a set of birds (tittiri) and they
later
>started chanting all the mantras of the vedas; the only problem was,
nothing was
>in order and it was all a big confusion. Hence the name taittiriya AranyakA
>(aranyakA = impenetrable forest?) I do not know if there are many meanings
to
>the word "krishna" but I have been told that since the knowledge is there
but
>hidden, it is called krishna - hence Krishna Yajurr veda  ...


  Also, the story goes on to say that YAjnavalkya was taught the
  shukla-yajur veda by sUrya, the Sun-God.

  Apart from the story about VaishampAyana and YAjnavalkya, the reason
  why Krishna and Shukla Yajur vedas are called what they are called,
  lies in the organization of the saMhitA and brAhmaNa portions. In the
  Krishna Yajur veda, the saMhitA and brAhmaNa mantras occur mixed
  together. While in the shukla yajur veda, the saMhitA and brAhmaNa
  portions are not so mixed. Also, there is a marked difference in the
  recitation style of the upanishhads. In the shukla yajur vedic
  bR^ihadAraNyaka upanishhad, for example, there are only two svaras
  (accents), not the usual three. The taittirIya upanishhad of the
  krishna yajur veda has all the three svaras.

 Anand