Originally Posted by
Jaskaran Singh
Namaste,
Really? The tANDyamahAbrAhmaNam, sAmavidhAnabrAhmaNam, and the jaiminIyabrAhmaNam all view the R^icha-s and sAman as inseperable and the chhAndogyopaniShad even claims that the R^icha is the upholder of the sAma (tadetadetasyAmR^ichyadhyUDhaM sAma). According to the ekAgni kANDam of the yajurveda, the sAmaveda and R^igveda are like husband and wife. To put it in other words, would you ever say that viShNu is independent of shrI or that shiva is independent of pArvatI? No. Similarly, it would be a bit strange to claim that the sAma is independent or not related to the R^icha. Some sAmavedin-s may believe that it is completely independent, but that's probably not a common belief.
That's true not only for HindustAnI music, but karnATik music as well (probably moreso). Heck, even the saptasvara-s, namely "sA" "ri" (re in Northern India) "gA" "ma" "pa" "dha" and "ni" come from the sAmaveda: sA = ShaDja, ri = R^iShabha, gA = gAndhAra, ma =madhyama, pa =pa~nchama, dha= dhaivata, and ni =niShAda; tyAgarAja (a medieval karnATik composer and bhakta) also alludes to this:
nAda tanumanishaM sha~Nkaram namAmi me manasA shirasA
modakara nigamottama sAmavedasAraM vAraM vAram
sadyojAtAdi pa~nchavaktraja sarigamapadhanI vara saptasvara
vidyAlolaM vidalita kAlam vimala hR^idaya tyAgarAja pAlam
Trans. "Again and again, I heartfully bow my head in obeisance to lord sha~Nkara: the embodiment of music, the giver of joy, the greatest of veda-s, [and] the essence of the sAmaveda. From sadyojAta and the [other of the] five faces, the vara of seven notes, "sarigamapadhanI" [arises]. [Your] moving recitations (svara-s) tear death asunder, O pure-hearted guardian of tyAgarAja."
Since the vast majority of the actual shabda-s [not counting stobhAkShara-s] of the sAmaveda "come from" the R^igveda, there are no differences in their portrayal of rudra, as the only sAmodgItha-s which do not have their basis in the R^ichamantra-s are all pavamAnastotra-s.
Bookmarks