Sanskrit verses are easy to memorize (especially for someone who knows the language), and their memorization is a crucial part of the tradition. They are in specific meters that help prevent miscommunication, and there would presumably have been redundancy with many people having memorized the same virtual books at the same time.

In 1995 I read an interview with an old man who could recite the entire Ṛg Veda both forwards and in reverse. He said this practice was common in his youth and lamented that the tradition could become lost because of the lack of mental strength in modern people.

Also, the Sanskrit language itself doesn't change, quite unlike English, so there would not be a need to revise what is passed down to preserve the meanings.

The Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava tradition I follow says the name of Kṛṣṇa descends from the spiritual realm. The Vedas say we are in a dream; and often the easiest way to awaken from a dream is by hearing the name of the dreamer.

In the Padma Purāṇa, it is stated, " The Holy name of Kṛṣṇa is transcendentally blissful. It bestows all spiritual benediction, for it is Kṛṣṇa Himself, the reservoir of all transcendental
mellows. It is not a material name under any condition, and it is as powerful as Kṛṣṇa Himself." It goes on to say the name and form of Kṛṣṇa are identical, although except that the name is more merciful.

It's pleasing to Kṛṣṇa to hear His own name said with love, and Kṛṣṇa has explained that He gives knowledge of Himself to those who are devoted to serving Him. I find it very logical. The complete reality is undoubtedly conscious and independent, but loving relationships can only be voluntary and are therefore genuinely special even to one who literally has everything. The Sāṅkhya analysis says the whole is logically prior to the parts because of being the space in which the parts exist.

These are just a few points I wanted to clarify, as overall we seem to be in agreement.