भेदान्नेतेि चेदेकस्यामपि
अविशेषपुनःश्रुतिर्भेदापादिकेति1 न विधेक्यमिति चेत्, विधैक्येपि शाखान्तरे प्रतिपत्तृभेदान्न भेदः |
स्वाध्यायस्य ; तथात्वे हि समाचारेऽधिकाराच्च
सववच्च तन्नियमः
2. Bhedanneticedekasyamapi
If it be said that the Vidyas are not one on account of different mentioning; we deny this, since it is even in one.
The Vidyas are not one; because the same matter repeated in the texts without difference, proves the object of injunction to be different. It is not so. No difference is apprehended in the object of injunctions; because the same Vidya could be repeated in different Sakhas for the benefit of different cognising agents.
3. Svadhyayasya; tathatvehi samacaredhikaracca
savavacca tanniyamah
Indeed, Sirovrata is a part of the mode of the study of the veda; because then only its unavoidability could be maintained; moreover this is so mentioned in the work called Samacara. The rule laid down for it, is similar to that in the case of the Sava homa.
1 श्रुतेर्भेदादिति M 3.
