III, 3, 6

6. If it be said that (the udgītha vidyā of the Bṛ. Up. and that of the Chānd. Up.) are separate on account (of the difference) of the texts; we deny this on the ground of their (essential) non-difference.

We read in the Vājasaneyaka I, 3, 1, 'The Devas said, well, let us overcome the Asuras at the sacrifices by means of the Udgītha. They said to speech: Do thou sing out for us.--Yes, said speech,' &c. The text thereupon relates how speech and the other prāṇas were pierced by the Asuras with evil, and therefore unable to effect what was expected from them, and how in the end recourse was had to the chief vital air, 'Then they said to the breath in the mouth: Do thou sing for us.--Yes, said the breath, and sang.'--A similar story is met with in the Chāndogya I, 2. There we read at first that 'the devas took the udgītha, thinking they would vanquish the Asuras with it;' the text then relates how the other prāṇas were pierced with evil and thus foiled by the Asuras, and how the Devas in the end had recourse to the chief vital air, 'Then comes this chief vital air; on that they meditated as udgītha.'--As both these passages glorify the chief vital air, it follows that they both are injunctions of a meditation on the vital air. A doubt, however, arises whether the two vidyās are separate vidyās or one vidyā only.

Here the pūrvapakṣin maintains that for the reasons specified in the first adhikaraṇa of the present pāda the two vidyās have to be considered as one.--But, an objection is raised, there is a difference of procedure which contradicts the assumption of unity. The Vājasaneyins represent the chief vital air as the producer of the udgītha ('Do thou sing out for us'), while the Chandogas speak of it as itself being the udgītha ('on that they meditated as udgītha'). How can this divergence be reconciled with the assumption of the unity of the vidyās?--The difference pointed out, the pūrvapakṣin replies, is not important enough to bring about a separation of the two vidyās, since we observe that the two both agree in a plurality of points. Both texts relate that the Devas and the Asuras were fighting; both at first glorify speech and the other prāṇas in their relation to the udgītha, and thereupon, finding fault with them, pass on to the chief vital air; both tell how through the strength of the latter the Asuras were scattered as a ball of earth is scattered when hitting a solid stone. And, moreover, the text of the Vājasaneyaka also coordinates the chief vital air and the udgītha in the clause, 'He is udgītha' (Bṛ. Up. I, 3, 23). We therefore have to assume that in the Chāndogya also the chief prāṇa has secondarily to be looked upon as the producer of the udgītha.--The two texts thus constitute one vidyā only.