Śaṅkaraon Brahma Sūtra 3.3.55

The above occasional discussion being terminated, we return to the discussion of the matter in hand. —We meet in the different Vakhas of each Veda with injunctions of vidy^s connected with certain members of sacrificial acts, such as the udgitha and the like. Cp. e. g. ‘Let a man meditate on the syllable Om (as) the udgitha’ {Kh, Up. I, j, i) ; ‘Let a man meditate on the fivefold Saman as the five worlds^ (A'A. Up. II, 2, 1); ‘People say: “Hymns, hymns ! ” the hymn is truly this earth ’ (Ait. Ar. II, 1, 2, 1) ‘ The piled up fire-altar truly is this world ’ ( 5at. Bnt. X, 5, 4. i). A doubt here arises whether the vidyas are enjoined with reference to the udgitha and so on as belonging to a certain ^akhd only or as belonging to all Vakhas. The doubt is raised on the supposition that the udgitha and so on differ in the different ^akh&s because the accents, &c. differ. Here the purvapakshin maintains that the vidyds are enjoined only with reference to the udgitha and so on which belong to the particular 5dkhd (to which the vidyd belongs). — Why ?—On account of proximity. P'or as such general injunctions as ‘ Let a man meditate on the udgitha ’ are in need of a specification, and as this need is satisfied by the specifications given in the same vSdkha which stand in immediate proximity, there is no reason for passing over that 6‘dkhd and having recourse to specifications enjoined in other 6*dkhas. Hence the vidyas are to be held apart, according to the JS'Skhas to which they belong. — To this the Sutra replies ‘but those connected with members,’ &c. The word ‘but’ discards the prima facie view. The meditations are not restricted to their own — i'akh^s according to the Veda to which they belong, but are valid for all .Sakhas. Why?~Because the direct state- ments of the texts about the udgitha and so on enounce no specification. For to such general injunctions as ‘ Let a — rrlan meditate on the udgitha’ which say nothing about — specifications violence would be done, if on the ground of proximity we restricted them to something special belong- ing to its own .S'akhS, and that would be objectionable because direct statement has greater weight than proximity. There is, on the other hand, no reason why the vidya should not be of general reference. We therefore conclude that, although the 6'akhas differ as to accents and the like, the vidyas mentioned refer to the udgitha and so on belong- ing to all 5akhds, because the text speaks only of the udgitha and so on in general.