अन्यथात्वं शब्दादिति चेत्, न, अविशेषात् ॥ ६ ॥
anyathātvaṃ śabdāditi cet, na, aviśeṣāt || 6 ||
anyathātvaṃ—There is difference; śabdāt—on account of (difference in) texts; iti cet—if it be said; na—not so; aviśeṣāt—on account of non-difference (as regards essentials).
6. If it be said (that the Udgitha Vidya of the Brihadaranyaka and that of the Chhandogya) are different on account of (difference in) texts; (we say) not so, on account of the non-difference (as regards essentials).
This Sutra represents the view of the opponent, who tries to establish that the two Vidyas are one. “Then they said to this vital force in the mouth, ‘Chant the Udgitha for us.’ ‘All right’, said the vital force and chanted for them” (Brih. 1. 3. 7); “Then this vital force that is in the mouth—they meditated on the Udgitha ‘Om’ as that vital force” (Chh. 1. 2. 7). It may be objected that they cannot be one, because of the difference in texts. But this is unacceptable because there is unity as regards a great many points. (For the similarity see texts in both.) So on the grounds given in Sutra 3.3.1, there is unity of Vidyas.