Aitareyabrahmana 2.28

2.28

prāṇā vai dvidevatyā,
anavānaṃ dvidevatyān yājet prāṇānāṃ saṃtatyai prāṇānām avyavachedāya
prāṇā vai dvidevatyā,
na dvidevatyānām anuvaṣaṭkuryad
yad dvidevatyānām anuvaṣaṭkuryād asaṃsthitān prāṇān saṃsthāpayet,
saṃsthā vā eṣā yad anuvaṣaṭkāro. ya enaṃ tatra brūyād:
asaṃsthitan prāṇān samatiṣṭhipat prāṇa enam hāsyatīti,
śaśvat tathā syāt. tasmān na dvidevatyānām anuvaṣaṭkuryāt
tad āhur: dvir āgūrya maitrāvaruṇo dviḥ preṣyati,
sakṛid āgūrya hotā dvir vaṣaṭkaroti: kā hotur āgūr iti
prāṇā vai dvidevatyā, āgūr vajras.
tad yad hotāntareṇāguretāgurā vajreṇa yajamānasya prāṇān vīyād.
ya enāṃ tatra brūyād:
āgurā vājreṇa yajamānasya prāṇān vyagāt prāṇa enaṃ hāsyatīti,
śaśvat tathā syāt. tasmāt tatra hotāntareṇa nāgureta/tho
mano vai yajñasya maitrāvaruṇo, vāg yajñasya hotā.
manasā vā iṣitā vāg vadati; yāṃ hy anyamanā vācaṃ vadaty,
asuryā vai sā vāg adevajuṣṭā. tad yad evātra maitrāvaruṇo dvir āgurate,
saiva hotur āgūḥ

ii. 28 (ix. 4). (The cups) for two deities are the breaths; without taking in breath he should say the offering verses for (the cups) for the deities, for the continuity of the breath and to avoid splitting the breaths. (The cups) for two deities are the breaths; he should not say the second _vaṣaṭ_ for (the cups) for two deities. If he were to say the second _vaṣaṭ_ for those for two deities, he would bring to rest the unresting breaths; the second _vaṣaṭ_ call is the ending. If one were then to say of him ‘He has brought to rest the unresting breaths; breath will forsake him,’ it would certainly be so. Therefore he should not say the second _vaṣaṭ_ for (the cups) for two deities. They say ‘Having twice expressed approval the Maitrāvaruṇa twice gives directions; having once expressed approval the Hotṛ twice says _vaṣaṭ_; what is the expression of approval of the Hotṛ?’ (The cups) for two deities are the breaths; the expression of approval is the thunderbolt; if the Hotṛ were to express approval between, with the expression as a thunderbolt he would pierce the breaths of the sacrificer. If one were then to say of him, ‘With the expression of approval as a thunderbolt he has pierced the breaths of the sacrificer,’ it would certainly be so. Therefore the Hotṛ should not express approval between (the two offering verses). Moreover the Maitrāvaruṇa is the mind of the sacrifice, the Hotṛ is the voice of the sacrifice. Impelled by mind speech speaks, for the speech which he speaks with mind elsewhere is demoniacal and not welcome to the gods; verily thus in that the Maitrāvaruṇa twice utters the expression of approval, this is the expression of approval of the Hotṛ.