तां हैतामेके सावित्रीमनुष्टुभमन्वाहुः; वागनुष्टुप्, एतद्वाचमनुब्रूम इति; न तथा कुर्यात्; गायत्रीमेव सावित्रीमनुब्रूयात्; यदि ह वा अप्येवंविद्बह्विव प्रतिगृह्णाति, न हैव तद्गायत्र्या एकंचन पदं प्रति ॥ ५ ॥
tāṃ haitāmeke sāvitrīmanuṣṭubhamanvāhuḥ; vāganuṣṭup, etadvācamanubrūma iti; na tathā kuryāt; gāyatrīmeva sāvitrīmanubrūyāt; yadi ha vā apyevaṃvidbahviva pratigṛhṇāti, na haiva tadgāyatryā ekaṃcana padaṃ prati ॥ 5 ॥
5. Some communicate (to the pupil) the Sāvitrī that is Anuṣṭubh (saying), ‘Speech is anuṣṭubh; we shall impart that to him.’ One should not do like that. One should communicate that Sāvitrī which is the Gāyatri. Even if a man who knows as above accepts too much as gift, as it were, it is not (enough) for even one foot of the Gāyatrī.
Some, the followers of certain recensions of the Vedas, communicate to the initiated pupil the Sāvitrī that is produced from, or composed in, the metre called Anuṣṭubh. Their intention is being stated: They say, ‘Speech is Anuṣṭubh, and it is also Sarasvatī in the body. We shall impart that speech—Sarasvatī—to the boy.’ One should not do, or know, like that. What they say is totally wrong. What then should one do? One should communicate that Sāvitrī which is the. Gāyatrī. Why? Because it has already been said that the Gāyatrī is the vital force. If the child is taught about the vital force, he will be automatically taught about speech, and Sarasvatī, and the other organs as well. Having stated this incidentally, the text goes on to praise the knower of the Gāyatrī: Even if a man who knows as above accepts too much as gift,as it were—really there is no such thing as too much for him, for he is identified with the universe—it, the whole amount of gift received, is not enough for even one foot of the Gāyatrī.