Vaikhānasamantrapraśna, 5-8 · Chapter 5.1.19

pr̥ṣṭhó rudrá ŕ̥ṣayo rómā́ṇy uró gúhas tī́rthā lāṅgū́lam
kúkṣir médinī cákṣuṣī cándrādityaú vā́lā vidyā́dharāḥ

ū́dhas sāgarā́ḥ[*35] stanā́ nadyó gā́traṃ bhū́-dharāḥ
ásthīni párvatā rúdhiraṃ mitrā́-váruṇau māṃsam agnír jā́hnavī mūtrám

khurá úragā jyeṣṭhā́[*36] nā́síkā dántā marutáḥ
jíhvā sarasvatī́ karṇáḥ kavī́ndraś śakŕ̥t púṇya-déśam[*37]

etā́s sa-vátsā gā́vas sá-vŕ̥ṣāḥ
yathā-sukháṃ cárantu kāmáṃ carantām
yathā-sukháṃ vrajantu kāmáṃ vrajantām
yathā-sukháṃ mudantu kāmáṃ mudantām

gā́vo hi me mātáras santu sárvā mé gó-vr̥ṣāḥ pitáraḥ santu sárve
vatsā́ máma bhrātára eva santu tasmād iḷā́ śuddhi-karā́ bhavantu

imā́ṃ siñcāmīmā́m ánugacchāmīmā́ṃ śodhayāmīmā́ṃ mudantu devā́ vítatā vareśā́m[*38]

bhuñjántu dattáṃ bálim adya vīrā́ś
śvaḥ śrā́vaye[*39] yūyám aśeṣam asmā́d
gácchadhvam āryā́s su-mánasā ca yúktāḥ
[*33] Normal accent dúhatā́ṃ.
[*34] I read this as dharā sā yā. In his English translation of the KJK, Goudriaan (p. 319) lists an alternative reading dhārāyāsāya from a group of manuscripts which he calls L. Goudriaan is unable to translate these letters either as dhārāsāyā (which he incorrectly lists as dhārāsāya) or as dhārāyāsāya.
[*35] I have added visarga to correct the text.
[*36] The 1946 edition correctly gives jyeṣṭhā, however the 1984 edition has corrupted the word to jeṣṭhā.
[*37] The older edition correctly gives puṇya-, however the 1984 edition of the text has corrupted it to r̥uṇya-. In Telegu script, p and r̥, when following a consonant, are similar.
[*38] The text gives the unintelligible vareḷā́m, which I have changed to vareśā́m, to the (female) lord of boons. I chose this over the possible vareṣā́m since in the Telegu script ḷ is very similar to ś. Also the reading of vareśām gives provides a referent for the four occurrences in this text of imām.
[*39] I have corrected śvaśrā́vaye to śvaḥ śrā́vaye. Thus the word śvaḥ, “tomorrow” follows the word adya, “today” in the previous line, a common sequence. cf. RV 6.56.6d.