इति विष्णुपुराणे ।'आदित्यानामहं विष्णुः' इत्यारभ्य 'एकांशेन स्थितो जगत्' इतिपर्यन्तं गीतासु ।'पुरुष एवेदं विश्वं कर्म तपो ब्रह्म परामृतम्' इत्यादिश्रुतिश्च ।विष्ण्वादिशब्दानां पुनरुक्तानामपि वृत्तिभेदेनार्थभेदात् न पौनरुक्त्यम् ।'श्रीपतिमाधवः' इत्यादीनां वृत्त्येकत्वेऽपि शब्दभेदान्न पौनरुक्त्यम् ।अर्थैकत्वेऽपि न पौनरुक्त्यं दोषाय, 'नाम्नां सहस्रस्य किमेकं दैवतम्' इति पृष्टेः एकदेवताविषयत्वात् ॥यत्र पुंलिङ्गशब्दप्रयोगः, तत्र विष्णुर्विशेष्यः; यत्र स्त्रीलिङ्गशब्दः तत्र देवता विशेष्यते; यत्र नपुंसकलिङ्गशब्दः तत्र ब्रह्मेति विशेष्यते ॥'यतः सर्वाणि भूतानि' इत्यारभ्य जगदुत्पत्तिस्थितिलयकारणस्य ब्रह्मण एकदेवतात्वेनाभिहितत्वादादावुभयविधं
In plain words
Thus it is stated in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa and the Bhagavadgītā, starting from 'Among the Adityas I am Viṣṇu' up to 'I stand supporting this entire universe with a single fraction of my being.' So too declare the Vedic texts like 'The Puruṣa alone is this entire universe, action, austerity, and supreme immortality.' Even when words like Viṣṇu are repeated, there is no redundancy, because differences in etymological derivation yield distinct meanings. Even when names like Śrīpati and Mādhavā share the same derivational mode, difference in words avoids tautology. Nor is identity of meaning a flaw, for the enquiry asks: 'What is the one deity of the thousand names?' thus pointing to a single divine subject. Wherever a masculine term is used, Viṣṇu is the primary subject; wherever feminine, the deity; wherever neuter, Brahman. And since scriptural passages beginning with 'From which all beings are born' declare Brahman alone as the sole cause of the creation, sustenance, and dissolution of the universe...
Close to the Sanskrit
Thus in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa. 'Of the adityas I am Vishnu' beginning up to 'Standing with a single part the world' in the Gitas. 'Person indeed is this universe action austerity Brahman supreme immortality' and such sruti. Of Vishnu and other words even when repeated, due to difference of derivation there is no redundancy. 'Consort of Sri Madhava' and others' even when derivational unity exists, due to difference of words there is no redundancy. Even when meaning is identical it is not a fault for redundancy, because of the question 'What is the single deity of the thousand of names?' being of single deity subject. Where masculine word employment is, there Vishnu is the qualified; where feminine word, there deity is qualified; where neuter word, there Brahman is qualified. 'From which all beings' beginning, of Brahman the cause of world origin sustenance and dissolution, because of being declared as single deity, at the beginning twofold...