all-pervading (instead of being /jn/at/ri/ and a/n/u, as
it is in reality).--The three Sutras can be made to fit in with either
interpretation, although it must be noted that none of them explicitly
refers to the soul's connexion with the buddhi.

Adhik. XIV and XV (33-39; 40) refer to the kart/ri/tva of the jiva, i.e.
the question whether the soul is an agent. Sutras 33-39 clearly say that
it is such. But as, according to /S/a@nkara's system, this cannot be the
final view,--the soul being essentially non-active, and all action
belonging to the world of upadhis,--he looks upon the next following
Sutra (40) as constituting an adhikara/n/a by itself, and teaching that
the soul is an agent when connected with the instruments of action,
buddhi, &c., while it ceases to be so when dissociated from them, 'just
as the carpenter acts in both ways,' i.e. just as the carpenter works as
long as he wields his instruments, and rests after having laid them
aside.--Ramanuja, perhaps more naturally, does not separate Sutra 40
from the preceding Sutras, but interprets it as follows: Activity is
indeed an essential attribute of the soul; but therefrom it does not
follow that the soul is always actually active, just as the carpenter,
even when furnished with the requisite instruments, may either work or
not work, just as he pleases.

Adhik. XVI (41, 42) teaches that the soul in its activity is dependent
on the Lord who impels it with a view to its former actions.

Adhik. XVII (43-53) treats of the relation of the individual soul to
Brahman. Sutra 43 declares that the individual soul is a part (a/ms/a)
of Brahman, and the following Sutras show how that relation does not
involve either that Brahman is affected by the imperfections,
sufferings, &c. of the souls, or that one soul has to participate in the
experiences of other souls. The two commentators of course take entirely
different views of the doctrine that the soul is a part of Brahman.
According to Ramanuja the souls are in reality parts of Brahman[14];
according to Sa@nkara the 'a/ms/a' of the Sutra must be understood to
mean 'a/ms/a iva,' 'a part as it were;' the one universal indivisible
Brahman having no real parts, but appearing to be divided owing to its
limiting adjuncts.--One Sutra (50) in this adhikara/n/a calls for
special notice. According to Sa@nkara the words 'abhasa eva /k/a' mean
'(the soul is) a mere reflection,' which, as the commentators remark, is
a statement of th