________________
II ADHYAYA, 3 PÂDA, 37.
555
according to its pleasure' (Bri. Up. II, 1, 18), i. e. it teaches that the Self is active in taking to itself the pränas and moving about in the body.
35. And on account of the designation (of the Self as the agent) in actions. If not so, there would be change of grammatical expression.
Because in the text Knowledge performs the sacrifice, it performs all works' (Taitt. Up. II, 5) the Self is designated as the agent in all worldly and Vedic works, for this reason also the Self must be held to be an agent. And should it be said that the word "knowledge' in that text denotes not the Self, but the internal organ or buddhi, we point out that in that case there would be a change of grammatical expression, that is to say, as the buddhi is the instrument of action, the text would exhibit the instrumental case instead of the nominative case ' by knowledge, and so on '(vigñanena instead of vigñanam).
36. (There would be) absence of definite rule, as in the case of consciousness.
The Satra points out a difficulty which arises on the view of the Self not being an agenť. Satra 32 has declared that if the Self were all-pervading it would follow that there would be no definite determination with regard to consciousness. Similarly, if the Self were not an agent but all activity belonged to Prakriti, it would follow that as Prakriti is a common possession of all souls, all actions would result in enjoyment (experience) on the part of all souls, or else on the part of none; for as each Self is held to be omnipresent, they are all of them in equal proximity to all parts of the Pradhana. For the same reason it could not be maintained that the distribution of results between the different souls depends on the different internal organs which are joined to the souls; for if the souls are omnipresent, no soul will be exclusively connected with any particular internal organ.
37. On account of the inversion of power. If the internal organ were the agent, then-since it is
Digitized by Google
