Of the three remaining Sutras of the adhikara/n/a (30-32), 30 explains, according to Sa@nkara, that the soul may be called a/n/u, since, as long as it exists in the sa/m/sara condition, it is connected with the buddhi.  According to Ramanuja the Sutra teaches that the soul may be called vij/n/ana because the latter constitutes its essential quality as long as it exists.—­Sutra 31 intimates, according to Sa@nkara, that in the states of deep sleep, and so on, the soul is potentially connected with the buddhi, while in the waking state that connexion becomes actually manifest.  The same Sutra, according to Ramanuja, teaches that j/n/at/ri/tva is properly said to constitute the soul’s essential nature, although it is actually manifested in some states of the soul only.—­In Sutra 32, finally, Sa@nkara sees a statement of the doctrine that, unless the soul had the buddhi for its limiting adjunct, it would either be permanently cognizing or permanently non-cognizing; while, according to Ramanuja, the Sutra means that the soul would either be permanently cognizing or permanently non-cognizing, if it were pure knowledge and all-pervading (instead of being jnat/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 Sa@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.