व्यपदेशाच्च क्रियायाम्, न चेन्निर्देशविपर्ययः ॥ ३६॥
vyapadeśācca kriyāyām, na cennirdeśaviparyayaḥ || 36 ||
vyapadeśāt—On account of mention; ca—also; kriyāyām—in respect of action; na cet—if it were not so; nirdeśa-viparyayaḥ—the reference (would have been) of a different kind.
36. Also on account of the (the scriptures) mentioning (the soul as an agent) with respect to action. If it were not so, the reference (would have been) of a different kind.
“Intelligence performs sacrifices, and it also performs all acts” (Taitt. 2. 5). Here by ‘intelligence’ the soul is meant and not the Buddhi, thereby showing that the soul is an agent. If the intention of the Sruti were to refer to the Buddhi then it would have used the word not in the nominative case, but in the instrumental case, as ‘by intelligence,’ meaning, through its instrumentality, as it has done elsewhere in similar circumstances. Vide Kau. 3. 6.