Then is not a rule required independent of the person? Since non-doership (akartritva) is stated, it is said — ‘knowledge’. There are three kinds of exhortation to action; thus threefold is the rule directing action. The causes are concisely declared as ‘the cause’. A collection of causes of action and of agents. The substratum and other causes are included. Thus throughout the Rigveda: ‘Knowledge, the knowable, and the knower — a rule arises depending on these.’ Also: ‘Cause, agent, and the collection of causes of action.’ Even in non-doership, the fruit of action comes about through action by the Lord’s will and other cited causes. Under the Lord’s sovereignty also the rule is fixed by action. If desire etc. arise, then the action is caused by God; the result too is determined. In truth, even in non-doership there is an apparent doership due to ego. Independence is likewise attributed only with respect to inert matter — hence the apparent contradiction between rule and non-doership is resolved. All this is established by experience and valid proof; no separate proof is asserted.