{
 "verse_id": "18.22",
 "mūla": {
  "devanāgarī": "यत्तु कृत्स्नवदेकस्मिन् कार्ये सक्तमहैतुकम् | अतत्त्वार्थवदल्पं च तत् तामसमुदाहृतम्",
  "iast": "yattu kṛtsnavadekasmin kārye saktamahaitukam | atattvārthavadalpaṃ ca tat tāmasamudāhṛtam",
  "chapter_position": "Chapter 18 (Mokṣa-Sannyāsa-Yoga (The Yoga of Liberation by Renunciation)), verse 22",
  "speaker": "Krishna",
  "addressed_to": "Arjuna"
 },
 "word_by_word": [
  {
   "surface_form": "yat",
   "lemma": "yad",
   "grammar": "nominative neuter singular noun",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "यत्"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "tu",
   "lemma": "tu",
   "grammar": "",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "तु"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "kṛtsna",
   "lemma": "kṛtsna",
   "grammar": "compound (compound member)",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [
    {
     "sense": "फल वत् सक्तम् अहेतुकं वस्तुतः तु अकृत्स्नफलवत्तया तथाविधसङ्गहेतुरहितम् अतत्त्वार्थवत् पूर्ववद्",
     "school": "viśiṣṭādvaita",
     "weight": 0.8,
     "witnesses": [
      "ramanuja"
     ]
    }
   ],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "कृत्स्न"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "vat",
   "lemma": "vat",
   "grammar": "",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "वत्"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "ekasmin",
   "lemma": "eka",
   "grammar": "locative neuter singular noun",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "एकस्मिन्"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "kārye",
   "lemma": "kārya",
   "grammar": "locative neuter singular noun",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [
    {
     "sense": "देहे बहिर्वा प्रतिमादौ सक्तम् एतावानेव आत्मा ईश्वरो वा, न अतः परम् अस्ति इति, यथा नग्नक्षपणकादीनां शरीरान्तर्वर्ती देहप",
     "school": "advaita",
     "weight": 0.8,
     "witnesses": [
      "shankara"
     ]
    },
    {
     "sense": "एकस्मिन् कर्तव्ये कर्मणि प्रेतभूतगणाद्याराधनरूपे अत्यल्पफले कृत्स्न फल वत् सक्तम् अहेतुकं वस्तुतः तु अकृत्स्नफलवत्तया त",
     "school": "viśiṣṭādvaita",
     "weight": 0.8,
     "witnesses": [
      "ramanuja"
     ]
    }
   ],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "कार्ये"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "saktam",
   "lemma": "√sañj",
   "grammar": "nominative neuter singular participle noun",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [
    {
     "sense": "एतावानेव आत्मा ईश्वरो वा, न अतः परम् अस्ति इति, यथा नग्नक्षपणकादीनां शरीरान्तर्वर्ती देहपरिमाणो जीवः, ईश्वरो वा पाषाणदा",
     "school": "advaita",
     "weight": 0.8,
     "witnesses": [
      "shankara"
     ]
    },
    {
     "sense": "अहेतुकं वस्तुतः तु अकृत्स्नफलवत्तया तथाविधसङ्गहेतुरहितम् अतत्त्वार्थवत् पूर्ववद्",
     "school": "viśiṣṭādvaita",
     "weight": 0.8,
     "witnesses": [
      "ramanuja"
     ]
    }
   ],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "सक्तम्"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "ahaitukam",
   "lemma": "ahaituka",
   "grammar": "nominative neuter singular noun",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "अहैतुकम्"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "atattva",
   "lemma": "atattva",
   "grammar": "compound (compound member)",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "अतत्त्व"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "arthavat",
   "lemma": "arthavat",
   "grammar": "nominative neuter singular noun",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "अर्थवत्"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "alpam",
   "lemma": "alpa",
   "grammar": "nominative neuter singular noun",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "अल्पम्"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "ca",
   "lemma": "ca",
   "grammar": "",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "च"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "tat",
   "lemma": "tad",
   "grammar": "nominative neuter singular noun",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "तत्"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "tāmasam",
   "lemma": "tāmasa",
   "grammar": "nominative neuter singular noun",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [
    {
     "sense": "उदाहृतम्",
     "school": "advaita",
     "weight": 0.8,
     "witnesses": [
      "shankara"
     ]
    },
    {
     "sense": "उदाहृतम्",
     "school": "viśiṣṭādvaita",
     "weight": 0.8,
     "witnesses": [
      "ramanuja"
     ]
    }
   ],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "तामसम्"
  },
  {
   "surface_form": "udāhṛtam",
   "lemma": "ud-√āhṛ",
   "grammar": "nominative neuter singular participle noun",
   "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
   "theme_lists": [],
   "surface_devanagari": "उदाहृतम्"
  }
 ],
 "intertextual_panel": [
  {
   "verse": "3.9",
   "type": "lemma-family resonance",
   "score": 0.8968,
   "feature_breakdown": {
    "cosine": 0.8268,
    "theme_graph": 0.0,
    "vocative": 0.0,
    "substring": 0.0,
    "lemma_overlap": 9.2257,
    "stem_prefix": 7.0
   }
  },
  {
   "verse": "6.21",
   "type": "lemma-family resonance",
   "score": 0.8939,
   "feature_breakdown": {
    "cosine": 0.8239,
    "theme_graph": 0.0,
    "vocative": 0.0,
    "substring": 0.0,
    "lemma_overlap": 11.9634,
    "stem_prefix": 7.0
   }
  },
  {
   "verse": "18.24",
   "type": "near-cluster echo",
   "score": 0.8936,
   "feature_breakdown": {
    "cosine": 0.8312,
    "theme_graph": 0.0,
    "vocative": 0.0,
    "substring": 0.062,
    "lemma_overlap": 11.1218,
    "stem_prefix": 5.0
   }
  },
  {
   "verse": "18.39",
   "type": "lemma-family resonance",
   "score": 0.89,
   "feature_breakdown": {
    "cosine": 0.82,
    "theme_graph": 0.0,
    "vocative": 0.0,
    "substring": 0.0,
    "lemma_overlap": 15.5285,
    "stem_prefix": 7.0
   }
  },
  {
   "verse": "18.9",
   "type": "cross-chapter thematic parallel",
   "score": 0.8897,
   "feature_breakdown": {
    "cosine": 0.8397,
    "theme_graph": 1.0,
    "vocative": 0.0,
    "substring": 0.0,
    "lemma_overlap": 6.9443,
    "stem_prefix": 4.0
   }
  },
  {
   "verse": "4.9",
   "type": "lemma-family resonance",
   "score": 0.8892,
   "feature_breakdown": {
    "cosine": 0.8192,
    "theme_graph": 0.0,
    "vocative": 0.0,
    "substring": 0.0,
    "lemma_overlap": 9.9987,
    "stem_prefix": 7.0
   }
  },
  {
   "verse": "18.25",
   "type": "near-cluster echo",
   "score": 0.8872,
   "feature_breakdown": {
    "cosine": 0.8372,
    "theme_graph": 0.0,
    "vocative": 0.0,
    "substring": 0.0,
    "lemma_overlap": 11.1618,
    "stem_prefix": 5.0
   }
  },
  {
   "verse": "17.22",
   "type": "lemma-family resonance",
   "score": 0.8846,
   "feature_breakdown": {
    "cosine": 0.8246,
    "theme_graph": 0.0,
    "vocative": 0.0,
    "substring": 0.0,
    "lemma_overlap": 16.2859,
    "stem_prefix": 6.0
   }
  }
 ],
 "doctrinal_projections": {
  "advaita": {
   "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
   "key_cross_references": [],
   "witness_passages": [
    "shankara_18.22",
    "anandgiri_18.22"
   ],
   "score": 0.5,
   "english_rendering": "That knowledge is tamasic which clings to a single product — a body or an idol — as though it were the complete totality (krtsnava), without rational warrant (ahetuka): the error of those who, like naked Digambara materialists, shrink atman to the body's own dimensions, or who, like idol-worshippers, reduce Isvara to stone or wood. Such knowledge is not grounded in ultimate reality (atattvarthavat) precisely because it has no supporting reasoning: if the self were merely one particular body-product, why would that one body-product possess selfhood while all other body-products do not? Because it grasps only a narrow fragment, its fruit too is petty (alpa) — fit only for those among tamasic creatures (tamasanam praninam) who lack discernment (avivekinam)."
  },
  "viśiṣṭādvaita": {
   "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
   "key_cross_references": [],
   "witness_passages": [
    "ramanuja_18.22",
    "vedantadeshika_18.22"
   ],
   "score": 0.5,
   "english_rendering": "That knowledge is tamasic which, among the many obligatory duties available, becomes wholly fixated (sakta) on a single trivial rite — the propitiation of ghosts and spirit-bands (preta-bhuta-gana-aradhana) — treating its meagre fruit as though it were the complete fruit (krtsna-phala-vat), and doing so without any doctrinal justification (ahetuka) for that fixation. It is not grounded in reality (atattvarthavat) because it takes the jiva as wholly separate and autonomous rather than as the body of Bhagavan, and it is petty (alpa) because propitiation of departed spirits yields only a transient, minor result — far beneath the sole worthy end, which is service to Bhagavan."
  },
  "dvaita": {
   "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
   "key_cross_references": [],
   "witness_passages": [
    "madhva_18.22",
    "jayatirtha_18.22"
   ],
   "score": 0.5,
   "english_rendering": "*Tāmasic* (of the mode of darkness) *jñāna* (knowledge) seizes upon a single *kārya* (produced, dependent thing) — one body, one image, one *paratantra* (eternally dependent) creature — as though it were the *kṛtsna* (whole, entire) of reality: *kṛtsnavad ekasminkārye saktam*. This collapse is *ahaituka* (without valid ground, causally unintelligible), for it lacks the *pramāṇa* to distinguish *svatantra* (the independently real, self-sufficient) Hari from the *paratantra* *jīva* and the inert *jagat* (world). Where *pañca-bheda* (the five-fold real distinction: Lord–jīva, Lord–matter, jīva–jīva, jīva–matter, matter–matter) is the very structure of what is, such knowledge is *atattvārthavat* — not oriented to reality as it is — and therefore *alpa* (trivial, meager), incapable of grounding *bhakti* (devotion) as ontological subordination to Hari or of producing liberation. Hari's *taratamya* (graded ontological hierarchy) among beings goes entirely unseen; the knowing subject mistakes a fragment of *paratantra* existence for the whole and so remains bound.",
   "provenance": "siddhānta_reconstruction"
  },
  "śuddhādvaita": {
   "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
   "key_cross_references": [],
   "witness_passages": [
    "vallabha_18.22"
   ],
   "score": 0.5,
   "english_rendering": "That tamasic knowledge, says Vallabha, is the knowledge that clings to a single karya — the worship of pretas and spirit-gangs (preta-bhuta-gana-aradhana) whose fruit is utterly petty — treating it as though it yielded the complete fruit (krtsna-phala-vat), and without purpose (nisprayojana). It is wholly devoid of the recognition that every act, to bear any real fruit, must be rooted in Krsna's lila-prasada; outside that rooting, any knowledge, however earnest, produces only triviality."
  },
  "bhakti": {
   "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
   "key_cross_references": [],
   "witness_passages": [
    "sridhara_18.22"
   ],
   "score": 0.5,
   "english_rendering": "Tamasic knowledge, says Sridhara, is that which fastens (sakta) upon a single object — whether the physical body or an image — with the conviction 'this alone is atman, or Isvara' (etavan eva atma isvaro va), as though that fragment were the complete whole (paripurnavat). It is without valid reasoning (nirupapattikam), devoid of any hold on ultimate reality (paramartha-avalambana-sunyam), and therefore trivial (tuccha) — trivial both because its object is narrow and because its fruit is minor. Such is the knowledge declared tamasic."
  },
  "advaita-bhakti": {
   "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
   "key_cross_references": [],
   "witness_passages": [
    "madhusudan_18.22"
   ],
   "score": 0.5,
   "english_rendering": "Madhusudana Sarasvati anchors the tamas diagnosis in concrete philosophical opponents: the Digambaras who posit an atman exactly the size of the body, the Carvakas who identify the body itself as atman, and idol-worshippers who reduce Isvara to stone or wood — all share the same structural error: they seize one karya (product/effect) among many and treat it as the complete whole (krtsnava), without asking why that one product should bear selfhood when the rest do not (ahetuka). Such knowledge is not grounded in the truth of atman's eternity and all-pervasiveness (nityatva, vibhutva), and is therefore trivial. Madhusudana adds that wise observers simply note: 'this is the kind of knowledge that tamasic, common (prakrta) people are seen to hold.'"
  }
 },
 "prosodic_information": {
  "meter": "anuṣṭubh",
  "meter_shift_from_previous": true,
  "meter_shift_to_next": false,
  "pragmatic_context": {
   "vocative": "",
   "preceding_question": "",
   "following_response": ""
  }
 },
 "theme_list_memberships": [
  {
   "list": "कार्य",
   "role": "supporting",
   "other_verses_in_list": [
    "2.25",
    "2.28",
    "3.5",
    "3.17",
    "3.19",
    "4.16",
    "6.1",
    "13.20",
    "16.24",
    "18.5",
    "18.9",
    "18.30",
    "18.31"
   ]
  }
 ],
 "audit_trail": {
  "substrate_version": "v2.6-frozen",
  "fitted_weights": {
   "a": 1.0,
   "b": 0.01,
   "e_v": 0.005,
   "z": 0.2,
   "h": 0.0,
   "th": 0.01
  },
  "corpus_provenance": {
   "mūla": "Belvalkar critical edition (BORI 1947), via Ambuda multi-witness",
   "panel_witnesses": [
    "bg-mula",
    "bg-shankara",
    "bg-ramanuja",
    "bg-madhva",
    "bg-vedantadeshika",
    "bg-vallabha",
    "bg-jayatirtha",
    "bg-anandgiri",
    "bg-sridhara",
    "bg-madhusudan"
   ]
  },
  "extraction_date": "2026-04-21",
  "score_methodology_documented_at": "Paper 1, Section II.B",
  "word_by_word_parser": "ByT5-Sanskrit-multitask (Nehrdich/Hellwig/Keutzer EMNLP 2024)",
  "post_generation_repairs": [
   {
    "date": "2026-05-03",
    "fix": "dropped-space-at-consonant-consonant-joint corruption",
    "scope": "mūla.iast — spaces reinserted using word_by_word.surface_form as source of truth",
    "loci": [
     "kṛtsnavadekasminkārye -> kṛtsnavadekasmin kārye",
     "tattāmasamudāhṛtam -> tat tāmasamudāhṛtam"
    ]
   },
   {
    "date": "2026-05-03",
    "fix": "dropped-space-at-consonant-consonant-joint corruption",
    "scope": "mūla.devanāgarī — spaces reinserted using word_by_word surface fields as source of truth",
    "loci": [
     "कृत्स्नवदेकस्मिन्कार्ये -> कृत्स्नवदेकस्मिन् कार्ये",
     "तत्तामसमुदाहृतम् -> तत् तामसमुदाहृतम्"
    ]
   },
   {
    "date": "2026-05-03",
    "fix": "verb-lemma-misidentification (broader heuristic: prefix-√root canonical for all verb-tagged tokens)",
    "scope": "word_by_word[].lemma",
    "loci": [
     "saktam: sañj -> √sañj",
     "udāhṛtam: udāhṛ -> ud-√āhṛ"
    ]
   },
   {
    "kind": "qmark_artifact_repair",
    "applied_at": "2026-05-08T01:56:15.005297Z",
    "applied_by": "summon-web/scripts/repair_qmark_artifacts.py",
    "n_senses_repaired": 2,
    "substitution": "? -> ,",
    "root_cause": "ITRANS '\\,' (literal-comma escape) in sd_bgshankarabhashya.itx corrupted to '?' during upstream HTML pipeline at gitasupersite; propagated through h_c_panel/commentaries/bg_*.jsonl into substrate.",
    "verification_source": "sonos-paper/samvad_db/sources/sd_bgshankarabhashya.itx"
   }
  ]
 },
 "so_what_questions": [
  "What is the difference between sincere devotion to a concrete form (murti) and the tamasic error of collapsing the infinite into that form — where does legitimate saguna worship end and tamas-jnana begin?",
  "The verse makes 'without reasoning' (ahetuka) a marker of tamas — does this mean rational scrutiny is spiritually obligatory, and what happens to traditions that prize faith over argument?",
  "If all three gunas are natural constituents of prakriti, is a tamasic knower morally culpable for her ignorance, or merely conditioned by a guna she did not choose?",
  "Ramanuja ties tamasic knowledge to propitiation of pretas and spirits — how should a practitioner evaluate popular ritual forms (ancestor rites, folk deity propitiation) that may look like this category?",
  "The verse says such knowledge is 'petty' (alpa) — petty in scope, petty in fruit, or both? What is the relation between narrowness of vision and smallness of result?",
  "Madhusudana names the Carvakas and Digambaras as exemplars of tamas-jnana — does identifying a philosophical error with a guna amount to a theological argument, and is that intellectually honest?",
  "Across the six schools, is the cure for tamasic knowledge more information, different reasoning, a different object of devotion, or a transformation of the knower herself?"
 ],
 "everyday_applications": {
  "advaita": "When you find yourself utterly certain that one fixed role — parent, professional, national identity — is the whole of what you are, and cannot question that certainty, you are in tamas-jnana: a fragment mistaken for the totality. The Advaita practice is to notice the assumption, ask 'what witnesses this identity?', and resist the contraction without abandoning the role.",
  "viśiṣṭādvaita": "Investing all spiritual energy in a single minor ritual — a superstition, a family propitiation rite, an auspicious-day routine — while treating it as the complete religious life is the Ramanuja diagnosis of tamas in practice. The corrective is not to abandon the ritual but to embed it within the larger frame of service to Bhagavan, so the minor act points beyond itself.",
  "dvaita": "Tamasic knowledge in the Dvaita key is the refusal to acknowledge any reality higher than oneself or one's immediate group — the error of treating one's own community, ideology, or institution as ultimate. The Dvaita corrective: locate your specific role within the hierarchy of dependence on Hari, and act from that located place rather than from self-sufficiency.",
  "śuddhādvaita": "In the Pustimarga reading, going through religious motions — puja, charity, pilgrimage — without any orientation toward Krsna's grace (prasada) is purposeless (nisprayojana) and tamasic. The everyday shift: before any act of worship, ask whether you are orienting toward the source of grace or merely performing a transaction with a minor deity for a minor gain.",
  "bhakti": "Sridhara's version of tamas-jnana shows up whenever someone insists, without evidence or inquiry, that their limited experience of the sacred ('God is exactly this image, this book, this community') is the complete picture. The bhakti antidote is not less devotion but more honesty: hold your form of the sacred firmly while acknowledging it as a window, not the whole sky.",
  "advaita-bhakti": "Madhusudana's examples — materialists who reduce atman to a body-sized lump, idol-worshippers who reduce Isvara to stone — have a contemporary form: the person who reduces the self to a brain-state, or reduces the divine to a cultural artifact. The synthesis corrective: take the embodied, concrete form seriously as a real manifestation (not mere illusion), while simultaneously refusing to seal off the infinite behind it."
 },
 "primary_meaning": "Knowledge is tamasic when it clings to one narrow thing as if that fragment were the whole of reality, offers no rational ground for doing so, misses the truth of what is, and yields only petty fruit."
}