{
  "verse_id": "3.13",
  "mūla": {
    "devanāgarī": "यज्ञशिष्टाशिनः सन्तो मुच्यन्ते सर्वकिल्बिषैः । भुञ्जते ते त्वघं पापा ये पचन्त्यात्मकारणात्",
    "iast": "yajñaśiṣṭāśinaḥ santo mucyante sarvakilbiṣaiḥ | bhuñjate te tvaghaṃ pāpā ye pacantyātmakāraṇāt",
    "chapter_position": "Chapter 3 (Karma-Yoga (The Yoga of Action)), verse 13",
    "speaker": "Krishna",
    "addressed_to": "Arjuna"
  },
  "word_by_word": [
    {
      "surface_form": "ye",
      "lemma": "yad",
      "grammar": "nominative masculine plural noun",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "ये"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "punar",
      "lemma": "punar",
      "grammar": "",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "पुनर्"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "yajña",
      "lemma": "yajña",
      "grammar": "compound (compound member)",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "यज्ञ"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "śiṣṭa",
      "lemma": "śiṣṭa",
      "grammar": "compound (compound member)",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "शिष्ट"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "āśinaḥ",
      "lemma": "āśin",
      "grammar": "nominative masculine plural noun",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "आशिनः"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "santaḥ",
      "lemma": "sat",
      "grammar": "nominative masculine plural noun",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "सन्तः"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "mucyante",
      "lemma": "√muc",
      "grammar": "present indicative pass 3rd person plural verb",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [
        {
          "sense": "सर्वकिल्बिषैः सर्वपापैः चुल्ल्यादिपञ्चसूनाकृतैः प्रमादकृतहिंसादिजनितैश्च अन्यैः",
          "school": "advaita",
          "weight": 0.8,
          "witnesses": [
            "shankara",
            "anandgiri"
          ]
        },
        {
          "sense": "गृहिणः",
          "school": "śuddhādvaita",
          "weight": 0.8,
          "witnesses": [
            "vallabha"
          ]
        },
        {
          "sense": "। सर्वैर्विहिताकरणनिमित्तैः पूर्वकृतैश्च पञ्चसूनानिमित्तैः किल्बिषैः। भूतभाविपातकासंसर्गिणस्ते भवन्तीत्यर्थः। एवमन्वये भ",
          "school": "advaita-bhakti",
          "weight": 0.8,
          "witnesses": [
            "madhusudan"
          ]
        }
      ],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "मुच्यन्ते"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "sarva",
      "lemma": "sarva",
      "grammar": "compound (compound member)",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "सर्व"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "kilbiṣaiḥ",
      "lemma": "kilbiṣa",
      "grammar": "instrumental neuter plural noun",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [
        {
          "sense": "आत्मयाथात्म्यावलोकनविरोधिभिः सर्वैः विमुच्यन्ते",
          "school": "viśiṣṭādvaita",
          "weight": 0.8,
          "witnesses": [
            "ramanuja"
          ]
        },
        {
          "sense": "। भूतभाविपातकासंसर्गिणस्ते भवन्तीत्यर्थः। एवमन्वये भूतभाविपापाभावमुक्त्वा व्यतिरेके दोषमाह भुञ्जते इति। ते वैश्वदेवाद्यक",
          "school": "advaita-bhakti",
          "weight": 0.8,
          "witnesses": [
            "madhusudan"
          ]
        }
      ],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "किल्बिषैः"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "bhuñjate",
      "lemma": "√bhuj",
      "grammar": "present indicative 3rd person plural verb",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [
        {
          "sense": "ते तु अघं पापं स्वयमपि पापाः ये पचन्ति पाकं निर्वर्तयन्ति आत्मकारणात् आत्महेतोः",
          "school": "advaita",
          "weight": 0.8,
          "witnesses": [
            "shankara"
          ]
        },
        {
          "sense": "। अघपरिणामित्वाद् अघम् इति उच्यते। आत्मावलोकनविमुखा नरकाय एव पच्यन्ते।पुनरपि लोकदृष्ट्या शास्त्रदृष्ट्या च सर्वस्य यज्ञम",
          "school": "viśiṣṭādvaita",
          "weight": 0.8,
          "witnesses": [
            "ramanuja"
          ]
        },
        {
          "sense": "इति। ते वैश्वदेवाद्यकारिणोऽघं पापमेव। तुशब्दोऽवधारणे। ये पापाः पञ्चसूनानिमित्तं प्रमादकृतहिंसानिमित्तं च कृतपापाः सन्तः",
          "school": "advaita-bhakti",
          "weight": 0.8,
          "witnesses": [
            "madhusudan"
          ]
        }
      ],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "भुञ्जते"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "te",
      "lemma": "tad",
      "grammar": "nominative masculine plural noun",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "ते"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "tu",
      "lemma": "tu",
      "grammar": "",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "तु"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "agham",
      "lemma": "agha",
      "grammar": "accusative neuter singular noun",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "अघम्"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "pāpāḥ",
      "lemma": "pāpa",
      "grammar": "nominative masculine plural noun",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "पापाः"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "ye",
      "lemma": "yad",
      "grammar": "nominative masculine plural noun",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "ये"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "pacanti",
      "lemma": "√pac",
      "grammar": "present indicative 3rd person plural verb",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "पचन्ति"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "ātma",
      "lemma": "ātman",
      "grammar": "compound (compound member)",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "आत्म"
    },
    {
      "surface_form": "kāraṇāt",
      "lemma": "kāraṇa",
      "grammar": "ablative neuter singular noun",
      "senses_attested_in_panel": [],
      "theme_lists": [],
      "surface_devanagari": "कारणात्"
    }
  ],
  "intertextual_panel": [
    {
      "verse": "9.20",
      "type": "lemma-family resonance",
      "score": 0.8867,
      "feature_breakdown": {
        "cosine": 0.8267,
        "theme_graph": 0.0,
        "vocative": 0.0,
        "substring": 0.0,
        "lemma_overlap": 16.3875,
        "stem_prefix": 6.0
      }
    },
    {
      "verse": "4.31",
      "type": "lemma-family resonance",
      "score": 0.884,
      "feature_breakdown": {
        "cosine": 0.824,
        "theme_graph": 0.0,
        "vocative": 0.0,
        "substring": 0.0,
        "lemma_overlap": 16.0249,
        "stem_prefix": 6.0
      }
    },
    {
      "verse": "3.17",
      "type": "thematic-cluster continuation",
      "score": 0.8816,
      "feature_breakdown": {
        "cosine": 0.8216,
        "theme_graph": 2.0,
        "vocative": 0.0,
        "substring": 0.0,
        "lemma_overlap": 8.6896,
        "stem_prefix": 4.0
      }
    },
    {
      "verse": "3.31",
      "type": "cross-chapter thematic parallel",
      "score": 0.8786,
      "feature_breakdown": {
        "cosine": 0.8286,
        "theme_graph": 2.0,
        "vocative": 0.0,
        "substring": 0.0,
        "lemma_overlap": 8.8567,
        "stem_prefix": 3.0
      }
    },
    {
      "verse": "9.32",
      "type": "lemma-family resonance",
      "score": 0.8785,
      "feature_breakdown": {
        "cosine": 0.8285,
        "theme_graph": 0.0,
        "vocative": 0.0,
        "substring": 0.0,
        "lemma_overlap": 11.3108,
        "stem_prefix": 5.0
      }
    },
    {
      "verse": "4.36",
      "type": "shared-vocabulary echo",
      "score": 0.8765,
      "feature_breakdown": {
        "cosine": 0.8465,
        "theme_graph": 0.0,
        "vocative": 0.0,
        "substring": 0.0,
        "lemma_overlap": 7.8617,
        "stem_prefix": 3.0
      }
    },
    {
      "verse": "9.7",
      "type": "lemma-family resonance",
      "score": 0.874,
      "feature_breakdown": {
        "cosine": 0.826,
        "theme_graph": 0.0,
        "vocative": 0.0,
        "substring": 0.04,
        "lemma_overlap": 9.5123,
        "stem_prefix": 4.0
      }
    },
    {
      "verse": "4.30",
      "type": "shared-vocabulary echo",
      "score": 0.8737,
      "feature_breakdown": {
        "cosine": 0.8437,
        "theme_graph": 0.0,
        "vocative": 0.0,
        "substring": 0.0,
        "lemma_overlap": 5.3983,
        "stem_prefix": 3.0
      }
    }
  ],
  "doctrinal_projections": {
    "advaita": {
      "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
      "key_cross_references": [],
      "witness_passages": [
        "shankara_3.13",
        "anandgiri_3.13"
      ],
      "score": 0.5,
      "english_rendering": "Those who eat the remainder of yajña (sacrifice) — called amṛta (nectar) — are purified of all kilbiṣa (sins) arising from the pañca-sūnā (five household violences: grinding, pounding, hearth, water-pot, broom) and from negligent harm. But those āṭambhara (self-feeders) who cook solely for ātman (self) without performing vaiśvadeva and similar rites accumulate agha (sin) upon agha — they are already pāpa (sinful) and eat only that sin. Śaṅkara presses this point as a bridge to the cosmic wheel: action must be performed because it sustains jagat-cakra (the wheel of the world), not to fatten the self.",
      "divergence_note": "Śaṅkara's bhāṣya explicitly names the pañca-sūnā as the source of unavoidable domestic sin and calls yajña-śiṣṭa 'amṛtākhyam' (named nectar), grounding purification in ritual completion rather than devotional sentiment."
    },
    "viśiṣṭādvaita": {
      "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
      "key_cross_references": [],
      "witness_passages": [
        "ramanuja_3.13",
        "vedantadeshika_3.13"
      ],
      "score": 0.5,
      "english_rendering": "The Supreme Person (parama-puruṣa) stands present within Indra and all devas; one who gathers materials, cooks, offers to that indwelling Lord, and then eats only the śiṣṭa (remainder) is performing kainkarya (devoted service) and is thereby freed from all anādi (beginningless) kilbiṣas — those very sins that obstruct ātma-yāthātmya (true self-knowledge). Those who invert this order — treating as their own what the Lord gave for His own worship — eat only agha; Rāmānuja adds that such persons, turned away from ātma-avalokana (self-vision), are 'ripening for hell' (narakāya eva pacyante). Every act of cooking is either an offering to the indwelling Bhagavān or a compounding of bondage.",
      "divergence_note": "Rāmānuja's bhāṣya uniquely identifies the sin as obstructing ātma-yāthātmya-avalokana (vision of the self's true nature) and explicitly names the Lord as present in the form of Indra and the devas — a theological move absent in Śaṅkara."
    },
    "dvaita": {
      "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
      "key_cross_references": [],
      "witness_passages": [
        "madhva_3.13",
        "jayatirtha_3.13"
      ],
      "score": 0.5,
      "english_rendering": "*Yajña-śiṣṭāśinaḥ* (those who eat the remnant of sacrifice) — *santo mucyante sarva-kilbiṣaiḥ*: the *santo* (the virtuous) are freed from all *kilbiṣa* (sin-accumulation). Those who cook solely *ātma-kāraṇāt* (for their own sake) *bhuñjate agham* — they eat transgression itself. The distinction is ontological, not merely ritual. The *jīva* is irreducibly *paratantra* (eternally dependent) on *svatantra* Hari; every act of eating, cooking, and offering either enacts or violates that dependence. To offer to Viṣṇu first and receive back *prasāda* is to perform *bheda* (real distinction) correctly: the Lord gives, the *jīva* receives, the hierarchy of *taratamya* (graded hierarchy) is affirmed in the very act of swallowing. To eat without offering is to behave as though the *jīva* were self-originating — the precise inversion of *pañca-bheda* (the five-fold real distinction). *Agha* here is not merely impurity but the enacted assertion of false *svatantratā* in a being constitutionally incapable of it. The freed *santa* does not dissolve into Hari; he arrives, purified, at right relation — subordinate, real, distinct.",
      "divergence_note": "No Madhva or Jayatīrtha bhāṣya is extant for BG 3.13. Reading voiced directly from Dvaita siddhānta off the mūla.",
      "provenance": "siddhānta_reconstruction"
    },
    "śuddhādvaita": {
      "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
      "key_cross_references": [],
      "witness_passages": [
        "vallabha_3.13"
      ],
      "score": 0.5,
      "english_rendering": "*Pañca-vidha-yajño bhagavat-svarūpas* (the fivefold sacrifice is the Lord's own form): those who eat of its *śiṣṭa* (remainder) — *tac-chiṣṭāśinaḥ* — are freed, *sarve 'pi mucyante gṛhiṇaḥ*, all householders without exception. The *śiṣṭa* is not an offering returned from outside but the Lord's own form received back as *prasāda*; *kilbiṣa* dissolves by that direct contact, not by the eater's exertion. Those who cook only for themselves, *ātma-kāraṇāt*, take on *agha* (sin) — they have bypassed the Lord's form entirely and so receive only bondage. In *puṣṭi-mārga*, the whole logic turns on identity: *yajña* is *bhagavat-svarūpa*, eating its remainder is *sevā*, and liberation is the fruit of that contact.",
      "divergence_note": "The phrase *pañca-vidha-yajño bhagavat-svarūpaḥ* is the central move; it collapses the distance between ritual act and *darśana* (vision of the Lord) that Śaṅkara and Rāmānuja maintain. For Vallabha there is no *māyā* interposing between the rite and Brahman — the sacrifice *is* Kṛṣṇa's body, making *śiṣṭa-bhojana* a direct reception of the divine, not a symbolic or mediated one."
    },
    "bhakti": {
      "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
      "key_cross_references": [],
      "witness_passages": [
        "sridhara_3.13"
      ],
      "score": 0.5,
      "english_rendering": "Śrīdhara grounds the verse in smārta (traditional) householder discipline: those who eat what remains after vaiśvadeva and similar rites are freed from the pañca-sūnā sins — the five inevitable violences of the household listed in smṛti (Kāṇḍanī, Peṣaṇī, Cullī, Udakumbhī, Mārjanī). He draws the evaluative line clearly: those who cook only for ātmano-bhojana (self-eating) without performing vaiśvadeva are dura-ācāra (of corrupt conduct) and eat only agha. Śrīdhara's voice is the most legally precise of the panel — he cites smṛti directly and defines the boundary of pāpa (sin) through enacted ritual failure rather than metaphysical category.",
      "divergence_note": "Śrīdhara explicitly lists the pañca-sūnā by name from smṛti and ties agha directly to the omission of vaiśvadeva — a more smārta-legal register than either Rāmānuja's theological framing or Madhusūdana's synthetic reading. Payload was clean Devanāgarī; no HTML artifacts."
    },
    "advaita-bhakti": {
      "reading_summary": "(reading summary extraction pending; ENABLE_READING_SUMMARIES=true to generate)",
      "key_cross_references": [],
      "witness_passages": [
        "madhusudan_3.13"
      ],
      "score": 0.5,
      "english_rendering": "Madhusūdana reads the verse in two movements — anvaya (positive) and vyatireka (contrastive) — and expands both further than any other commentator. In the positive movement: those who eat yajña-śiṣṭa called amṛta are śiṣṭa (well-conducted persons) who have discharged their ṛṇa (debt) to the devas, making them free of both past kilbiṣas (pañca-sūnā-born) and future ones. In the contrastive: those who omit vaiśvadeva carry a double load — they still bear pañca-sūnā sins and add the new sin of nityakarma-akaraṇa (omission of obligatory rites). He then invokes śruti, smṛti, and mantra together — the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad on 'mixed food,' the smṛti verse on the five violences, and the Ṛgvedic 'kevala-āghо' stanza — making this the most textually layered rendering in the panel.",
      "divergence_note": "Madhusūdana's bhāṣya is the longest supplied and uniquely marshals śruti (BĀU), smṛti, and mantra simultaneously; his double-sin logic (existing pañca-sūnā sin plus new nityakarma omission) is the sharpest doctrinal precision in the panel."
    }
  },
  "prosodic_information": {
    "meter": "other",
    "meter_shift_from_previous": true,
    "meter_shift_to_next": true,
    "pragmatic_context": {
      "vocative": "",
      "preceding_question": "",
      "following_response": ""
    }
  },
  "theme_list_memberships": [
    {
      "list": "स्वयं",
      "role": "supporting",
      "other_verses_in_list": [
        "3.17",
        "3.19",
        "3.21",
        "3.26",
        "3.27",
        "3.28",
        "3.30",
        "3.31",
        "3.35",
        "4.1",
        "4.3",
        "4.38",
        "10.13",
        "12.8",
        "12.14",
        "15.4"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "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": "verb-lemma-misidentification (broader heuristic: prefix-√root canonical for all verb-tagged tokens)",
        "scope": "word_by_word[].lemma",
        "loci": [
          "mucyante: muc -> √muc",
          "bhuñjate: bhuj -> √bhuj",
          "pacanti: pac -> √pac"
        ]
      },
      {
        "date": "2026-05-05",
        "fix": "mula_avataranika_contamination_strip",
        "scope": "mula.iast, mula.devanagari",
        "old_iast_head": "ye punaḥ- yajña-śiṣṭāśinaḥ santo mucyante sarva-kilbiṣaiḥ | bhuñjate te tv aghaṃ pāpā ye pacanty ātma-kāraṇāt",
        "new_iast": "yajñaśiṣṭāśinaḥ santo mucyante sarvakilbiṣaiḥ | bhuñjate te tvaghaṃ pāpā ye pacantyātmakāraṇāt",
        "source": "sd_bgnew.itx (sanskritdocs.org BG mula, ITRANS) via indic_transliteration",
        "reason": "parser fallback path concatenated commentator avataranika prose into mula; surfaced by prosodic-caesura subagent (no '?' or ',' marker, missed by v2 detector)"
      }
    ]
  },
  "so_what_questions": [
    "If even the household grinding-stone and cooking-fire generate unavoidable kilbiṣa (sin), what does this say about whether there is any 'clean' life possible outside ritual reframing of ordinary acts?",
    "Rāmānuja says the sin specifically obstructs ātma-yāthātmya-avalokana (vision of the self's true nature) — does sin function here as an epistemological block rather than a moral stain, and what follows from that distinction?",
    "Vallabha collapses the gap between ritual and svarūpa (divine form): if the yajña IS Bhagavān, what is the soteriological difference between a Puṣṭi practitioner eating prasāda and a Śaṅkara Advaitin eating yajña-śiṣṭa?",
    "Madhusūdana's double-sin analysis suggests that omitting an obligatory rite is worse than committing an unavoidable sin — what is the implicit theory of agency and responsibility that underlies this accounting?",
    "All six schools agree that cooking exclusively for ātman (self) is the paradigm case of agha (sin) — is this primarily a critique of the consuming self, the non-offering act, or the severing of relational obligation?",
    "The verse sets up a binary (yajña-śiṣṭa eaters vs. self-cookers) but Madhusūdana expands this to a temporal dimension (past sins, future sins, omission sins) — does the verse's logic apply only to ritual acts or to any act that could be offered but is not?",
    "Given that the pañca-sūnā are structural features of householder life and not chosen transgressions, what does this verse imply about the relationship between social role, unavoidable harm, and the role of ritual as a technology of moral accounting?"
  ],
  "everyday_applications": {
    "advaita": "Before each meal, frame the act of eating as completing a sequence that began with an offering — even a simple one. This is not superstition but a structural move: it reminds the practitioner that the self who eats is not the isolated ātman but a node in a network of obligation. The Advaita practitioner uses this as niṣkāma-karma (desireless action) training: cook, offer, receive — and notice that the 'I who eats' is already less solid than it seemed.",
    "viśiṣṭādvaita": "When preparing food, recognize the materials as given by the indwelling Lord present in every dimension of the supply chain. Cooking becomes a form of kainkarya (service), and eating its śiṣṭa (remainder) becomes darśana-in-miniature. Practically: pause before eating to acknowledge that this meal arrived through a chain of beings in whom Bhagavān is present — not as a formula but as a recalibration of what 'mine' means.",
    "dvaita": "The Dvaita practitioner treats every meal as a daily reminder of pāratantrya (radical dependence): I did not generate this food, I cannot sustain this body by will, I am entirely supported by Hari's grace. Eating without this acknowledgment is not just impiety — it is the re-enactment of the root error that keeps the jīva in saṃsāra (the cycle of rebirth). Daily practice: a brief explicit acknowledgment of dependence before eating, not as courtesy but as metaphysical precision.",
    "śuddhādvaita": "In Puṣṭi-mārga households, food is first offered to Śrī Kṛṣṇa (offered in sevā to the svarūpa) before anyone eats — this is not an extra ritual atop ordinary eating but the recognition that eating prasāda is the only real eating. The everyday application is to make this offering genuinely, not mechanically: set aside a portion, offer it with attention, then eat what returns. The kilbiṣa dissolves not through your effort but through the contact with what is already the Lord's form.",
    "bhakti": "Śrīdhara's application is the most concrete: the householder is structurally implicated in violence through cooking (the pañca-sūnā). The remedy is structural too — build the vaiśvadeva offering into the cooking sequence itself, not as optional piety but as the act that transforms unavoidable harm into completed obligation. For a contemporary householder: at minimum, acknowledge the living things harmed in producing the meal, and make that acknowledgment a consistent practice rather than an occasional sentiment.",
    "advaita-bhakti": "Madhusūdana's double-sin analysis has a pointed practical implication: omitting a regular practice you have committed to is more accumulating than occasional lapses — the omission itself adds a layer. The contemporary application is the discipline of consistency in whatever daily practice (meditation, offering, study) one has adopted: irregular practice does not merely fail to help, it actively compounds the very thing it was meant to dissolve. Regularity is not perfectionism; it is the structural requirement for the rite's logic to function."
  },
  "primary_meaning": "Those who eat what remains after sacrifice are freed from all sin, but those who cook only for themselves eat transgression itself."
}