Cluster 0129

BG-3.32

Cluster context

Sanskrit śloka (BG-3.32):

ये त्वेतदभ्यसूयन्तो नानुतिष्ठन्ति मे मतम् । सर्वज्ञानविमूढांस्तान्विद्धि नष्टानचेतसः ॥३२॥

"But those who, scorning this my teaching, do not follow it — know them as deluded in all knowledge, destroyed, mindless."

This is the negative-image complement of BG-3.31 (cluster 0128). The prior cluster gave the positive verdict on those who follow the niṣkāma-karma teaching with śraddhā and without scorn (अनसूयन्तः); this one delivers the verdict on those who do the opposite. The chapter's argument has been building since BG-3.4 (न कर्मणामनारम्भात्...) — Jñāneśvar now lets it land as a categorical binary.

Eight Marathi ovis unfold the verdict in three movements: (i) 3.194-3.196 diagnose the scoffer's interior — prakṛti-bound, indulging the senses, dismissing the teaching as either trivial or as mere rhetoric, drugged on delusion; (ii) 3.197-3.200 deliver four extended metaphors of waste — corpse-given-jewel, congenitally-blind-and-dawn, moon-and-crow, moth-and-lamp — proving that addressing the teaching to such a person is itself useless; (iii) 3.201 closes by identifying sense-pursuit AS self-slaughter (आत्मघाता).

Ovi 3.194

Original (Marathi): नातरी प्रकृतिमंतु होउनी । इंद्रियां लळा देउनी । जें हें माझें मत अव्हेरुनी । ओसंडिती ॥१९४॥ Voice: krishna-to-arjuna

Word-by-word gloss

Marathi	Meaning
नातरी	otherwise / on the other hand (introducing the contrast)
प्रकृतिमंतु	possessed-by-prakṛti, ruled-by-nature
होउनी	having become
इंद्रियां	to-the-senses
लळा	pampering, indulgence, fondling
देउनी	giving
जें	which
हें	this
माझें मत	my teaching, my view (= मे मतम्)
अव्हेरुनी	spurning, turning-away-from
ओसंडिती	(they) overflow / cast off / set aside

Literal translation

English: "On the other hand, having become prakṛti-ruled, pampering the senses, those who turn away from this teaching of mine and cast it aside —"

मराठी (आधुनिक): "याउलट, प्रकृतीच्या आहारी जाऊन, इंद्रियांचे लाड पुरवीत, जे माझे हे मत नाकारून बाजूला सारतात —"

Etymology / register note: प्रकृतिमंतु is Jñāneśvar's Marathi rendering of the Gītā's प्रकृति-vocabulary (the same word will dominate BG-3.33's सदृशं चेष्टते स्वस्याः प्रकृतेर्ज्ञानवानपि — the next śloka). The participial लळा देउनी ("giving pampering-fondling") is striking — it is the Marathi vocabulary of a parent spoiling a child, used here for the relation senses ← person. The scoffer is not commanding his senses (the Gītā's ideal); he is spoiling them like a doting parent.

The verbal cluster माझें मत अव्हेरुनी ओसंडिती is Sanskrit→Marathi precise: अव्हेरुनी = अभ्यसूयन्तः (scorning), ओसंडिती = नानुतिष्ठन्ति (do-not-practice). The Sanskrit's two-fold action (scorn + non-practice) is preserved.

Metaphor-unfold

No extended metaphor in this ovi — लळा देउनी is a one-stroke domestic image (spoiling-children), not an unfolded metaphor. Setup-ovi for the cluster.

Nāth-yogic layer

No Nāth-yogic referent in this ovi. The prakṛti-vocabulary here is Sānkhya/Vedānta-doctrinal (matching BG-3.33's prakṛti-determinism argument), not Nātha-tantric.

Cross-references

Internal:
3.192 (अनुपरोध मत माझें ... परमादरें स्वीकारिजे) — contradicts-and-revises (direct contrapositive — same मत माझें phrase, opposite attitude: स्वीकारिजे vs अव्हेरुनी)
BG-3.33 (forthcoming) — foreshadows (prakṛti-vocabulary planted here will become the focal noun of the next śloka)
Tukaram parallel:
Tukaram 2744 (पोटासाठीं खटपट ... राम राम म्हणतां जाड जिभ) — thematic-resonance — the same diagnostic: stomach/senses get full attention, the Name gets locked-jaw refusal. Tukaram inherits Jñāneśvar's anti-name-laziness diagnosis wholesale.
Source citation:
BG-3.33 (सदृशं चेष्टते स्वस्याः प्रकृतेर्ज्ञानवानपि) — paraphrase — प्रकृतिमंतु होउनी semantically anticipates the next śloka's प्रकृतेः argument; Jñāneśvar plants the term one śloka early.

Modern application

The product manager who has read the same three books on "deep work" and still opens Slack first-thing — the teaching is owned, displayed, even quoted, and reliably set aside (अव्हेरुनी ओसंडिती).
The diabetic who knows the diet, has the meal-plan printed on the fridge, and pampers the late-night sweet-craving (इंद्रियां लळा देउनी) — the diagnostic literal.
The meditation-app subscriber who has 247 unstarted sessions and a perfect streak of opening Instagram before the alarm finishes ringing.

Sādhanā

Today: name one specific teaching you currently scorn-in-practice (you nod when others say it; you do not do it). Write that one sentence and tape it where you will see it tomorrow. Don't try to fix it — just stop telling yourself you accept it.

Arc

3.194 names the scoffer's posture (prakṛti-ruled, sense-pampering, teaching-spurning); 3.195 will name the scoffer's verbal-rationalizations for the spurning.

Ovi 3.195

Original (Marathi): जे सामान्यत्वें लेखिती । अवज्ञा करूनि देखती । कां हा अर्थवादु म्हणती । वाचाळपणें ॥१९५॥ Voice: krishna-to-arjuna

Word-by-word gloss

Marathi	Meaning
जे	who
सामान्यत्वें	as-common, as-ordinary, as-trivial
लेखिती	(they) treat-as, count-as, regard
अवज्ञा	disregard, contempt
करूनि	having-done
देखती	(they) look-at, view
कां	or
हा	this
अर्थवादु	arthavāda — eulogistic-exaggeration, mere-praise-not-meant-literally
म्हणती	(they) say
वाचाळपणें	with-loquacity, garrulously, talkatively

Literal translation

English: "Who treat (this teaching) as ordinary, who look upon it with disregard, or who garrulously declare 'this is just arthavāda (rhetorical eulogy)' —"

मराठी (आधुनिक): "जे या उपदेशाला सामान्य समजतात, अवहेलनेने त्याकडे पाहतात, किंवा 'हे तर केवळ अर्थवाद (अलंकारिक स्तुती) आहे' असे वाचाळपणे म्हणतात —"

Etymology / load-bearing technical term: अर्थवादु is a Mīmāmsā-school technical term — in Vedic exegesis, arthavāda designates passages that are eulogistic-praise or condemnation NOT meant as direct injunctions (vidhi); they support the injunctions rhetorically but do not themselves command. Jñāneśvar puts this loaded scholastic word in the mouth of the scoffer: the scoffer is portrayed as the SOPHISTICATED critic — one who has the technical vocabulary to dismiss the Gītā's promises as "merely praise-passages, not actually-binding." This is a rare moment where Jñāneśvar names the educated-dismisser, not just the spoiled-sensualist.

वाचाळपणें ("with garrulity") adds a register-judgment: the scholarly dismissal is not deemed neutral — it is loquacious self-display.

Metaphor-unfold

No extended metaphor in this ovi — but a triadic-classification of scoffer-stances is laid out: (i) trivializers (सामान्यत्वें लेखिती), (ii) contempt-viewers (अवज्ञा करूनि देखती), (iii) sophisticated-dismissers (अर्थवादु म्हणती). Three rungs of the scoffer-ladder.

Nāth-yogic layer

No Nāth-yogic referent in this ovi.

Cross-references

Internal:
3.194 — developed-further (3.194 named the posture; 3.195 names the verbal stances)
3.192 — contradicts-and-revises (the contrastive pair: परमादरें स्वीकारिजे vs सामान्यत्वें लेखिती + अवज्ञा)
Tukaram parallel:
Tukaram 2859 (मद, विचाररहित, नागडा ... पंडित-जन तुक्या टाकावा थुंकोनि) — mirror-image-from-the-other-side — Tukaram's self-portrait as the figure the Pāṇḍita-class spits-out is the inverted match for Jñāneśvar's Pāṇḍita-class who declare arthavāda. Same axis, opposite vantage. Worth a noting flag.
Source citation:
Pūrva-Mīmāmsā Sūtra 1.2.1-1.2.18 (arthavāda-adhikaraṇa) — terminological-source — Jñāneśvar's अर्थवादु is the Mīmāmsā technical term; the scoffer is portrayed as someone wielding Mīmāmsā exegetical vocabulary to dismiss the Gītā.

Modern application

The tenured academic at a Gītā-conference who calls the bhakti-verses "performative" and "rhetorical surplus" — अर्थवादु म्हणती वाचाळपणें in a 2026 English-paper register.
The MBA who calls the karma-yoga passages "motivational" but reserves "real strategy" for game-theory — trivializing-as-ordinary while keeping technical vocabulary at the ready.
The therapist who recommends mindfulness as a "useful technique" but flinches at the word "soul" — सामान्यत्वें लेखिती is the politely-secularizing flattening.

Sādhanā

Today: notice ONE moment when you reach for technical vocabulary (psychological, scientific, economic, literary-critical) specifically in order to NOT have to take a wisdom-text seriously. The reach is fast and almost invisible — catch it once. Don't fix it. Just name it as it happens.

Arc

3.195 finishes the diagnostic portrait of the scoffer's stance; 3.196 will declare the underlying cause (delusion-drunk, poisoned-by-sense-objects, drowned in ignorance-mud).

Ovi 3.196

Original (Marathi): ते मोहमदिरा भुलले । विषयविखें घारले । अज्ञानपंकीं बुडाले । निभ्रांत मानीं ॥१९६॥ Voice: krishna-to-arjuna

Word-by-word gloss

Marathi	Meaning
ते	they
मोह-	delusion
मदिरा	wine, intoxicating-liquor
भुलले	(are) bewitched, intoxicated, lost-in
विषय-	sense-object
विखें	with-poison (इण्डो-आर्यन् विष → Marathi विख)
घारले	drugged, stupefied, overpowered
अज्ञान-	ignorance
पंकीं	in-the-mud, in-the-mire
बुडाले	(are) drowned, submerged
निभ्रांत	without-doubt, certain, beyond-question
मानीं	regard-(this), consider-(this)

Literal translation

English: "They are intoxicated by the wine-of-delusion, drugged by the poison-of-sense-objects, drowned in the mud-of-ignorance — regard this without doubt."

मराठी (आधुनिक): "ते मोहाच्या दारूने धुंद झाले आहेत, विषयांच्या विषाने मूर्च्छित आहेत, अज्ञानाच्या चिखलात बुडाले आहेत — हे निःशंकपणे जाण."

Translation-discipline note: This ovi is the Marathi-side rendering of the Sanskrit सर्वज्ञानविमूढान् ... नष्टान् अचेतसः — the three Sanskrit terms map nearly one-to-one onto three Marathi triplet-images: सर्वज्ञानविमूढ → मोहमदिरा भुलले; अचेतस → विषयविखें घारले / अज्ञानपंकीं बुडाले; नष्टान् → (anticipates 3.201's आत्मघाता). The structural-exactness here matches the pattern flagged in observations.md (Cluster 0116) for BG-3.19: Jñāneśvar produces Sanskrit→Marathi one-to-one renderings of load-bearing imperative-verses.

The closing निभ्रांत मानीं is Kṛṣṇa's विद्धि (know! — imperative-vocative addressed to Arjuna) — preserved exactly. This is the rare ovi where the Sanskrit second-person imperative directly surfaces in the Marathi.

Metaphor-unfold

Three triplet-images, each a one-stroke metaphor stacking on the previous:

Literal image	Philosophical referent	Modern equivalent
Drunk on wine (मदिरा)	Cognitive delusion (मोह) blurs discrimination	The 4-hour doomscroll where you forgot what you were looking for in the first place
Drugged by poison (विख)	Sense-objects function as toxin to clarity	The dopamine-loop of the addictive-app, designed to disable the off-switch
Drowned in mud (पंक)	Ignorance is not absence-of-light but active-clinging-mire	The conviction-set that a person cannot disagree-with even when shown counter-evidence — the belief is load-bearing for the identity

Metaphor-family: This triplet (wine-poison-mud) is a figura escalans — three intoxication-images that move from voluntary (wine) to involuntary (drugged) to structural (drowned-in-mire). The escalation is the doctrine: sense-pursuit BEGINS as voluntary indulgence and ENDS as structural-helplessness. The reader is shown the trajectory in three nouns.

Nāth-yogic layer

No Nāth-yogic referent in this ovi. The vocabulary (मदिरा / विष / पंक) is generic Vedantic-Purāṇic moral-imagery, not Nātha-tantric.

Cross-references

Internal:
3.131-3.135 (kāma-as-fire / kāma-as-enemy in adhyāya 3's earlier movement) — parallel-image (the sense-object-as-toxic-substance image-family)
BG-3.40 (forthcoming — इन्द्रियाणि मनो बुद्धिरस्याधिष्ठानम् उच्यते — kāma's seat) — foreshadows
Tukaram parallel:
Tukaram 2630 (vyasana-prārthanā — the 5-vice anti-petition: narastuti-kathā-vikrā, paranāri-paradhana, bhūta-matsara-santa-nindā, deha-abhimāna, pāyāñchā-visara) — inherits-the-diagnosis — Tukaram's daily-petition itemizes the very विषयविख Jñāneśvar names categorically here.
Source citation:
BG-2.62-63 (ध्यायतो विषयान्पुंसः सङ्गस्तेषूपजायते...बुद्धिनाशात्प्रणश्यति) — echo — the canonical Gītā-statement of the senses→delusion→destruction sequence; Jñāneśvar's wine-poison-mud triplet is its Marathi-rendering.
Bhāgavata Purāṇa 11.20.27-28 (yo dustyajān ... viṣayān martyo bhajati) — echo — same diagnostic register.

Modern application

The "I'll-just-check-once" reach for the phone at 11pm that ends at 2am — phase 1 (wine), phase 2 (drug), phase 3 (next morning's mire of self-disgust), in three hours.
The colleague whose every conversation circles back to one grievance — अज्ञानपंकीं बुडाले, the mud is structural: the identity needs the grievance.
The lover-of-validation who reads every metric, every comment — the dopamine-substance has crossed from voluntary-indulgence to involuntary-need; phase 2 is intact, phase 3 setting in.

Sādhanā

Today: identify which phase you are in for ONE specific sense-pursuit you know about yourself. Wine (voluntary still), drug (the off-switch has begun to fail), or mud (the pursuit is now load-bearing for your self-image). Just identify. Phase-naming alone halves the grip.

Arc

3.196 closes the diagnostic portrait (three-stage interior of the scoffer); 3.197 will open the four-fold metaphor-cascade (corpse-jewel, blind-dawn, moon-crow, moth-lamp) demonstrating the futility of the teaching ever landing in such a person.

Ovi 3.197

Original (Marathi): देखैं शवाच्या हातीं दिधलें । जैसें रत्न कां वायां गेलें । नातरी जात्यंधा पाहलें । प्रमाण नोहे ॥१९७॥ Voice: krishna-to-arjuna

Word-by-word gloss

Marathi	Meaning
देखैं	behold, see (narrative-imperative, used freely in Kṛṣṇa-speech per observations.md)
शवाच्या हातीं	into-the-corpse's-hand
दिधलें	placed, given
जैसें	just-as
रत्न	jewel
कां	(or)
वायां गेलें	went-in-vain, became-wasted
नातरी	or-else
जात्यंधा	to-the-born-blind, to-the-congenitally-blind
पाहलें	dawned, the-dawn-came
प्रमाण नोहे	is-not-evidence, is-not-valid-for-him

Literal translation

English: "Behold — just as a jewel placed in a corpse's hand goes to waste, or as the dawn for a congenitally-blind person is no evidence (of anything) —"

मराठी (आधुनिक): "पाहा — मेलेल्याच्या हातात ठेवलेले रत्न जसे फुकट जाते, किंवा जन्मांधाला पहाट उगवली तरी ते त्याच्यासाठी काही प्रमाण नसते —"

Voice-attribution note: देखैं is the generic Old-Marathi narrative-imperative discussed at length in observations.md (Cluster 0075 lesson). Used freely inside Kṛṣṇa-to-Arjuna stretches; not a voice-shift. Voice stays krishna-to-arjuna. The surrounding context (3.196's मानीं = Sanskrit विद्धि addressed-to-Arjuna; 3.199's vocative पार्था) confirms.

Metaphor-unfold

Two paired images. Pair 1 of the four-fold cascade (3.197-3.200).

Literal image	Philosophical referent	Modern equivalent
A jewel placed in a corpse's hand	The Gītā-teaching (`रत्न`) delivered to a being whose discriminative-faculty is dead (`शव`)	A masterwork of philosophy gifted to someone with active-dementia — the object is intact, the recipient is unavailable
Dawn breaking for a congenitally-blind person	The dawn (`पाहलें`) of the Gītā's wisdom shining on one born without the organ to receive it	A multi-color sunrise photographed for someone who has never seen color since birth — the light is there, the receiving-organ is absent

Metaphor-family: corpse-and-jewel and congenitally-blind-and-dawn — both belong to a receiver-absent / object-present family. The teaching is the object, the practitioner-faculty is the receiver. Where the receiver-faculty is dead or never-formed, the object's presence is irrelevant.

A subtle but important Mīmāmsā-resonance: प्रमाण नोहे ("is-not-evidence") is the technical-vocabulary of pramāṇa-theory (knowledge-source). For the born-blind, pratyakṣa (perceptual-evidence) of dawn does not arise — there is no organ. Jñāneśvar pulls the technical word into the metaphor to seal the point: it is not that the dawn does not exist for the blind; it is that it cannot function-as-pramāṇa for him.

Nāth-yogic layer

No Nāth-yogic referent in this ovi. The blind-and-dawn image is Vedantic-doctrinal (cf. Śankara's recurring jātyandha images), not Nātha-tantric.

Cross-references

Internal:
3.198 — developed-further (next pair of the same four-fold cascade)
18.1718-18.1721 (adhyāya 18's closing-imagery of the unfit recipient — forthcoming in decoding) — parallel-image
Tukaram parallel:
None integrated. The specific corpse-jewel image does not appear in Tukaram's commonly-decoded abhangs; will revisit if encountered.
Source citation:
Śankara's bhāṣya on BG-3.32 uses comparable adhikāri-defect language (अनधिकारित्वात्) — echo / interpretive-parallel. The image-substance is Jñāneśvar's; the doctrine of adhikāri-precondition is shared with the bhāṣya-tradition.

Modern application

The investor who lectures the unrecoverable-addict on compound-interest — the lesson is correct, the recipient's discrimination-faculty is currently un-available.
The well-meaning relative who explains democracy-norms to the family-member whose identity is built on the strongman — the dawn is showing, the organ that distinguishes dawn from dusk is not present at this stage.
The startup-founder who gives a meditation-app to a parent in active grief on day 4 — the gift is real, the receiver-state cannot make use of it now.

Sādhanā

Today: notice ONE conversation where you found yourself repeating a true point to someone whose ability-to-receive it was not present in this moment. Do not blame them. Just note: the teaching and the recipient need to match. The corpse-and-jewel image is also a discipline about you — you are not obliged to keep pressing the jewel.

Arc

3.197 opens the four-fold metaphor-cascade with the receiver-absent pair; 3.198 will deliver the second pair (moon-and-crow, foolish-and-discrimination).

Ovi 3.198

Original (Marathi): कां चंद्राचा उदयो जैसा । उपयोगा न वचे वायसा । मूर्खा विवेकु हा तैसा । रुचेल ना ॥१९८॥ Voice: krishna-to-arjuna

Word-by-word gloss

Marathi	Meaning
कां	or
चंद्राचा उदयो	the moon's rising, moonrise
जैसा	just-as
उपयोगा न वचे	does-not-go-to-use, is-of-no-use
वायसा	to-the-crow (वायस — crow; tatsama Sanskrit)
मूर्खा	to-the-fool
विवेकु	discrimination (vivekā — discernment between real/unreal, eternal/non-eternal)
हा	this
तैसा	likewise
रुचेल ना	will-not-be-pleasing, will-not-find-taste-in

Literal translation

English: "Or, just as the rising of the moon is of no use to a crow, in the same way this discrimination (viveka) will not taste-good to the fool."

मराठी (आधुनिक): "किंवा चंद्राचा उदय जसा कावळ्याला उपयोगाचा नसतो, तसाच मूर्खाला हा विवेक रुचणार नाही."

Image-precision note: This is one of Jñāneśvar's most-cited single-line images (चंद्र-वायस). The crow is a day-bird — by the time the moon rises, the crow is asleep / lodged. The moonrise is not absent for the crow; the crow is constitutionally absent for the moonrise. The image surgically separates "object's presence" from "subject's availability."

A subtle Marathi-aesthetic note: रुचेल ना ("will not taste") is the verb of palate/connoisseurship — Jñāneśvar shifts from "cannot perceive" (in 3.197's blind-and-dawn) to "cannot relish" here. The fool is not necessarily unable to perceive viveka; he is unable to develop taste-for-it. This is a register-shift downward — from organ-defect (3.197) to taste-defect (3.198).

Metaphor-unfold

Pair 2 of the four-fold cascade.

Literal image	Philosophical referent	Modern equivalent
The moon's rising	The cool, discriminating clarity (viveka) of the karma-yoga teaching	Late-night writing-time / 3am clarity when day-noise is gone
The crow (day-bird) for whom moonrise is useless	The fool whose attention-rhythm is locked to gross-sense-objects, sleeping when the subtle is available	The doom-scroller whose attention is locked to fast-changing-stimulus, asleep to the slow-and-cool

Metaphor-family: chandra-and-vayasa (moon-and-crow) — temporal-mismatch between object's-availability and subject's-rhythm. Different from 3.197's organ-absent family. Here the organ exists; the rhythm of attention has been trained against the object's frequency.

Nāth-yogic layer

चंद्र in Nātha-yogic vocabulary can refer to the amṛta-secreting moon at the sahasrāra / brahmarandhra whose nectar feeds the yogin through inverted-tongue (khecarī-mudrā). However, in THIS ovi the chandra is in its plain-Marathi sense of the night-sky moon, with the crow as natural-day-bird. The Nātha-resonance is speculative — Jñāneśvar elsewhere (adhyāya 6) uses chandra-amṛta vocabulary; the present ovi is poetic-natural, not tantric. Mark and move on. confidence: speculative.

Cross-references

Internal:
3.197 — developed-further (continuing the four-fold receiver-defect cascade)
6.288-6.293 (chandra-amṛta-bindu kuṇḍalinī sequence — forthcoming) — parallel-image-but-different-frame (same word चंद्र, different doctrinal register)
Tukaram parallel:
Tukaram 2866 (kasī pārakhī — the realization-test: cooked-food-must-be-tasted; touchstone-separates-pure-mid-low; pārakhī-vs-mūḍha-lāvaṇya) — inherits-the-discrimination-vs-fool axis — Tukaram's mūḍha-lāvaṇya who-cannot-tell-pure-from-impure is structurally the same figure as Jñāneśvar's मूर्खा who cannot taste viveka.
Source citation:
Cāṇakya-Nīti 2.13 (काकः कोकिल समाह्वये...) — echo (the crow-and-koel family of unfit-listener images is widespread in classical Sanskrit subhāṣita; Jñāneśvar uses the crow-as-non-listener in this same lineage).

Modern application

The friend you keep recommending a slow, careful book to — they read it in 90 minutes, give a quote-graphic, miss the entire argument. Their reading-rhythm is incompatible with the book's frequency. Not their fault; not yours. रुचेल ना.
The colleague who, when you bring up the slow long-term move, immediately translates it into a quarterly KPI. Their attention is trained to a different cycle.
Yourself, this morning, with the wisdom-text whose first three pages you skimmed. Don't congratulate yourself for naming the crow — the moonrise was for you too.

Sādhanā

Today: read ONE paragraph (any wisdom-text) at one-tenth speed. Read it aloud, one word at a time. If you find yourself skimming, you have located one frequency-band of crow-rhythm in yourself. The 90-second exercise IS the practice. The moon does not rise faster.

Arc

3.198 closes the second pair of the cascade with a register-warning about the listener; 3.199 will draw the practical-conclusion (therefore do not bother conversing with such a person).

Ovi 3.199

Original (Marathi): तैसे जे पार्था । विमुख या परमार्था । तयांसी संभाषण सर्वथा । करावेना ॥१९९॥ Voice: krishna-to-arjuna

Word-by-word gloss

Marathi	Meaning
तैसे	likewise, in-the-same-way
जे	those-who
पार्था	Arjuna! (Pārtha — son of Pṛthā; load-bearing vocative)
विमुख	turned-away-from
या परमार्था	from-this-supreme-truth, from-this-paramārtha
तयांसी	with-them
संभाषण	conversation, address, discourse
सर्वथा	by-any-means, at-all
करावेना	should-not-be-done (Marathi negative-prescriptive — "should-not-be-made-to-do")

Literal translation

English: "Likewise, Pārtha, those who are turned-away from this supreme-truth — with them conversation should not be conducted in any way."

मराठी (आधुनिक): "त्याचप्रमाणे, हे पार्था, जे या परमार्थापासून पाठ फिरवलेले आहेत — त्यांच्याशी कोणत्याही प्रकारे संभाषण करू नये."

Voice-anchor (load-bearing): पार्था is the unambiguous Arjuna-vocative. Voice = krishna-to-arjuna, full strength. This is the ovi that retroactively confirms Kṛṣṇa-voice for the entire 3.194-3.198 stretch (per observations.md voice-attribution discipline: when a cluster contains at least one explicit vocative, surrounding ovis without explicit anchors inherit the same voice unless evidence shifts).

Doctrinal note (worth flagging): तयांसी संभाषण सर्वथा करावेना is a striking instruction in a text otherwise relentlessly inclusive — the Gītā that promises सर्वधर्मान्परित्यज्य... मा शुचः (18.66) here counsels Arjuna NOT to address the scoffer at all. The doctrine is adhikāri-discrimination: not everyone is at the threshold-state for the teaching; offering it indiscriminately wastes both teaching and teacher. This is the Gītā-tradition's pre-modern teacher-discipline: discernment-of-the-recipient is part of the teacher's craft.

Compare BG-18.67 (इदं ते नातपस्काय...नाभक्ताय कदाचन) — the closing-injunction of the entire Gītā: do-not-share-this with the non-tapaska, the non-bhakta. Jñāneśvar's 3.199 is a mid-text rehearsal of that closing-instruction.

Metaphor-unfold

No extended metaphor in this ovi — it is the conclusion-statement drawn from the four-fold cascade. Three ovis of imagery (3.197-3.198) plus this conclusion (3.199) form the unit evidence → therefore.

Nāth-yogic layer

No Nāth-yogic referent in this ovi. The instruction is doctrinal-discriminatory, not tantric.

Cross-references

Internal:
3.197-3.198 — derived-conclusion-from (the four-fold cascade is the premise; 3.199 is the conclusion)
BG-18.67 (forthcoming — इदं ते नातपस्काय...नाभक्ताय कदाचन) — foreshadows (the canonical closing-injunction of the Gītā about non-sharing with the unfit; 3.199 is its mid-text rehearsal)
Tukaram parallel:
Tukaram 2930 (anti-durjana-sanga prayer — don't-give-durjana-sanga-chitta-bhanga-moment-by-moment; I'll-take-many-births-yātanā-instead) — inherits-the-discriminatory-instruction-from-the-other-side — Tukaram begs to be spared from durjana-sanga; Kṛṣṇa here instructs not to seek converse with the para-mārtha-vimukha. The two sides of the same discipline.
Source citation:
BG-18.67 (इदं ते नातपस्काय...नाभक्ताय कदाचन) — direct-doctrinal-parallel
Manusmṛti 2.110-2.114 (rules on whom-to-instruct and whom-not-to) — tradition-frame (the broader śāstric tradition of instruction-recipient-discrimination).

Modern application

The activist who has had the same conversation with the same uncle at every Diwali for ten years — करावेना. The instruction is to stop. Not from contempt; from the receiver-state-recognition of 3.197-3.198.
The therapist who has watched a client decline the framework for the eighth session running — the framework needs to retire; the relationship can stay; the offering-of-the-teaching needs to stop until the receiver is differently-poised.
The teacher who returns a marked essay with the same comment for the third semester — the teacher should consider whether the conversation-form is wrong (not the student).

Sādhanā

Today: identify ONE conversation you have been initiating-on-repeat with a person who is विमुख. For 30 days: stop initiating. Notice what arises in you. The instruction is not "be cold" — it is "stop spending your jewel on the corpse-hand."

Arc

3.199 draws the discriminatory conclusion (do-not-converse-with-them); 3.200 will identify the further reason — the scoffers will respond with active-slander (निंदाही करूं लागती).

Ovi 3.200

Original (Marathi): म्हणौनि ते न मानिती । आणि निंदाही करूं लागती । सांगैं पतंगु काय साहती । प्रकाशातें ? ॥२००॥ Voice: krishna-to-arjuna

Word-by-word gloss

Marathi	Meaning
म्हणौनि	therefore (load-bearing logical-connector — same word as 3.150's तस्मात्→म्हणौनि per observations.md)
ते	they
न मानिती	(do) not-accept
आणि	and
निंदाही	even-slander, calumny-also
करूं लागती	begin-to-do
सांगैं	tell-me!
पतंगु	moth
काय साहती	what-can-(it)-bear, what-can-(it)-withstand
प्रकाशातें	(the accusative of) light, light-itself

Literal translation

English: "Therefore they will not accept (the teaching), and they will even begin to slander (it) — tell me, can the moth bear the light?"

मराठी (आधुनिक): "म्हणून ते (हे मत) स्वीकारणार नाहीत आणि शिवाय निंदाही करायला लागतील — सांग, पतंग प्रकाश सहन करू शकतो काय?"

Doctrinal/structural note: म्हणौनि is the same load-bearing logical-connector flagged in observations.md (Cluster 0116, BG-3.19) — Jñāneśvar's standard Marathi-rendering of Sanskrit तस्मात्. Here म्हणौनि is operating intra-cluster (not at chapter-pivot scale): it connects the imagery-evidence (3.197-3.198) plus the instruction (3.199) to the prediction-of-response (3.200). The argument is complete: receiver-defect → don't-converse → predictably-will-slander.

The closing line सांगैं पतंगु काय साहती प्रकाशातें ? is one of Jñāneśvar's signature interrogative-metaphor moves — instead of asserting "the moth cannot bear the light," he asks Arjuna the question. The rhetorical structure forces Arjuna (and reader) into the answering-position. The answer "no, the moth does not bear the light — it dies in it" then sets up the next ovi's claim that sense-pursuit IS self-slaughter.

Metaphor-unfold

The moth-and-lamp image — pair 3 of the metaphor-set (technically the third of the four-fold sequence opened in 3.197).

Literal image	Philosophical referent	Modern equivalent
The moth flying at the lamp's flame	The scoffer's attraction to (= pseudo-engagement with) the light of the teaching — not as illumination-source but as attractor-for-destruction	The aggressive-comment-poster who must engage every spiritual-post on social-media specifically to attack it — the very engagement IS the moth-flight
The flame the moth cannot bear (`साहती ना`)	The viveka-light of the teaching that the scoffer's psychic-structure cannot tolerate	The teaching whose presence in the room creates a defensive-rage in the listener (proof of contact made — not of receptivity)

Metaphor-family: patanga-deepa (moth-and-lamp) — attraction-as-destruction family. Different from the three preceding receiver-defect images (corpse-jewel, blind-dawn, crow-moon, fool-viveka) in that the moth is NOT passive-and-uncomprehending — the moth actively seeks the light and is destroyed by the seeking. This is a register-shift in the cascade: from cannot-receive to comes-toward-and-is-destroyed. The metaphor prepares 3.201's claim that sense-pursuit is self-slaughter.

Nāth-yogic layer

No Nāth-yogic referent in this ovi. The moth-lamp image is universal-classical, not tantric.

Cross-references

Internal:
3.201 — developed-further (3.200 asks the question, 3.201 answers it doctrinally: this is what sense-pursuit IS)
6.10 (forthcoming — सुख-दु:खाची लागी / पतंगु जैसा... — kuṇḍalinī chapter's recurring moth-and-flame imagery) — parallel-image in different register
Tukaram parallel:
Tukaram 2864 (*all-have-adhikāra; uddhāra-in-Kali-by-Hari-nāma) — inverse-resonance — Tukaram famously expands the adhikāra universally; Jñāneśvar here (and via BG-18.67) preserves the adhikāri-discrimination. The two are NOT in contradiction — both poets honor the inclusive-final-promise while preserving the practical-instruction-discipline. Worth tracking as surface-tension-resolved-in-depth.
Source citation:
BG-11.29 (यथा प्रदीप्तं ज्वलनं पतङ्गा विशन्ति नाशाय) — direct-image-citation — the canonical Gītā moth-and-flame image (in Arjuna's viśva-rūpa vision); Jñāneśvar pre-figures it here in adhyāya 3. This is the load-bearing source-citation of this ovi. The viśva-rūpa-darśana sees all beings as moths-flying-into-the-cosmic-fire; Jñāneśvar uses the same image at smaller scale for the scoffer of the teaching.

Modern application

The online-debate where the contrarian-replier seeks out every spiritual-post to attack — पतंग प्रकाशातें in 280-character form. The very seeking is the moth-flight.
The colleague who, when you bring up the meditation-retreat, must immediately mock it — the mockery is the moth's attraction-to-the-light, in defensive-armor.
Yourself, this morning, with the wisdom-text whose first paragraph caused an instant inner-recoil. The recoil IS the contact. Contact with the teaching is registered in psyche-structures as a destabilization. The moth's wing has touched the heat.

Sādhanā

Today: notice ONE moment when you feel an instant-defensive-rage toward a spiritual-claim. Do not act on it. Do not defend yourself against it. Sit with the rage for 90 seconds. The rage IS the diagnostic: the teaching has made contact. (This is not the same as agreement; it is the same as proof-of-contact.)

Arc

3.200's interrogative-metaphor sets up the closing-doctrinal-claim; 3.201 will answer the question — yes, the moth dies in the light, and this dying IS the literal-truth of sense-pursuit (आत्मघाता).

Ovi 3.201

Original (Marathi): पतंगा दीपीं आलिंगन । तेथ त्यासी अचुक मरण । तेंवीं विषयाचरण । आत्मघाता ॥२०१॥ Voice: krishna-to-arjuna

Word-by-word gloss

Marathi	Meaning
पतंगा	for-the-moth
दीपीं	in-the-lamp
आलिंगन	embrace, embracing
तेथ	there
त्यासी	for-it
अचुक मरण	unerring death, certain-death (literally "death-without-miss")
तेंवीं	likewise
विषयाचरण	sense-object-pursuit, indulgence-of-sense-objects
आत्मघाता	(is) self-slaughter, ātma-ghāta (literally killing-of-self)

Literal translation

English: "The moth's embrace of the lamp — there, for it, is unerring death. Likewise the pursuit of sense-objects is self-slaughter."

मराठी (आधुनिक): "पतंगाने दिव्याला मारलेली मिठी — तिथे त्याला निश्चित मरण आहे. तसेच विषयांचे आचरण म्हणजे आत्मघात आहे."

Translation-discipline / load-bearing terminology: Three structural-exactness moves seal the cluster:

आलिंगन ("embrace") is a deliberately-affectionate verb — the moth does not crash, does not blunder — it embraces the lamp. The verb dignifies the choice-quality of the act. The destruction is willed, not accidental.
अचुक मरण ("death-without-miss") is Marathi's strongest-form certainty-expression. Compare 3.83's कहींच न घडे (Cluster 0107) and 3.151's पातले — Jñāneśvar's signature certainty-form sentences cluster at chapter-pivot points. This is one.
आत्मघाता is the load-bearing closing-noun of the cluster (and of the chapter's first major doctrinal-arc). The Sanskrit नष्टान् of BG-3.32 is rendered into the active-causal ātma-ghāta — the scoffer is not merely destroyed (passive), he is self-slaughtering (active-reflexive). This is Jñāneśvar's interpretive intensification of the Sanskrit. The Gītā says "destroyed"; Jñāneśvar specifies by their own hand.

Metaphor-unfold

Literal image	Philosophical referent	Modern equivalent
The moth embracing the lamp-flame	The sense-pursuer's affectionate, willed engagement with the very sense-objects that destroy his discriminative-faculty	The lover who returns to the abusive-relationship knowing it; the smoker lighting the next; the gambler placing the next bet — the embrace is informed, not blind
Unerring death (अचुक मरण)	The certainty of structural-self-destruction in sense-pursuit; not probabilistic	The diabetes diagnosis that arrives on time; the wrecked liver; the addiction-trajectory whose end-point is not in doubt
Likewise, sense-pursuit IS self-slaughter	The diagnostic-claim is not "sense-pursuit leads to destruction" but "sense-pursuit IS destruction" — they are not cause-and-effect, they are the same act under two descriptions	The smoker is not "risking" cancer — the smoker IS the cancer-process, in slow-motion

Metaphor-family: patanga-dipa-atma-ghata — culmination of the four-fold receiver-defect cascade. The closure is not metaphor-extension but metaphor-IDENTIFICATION: sense-pursuit and self-slaughter are not analogues, they are the same act.

Nāth-yogic layer

No Nāth-yogic referent in this ovi. आत्मघात is a Vedantic moral-category, not tantric. (Nāth-tradition's ulta-sādhana involves death-of-the-empirical-ego, but that is a willed positive ātma-ghāta in a different sense — not the same usage as here.)

Cross-references

Internal:
3.131-3.135 (काम is the enemy of jīva — adhyāya 3's earlier movement) — developed-further (3.201's आत्मघाता is the doctrinal-end-point of the kāma-shatru argument)
BG-3.41-3.43 (forthcoming — kāma-as-enemy-to-be-conquered) — foreshadows
BG-16.16-16.21 (त्रिविधं नरकस्येदं द्वारं नाशनमात्मनः — the three-doors of self-destruction) — developed-further (the canonical ātma-nāśana doctrine of the Gītā; this ovi is the adhyāya-3 first-statement of it).
Tukaram parallel:
Tukaram 2630 (vyasana-prārthanā — the daily petition-against-5-vices) — direct-thematic-inheritance — Tukaram's daily vyasana-prārthanā is operationally a practice for not embracing the lamp. The petition is the precise countermeasure to 3.201's diagnosis.
Tukaram 2797 (don't entangle in māyā-net, Time comes to devour) — parallel-mortality-warning — same axis of warning, slightly different metaphor-family (māyā-net vs moth-lamp).
Source citation:
BG-11.29 (यथा प्रदीप्तं ज्वलनं पतङ्गा विशन्ति नाशाय) — direct-image-source (canonical, as flagged in 3.200).
BG-16.21 (त्रिविधं नरकस्येदं द्वारं नाशनमात्मनः) — doctrinal-source (ātma-nāśana doctrine).
Iśa Upaniṣad 3 (असुर्या नाम ते लोकाः ... ये के चात्महनो जनाः) — direct-quote-of-doctrine (the ātma-hana doctrine — those who slaughter the Self enter sunless-worlds; Jñāneśvar's आत्मघाता is the exact Marathi-Sanskrit echo).

Modern application

The recurring relationship-pattern you can name precisely and still re-enter — the embrace is informed, the death is अचुक, you are not blundering, you are choosing.
The job you have known for two years is wrecking you, that you continue — the moth-embrace of the lamp; the certainty is the diagnostic.
The scrolling-loop you re-enter at the same time each night, the dopamine-substance you know is the depression-engine and reach for anyway — this IS the patanga-dīpa-ālingana, in 2026 idiom.

Sādhanā

Today: identify ONE specific embrace in your life — a returning-to-something that you KNOW is the source of your suffering, that you nonetheless choose. Do not vow to stop. Do not shame yourself. Just NAME it as the embrace. Write the name on paper. The naming is the first interruption in the moth-lamp loop. (Stage 2 of the practice — actually-interrupting — comes from a different ovi. Today's practice is only stage 1.)

Arc

3.201 closes the cluster with the verdict (आत्मघाता) and completes the BG-3.31/3.32 binary that has structured the karma-yoga doctrinal arc's first major resting-point. The chapter now pivots: having delivered the verdict, BG-3.33 will ask why — why does one continue the embrace even when informed? The answer (svabhāva, prakṛti) will open the chapter's final movement on kāma-as-the-enemy-within.

Cluster summary

Core teaching: Those who scorn and refuse to practice Kṛṣṇa's teaching are sense-deluded, ignorance-drowned beings whose destruction is self-inflicted — the way a moth chooses the lamp it dies in.

Theme tags: contrapositive-warning, sva-vighāta, sense-bondage, asūyā, moth-and-lamp, corpse-and-jewel, karma-yoga-arc-closing.

Extended metaphors: Yes — four in cascade plus a triplet: - triplet 3.196: wine of delusion + poison of sense-objects + mud of ignorance - 3.197: corpse-given-jewel + congenitally-blind-and-dawn (receiver-organ-absent) - 3.198: moon-and-crow (receiver-rhythm-mismatched) - 3.200-3.201: moth-and-lamp (receiver-actively-self-destroying)

The cascade is structurally engineered: the four metaphors are not interchangeable, they escalate from passive-defect (corpse) → organ-defect (blind) → rhythm-defect (crow) → active-self-destruction (moth). The metaphor-set is the doctrine.

Chapter arc position: Closing pair of BG-3's first major doctrinal-arc — chapter's argument funnels into a binary verdict (followers freed / scoffers destroyed). The doctrinal-arc that opened at BG-3.4 (न कर्मणामनारम्भात्...) and was imperatively summarized at BG-3.19 (तस्मादसक्तः सततम्... — cluster 0116) here lands with its consequence-statement.

Connects to next śloka: Having delivered the verdict on scoffers — sense-pursuit IS self-slaughter — BG-3.33 will pivot to ask the obvious follow-up: if scorning works against one's interest, why does one still scorn? The answer (प्रकृति, planted in this cluster's 3.194 as प्रकृतिमंतु होउनी, will become the focal noun of the next śloka: सदृशं चेष्टते स्वस्याः प्रकृतेर्ज्ञानवानपि) opens the chapter's final movement on svabhāva and kāma-as-the-enemy-within.

Methodological note (for observations.md): This cluster confirms two patterns flagged earlier in the project — (i) the Sanskrit→Marathi structural-exactness pattern (3.194's अव्हेरुनी ओसंडिती = अभ्यसूयन्तः नानुतिष्ठन्ति; 3.196's निभ्रांत मानीं = विद्धि); (ii) the म्हणौनि logical-connector marking argument-closure (3.200). Add the interrogative-metaphor device (3.200's सांगैं पतंगु काय साहती प्रकाशातें?) as a new pattern-marker worth tracking — Jñāneśvar's signature move of forcing Arjuna into the answer-position before delivering the doctrinal conclusion.