Upadēśa Undiyār: Tamil text, transliteration and translation
The three main sources that I cite in articles on this blog are Nāṉ Ār?, Upadēśa Undiyār and Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, because these are the three texts in which Bhagavan expressed the fundamental principles of his teachings in the most comprehensive, systematic, clear and coherent manner, but though there is a complete translation of Nāṉ Ār? on my website, I have not till now given a complete translation of all the verses of either Upadēśa Undiyār or Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu in one place, so since friends often write to me asking for such a translation of these texts, I have decided to give a complete translation of each of them here. Therefore in this article I give a translation of all the verses of Upadēśa Undiyār (which Bhagavan composed first in Tamil and later translated into Sanskrit, Telugu and Malayalam under the title Upadēśa Sāram, ‘The Essence of Spiritual Teachings’), and in a subsequent article I will likewise give a translation of all the verses of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu.
In both these texts Bhagavan expressed the fundamental principles of his teachings in the style of sūtras or aphorisms, so though each verse is relatively short, it is packed with deep meaning and is rich in implications, and hence they require explanation in order for us to understand them more deeply and completely. However no explanation of them should be considered complete, because no matter how much we may study and reflect on their meaning, we can always find fresh depth of meaning and wealth of implications in them, and consequently our understanding of them can become more clear, as I often find while answering questions or replying to comments on this blog, because when I cite and apply these verses in different contexts my understanding of them is deepened and enriched.
Therefore in this article, instead of attempting to give any new explanations of these verses, after each one I will give a list of links in reverse chronological order to places in this blog where I have already cited, explained and discussed it. Later I intend to post a copy of this translation on my website, but until I do so I will try to keep the list of links for each verse up to date by adding new links as and when I write any further explanations of any of these verses.
Like Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu and some of the other important Tamil works of Bhagavan Sri Ramana, Upadēśa Undiyār was composed at the request of Muruganar. In order to understand correctly what Bhagavan teaches us in this text, it is necessary for us to know the context in which he composed it.
Muruganar, who was not only Bhagavan’s foremost disciple but also a great Tamil scholar and poet, first came to him in September 1923, and before coming he composed a song called Dēśika Padigam, which he offered to him on his arrival. Soon after that he composed another song entitled Tiruvembāvai, and on seeing the poetic beauty of these verses and the lofty ideas contained in them, Bhagavan remarked, ‘This is in the style of Manikkavacakar. Can you sing like Manikkavacakar?’. Muruganar was taken aback on hearing these words, and exclaimed, ‘Where is my ignorant mind, which is as blind as an owl in daylight, and which is darker than the darkness of night? And where is the self-experience (ātma-anubhuti) of Manikkavacakar, in whom the darkness of delusion had vanished and in whom true knowledge (mey-jñāna) had surged forth? To compare my base mind with his exalted experience is like comparing a fire-fly with the bright stars’. When Muruganar thus expressed his own deeply felt unworthiness, by his glance of grace Bhagavan shone forth in his heart, thereby making his mind blossom, enabling him to compose the great work Śrī Ramaṇa Sannidhi Muṟai, which in later years Bhagavan himself declared to be equal to Manikkavacakar’s Tiruvācakam.
Śrī Ramaṇa Sannidhi Muṟai is a collection of more than 120 songs composed by Muruganar in praise of Bhagavan, and many of them are sung in the same style and metres as the songs of Tiruvācakam. Among the songs in Tiruvācakam, there is one song of 20 verses called Tiruvundiyār, in which Manikkavacakar sings about some of the līlās or divine games played by Lord Siva. Therefore in 1927 when Muruganar began to compose a song called Tiruvundiyār in praise of Bhagavan, he decided to follow a similar theme, and thus he started to sing about various līlās played by several Gods, taking all those Gods to be none other than Bhagavan Ramana himself.
Once some devotees asked Sadhu Om, ‘Kavyakantha Ganapati Sastri claimed that Bhagavan is an incarnation or avatāra of Subrahmanya. Other devotees say that he is an incarnation of Siva. What was Muruganar’s opinion? According to him, of which God was Bhagavan an incarnation?’, to which he replied with a smile, ‘According to Muruganar, it is the other way around. His conviction was that all Gods are incarnations or manifestations of Bhagavan’. This conviction of Muruganar’s is beautifully expressed by him in his song Tiruvundiyār.
Having attained self-knowledge by the grace of Bhagavan, Muruganar knew from his own direct experience that Bhagavan is the one unlimited supreme reality, and that all Gods and divine incarnations are truly manifestations of that same supreme reality. Although the supreme reality can manifest itself in any number of divine names and forms, the highest of all those manifestations is the name and form of the sadguru. Therefore being an exemplary disciple, Muruganar was drawn in devotion only to the name and form of his sadguru, Bhagavan Ramana, as he expresses beautifully in Śrī Ramaṇa Jñāna Bōdham, volume 3, verse 1023:
Thus in Tiruvundiyār Muruganar sings about the līlās of Vinayaka, Subrahmanya, Vishnu and his various incarnations such as Rama and Krishna, Siva, Buddha and Jesus, taking all these Gods to be manifestations of Bhagavan Ramana. Tiruvundiyār is divided into two parts, the first part consisting of 137 verses (Sannidhi Murai, vv. 1277-1413) about the līlās of various Gods narrated in the Hindu Purāṇas, and the second part consisting of 7 verses (Sannidhi Murai, vv. 1414-1420) about Buddha upholding the dharma of compassion (vv. 1-5) and Jesus Christ suffering crucifixion to expiate the sins of others (vv. 6-7).
In the first part of Tiruvundiyār Muruganar sings about Vinayaka breaking the axle of his father’s chariot (1-2), about Subrahmanya subduing the ego of Brahma (3), giving upadēśa to Siva (4-9) and playing with Vishnu (10-11), about Vishnu killing Hiranaya (12) and bestowing grace upon Mahabali (13-16), about Rama being merciful to Ravana (17), about Krishna teaching Arjuna his duty (18), and about Siva drinking poison (19), subduing Kali by his dance (20-21), plucking off one of the heads of Brahma (22), killing Andhakasura (23), burning the Tripurasuras with a mere laugh (24-34), punishing Daksha (35-36), destroying Jalandharasura (37), flaying the elephant (38), burning Kama (39-51), kicking Yama (52-61), showing compassion to Ravana (62-66), blessing Brahma and Vishnu when they worshipped him in the form of Annamalai, having failed to reach his head and feet (67-69), and finally enlightening the ascetics in the Daruka Forest (70-137). While singing about these līlās, Muruganar sings of them as the līlās of Bhagavan Ramana, who had manifested as all these various Gods.
It was in the context of the last līlā related in the first part of Tiruvundiyār that the work Upadēśa Undiyār came into existence. Having sung in verses 70 to 102 how Bhagavan in the form of Siva had appeared in the Daruka Forest to subdue the pride of the ascetics (tapasvis) and bring them to the path of liberation, Muruganar came to the point where Siva was to give them his spiritual teachings (upadēśa). Thinking that it would not be appropriate for him to decide what teachings Siva would have given in order to uplift the ascetics from their then level of maturity, in which they were blinded by their attachment to the path of ritualistic action (karma), and to elevate their minds gradually till they would be fit to come to the direct path to liberation, Muruganar prayed to Bhagavan to reveal the essence of the teachings which he had himself given to the ascetics in those ancient days, when he had manifested in their midst in the form of Siva. Accordingly in verses 103 to 132 of the first part of Tiruvundiyār (verses 1379 to 1408 of Sannidhi Murai) Bhagavan composed the essence of the upadēśa that Siva gave to the ascetics in the Daruka Forest.
While composing these thirty verses, which he did in one sitting, Bhagavan discussed in detail with Muruganar all the ideas which were to be presented one after another in a carefully arranged and balanced sequence, and in the course of these discussions the original drafts of verses 16, 28 and 30 were composed by Muruganar and were then revised by Bhagavan. Such was the close co-operation with which they worked together.
These thirty verses form the main text (nūl) of Upadēśa Undiyār, and Bhagavan subsequently translated them into Telugu, Sanskrit and Malayalam under the title Upadēśa Saram (The Essence of Teachings). In Tamil the entire work consists of a prefatory verse (pāyiram) composed by Muruganar, six introductory verses (upōdghātam) that Bhagavan selected from Muruganar’s Tiruvundiyār in order to present the teachings in their proper context, the main text (nūl) of thirty verses, and five concluding verses of praise (vāṙttu), which are the last five verses of the first part of Tiruvundiyār.
In each of the verses of the upōdghātam, nūl and vāṙttu the final word of the second and third lines is உந்தீபற (undīpaṟa), which is a poetic elongation of the verb உந்திபற (undipaṟa), in which பற (paṟa) is the root and an imperative form of a verb that means to fly, hover, flutter or float in the air, and உந்தி (undi) seems to have been the name of an ancient game played by women, which was perhaps an early non-competitive form of what later evolved into the modern competitive sports of ball badminton and badminton, and the aim of which may have been for the group of players to keep the ball or shuttlecock flying about in the air without touching the ground for as long as possible. உந்தி (undi) may therefore have also meant the ball or shuttlecock used in such a game, in which case உந்தீ (undī) would be a vocative (or eighth case) form of it, so ‘உந்தீ பற’ (undī paṟa) may have been an exclamation that meant ‘ball, fly’ or ‘shuttlecock, fly’. The Tiruvundiyār song composed by Manikkavacakar was perhaps intended to be sung while playing this game, and hence he adopted a metre in which this word occurs at the end of the second and third lines of each verse. When these verses are translated into English, உந்தீபற (undīpaṟa) is obviously to be treated as a poetic expletive, but it is worth noting that it does lend a very joyful and playful spirit to the profound spiritual teachings that Bhagavan gives us in Upadēśa Undiyār.
In order to understand what Bhagavan is teaching us in Upadēśa Undiyār, particularly in the first fifteen verses, we need to read and carefully consider the upōdghātam and the summary of the story contained in it. Though in the Purāṇas the ascetics who were living in the Daruka Forest are described as ‘rishis’ (ṛṣis) who were performing tapas or austerities, what actually was their state of mind, what kind of tapas were they performing, and what was it that they were seeking to achieve through their tapas?
These so-called rishis were following the path of kāmya karma (ritualistic actions performed for the fulfilment of temporal desires), which is the path prescribed by the pūrva mīmāṁsā, a system of philosophy focused on the interpretation and practice of the Karma Kāṇḍa, the preliminary (and by far the largest) portion of the Vedas, which is concerned with performance of sacrifices and other ritualistic actions. Not knowing that the true goal of life is liberation, which is eradication of ego, they exhibited their ignorance by their actions such as the performance of various kinds of yāgas and yajñas (sacrificial rites), whereby they sought to attain powers, siddhis and other sources of enjoyment both in this world and the next. Being adept in the performance of such sacrificial rites and in the use of other techniques such as mantras, yantras and tantras, they had become intoxicated with conceit. Their pride in the power and efficacy of their karmas (ritualistic actions) was so great that they had even come to believe that there is no God except karma. ‘Karma alone is of foremost importance. The efforts we make in performing karmas have the power to yield their own fruit; they must yield their fruit; even God cannot prevent them from yielding fruit. So there is no need for us to be concerned about any God other than our own karmas’ – such was their arrogant attitude.
Thus, though in the Purāṇas they are politely referred to as ‘rishis’, their state of mind reveals that they were in fact only students in the first standard of the school of bhakti described in chapter two of the supplement to The Path of Sri Ramana. Can the karmas that they were performing for the fulfilment of their own selfish desires be called real tapas? As Bhagavan taught us in verse 30 of Upadēśa Undiyār, real tapas is nothing but complete cessation of ego, the false awareness ‘I am this body’, which is what gives rise to the sense of doership, ‘I am doing karma’.
Since the ascetics had thus strayed so far from the path that leads to the real goal of egolessness, it was necessary for Lord Siva, the ocean of compassion, to make them understand the error of their ways and guide them back to the proper path. Therefore he manifested in the form of a mendicant and made them understand that even their most powerful karmas were rendered powerless in front of him. Thus their pride was subdued and they prayed to him for salvation.
Knowing how gross and unrefined the minds of the ascetics had become due to their longstanding attachment to karma, Siva knew that it would not be possible to bring them immediately to the subtle path of self-investigation (ātma-vicāra), which alone is the direct path to liberation. Therefore he had to guide them towards the path of self-investigation in a gradual manner. That is why in the first fifteen verses of Upadēśa Undiyār it was necessary for Bhagavan to summarise the paths of niṣkāmya karma, bhakti and yōga, which Siva first had to teach to the ascetics in order to elevate their minds gradually to the level of maturity in which they could understand that liberation can ultimately be attained only by means of self-investigation. Only after summarising those paths and explaining how they are each intended to lead eventually to the path of self-investigation, which is the true path of jñāna, could he begin to explain this path in more detail from verse 16 onwards.
Either because they do not know the context in which he composed this work, or because they have not carefully considered the connection between the context and what he taught in it, many people wrongly assume that Upadēśa Undiyār or Upadēśa Sāram is the essence of Bhagavan Ramana’s own teachings. However, if we consider the context and what he wrote in the first fifteen verses, it should be clear that the intention with which he composed this work was to summarise not his own teachings but the teachings that Siva gave in ancient days to the ascetics in the Daruka Forest to suit their level of spiritual maturity.
As Bhagavan often used to say, whatever spiritual teachings are given must be suited to the grasping power and maturity of whomever they are given to, so many different levels of teachings and practices are necessary to suit the needs of people of many different levels of spiritual development (see for example section 107 of Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi (1978 edition, page 103; 2006 edition, page 105), where it is recorded that he said that the instructions to be given ‘differ according to the temperaments of the individuals and according to the spiritual ripeness of their minds’). Since the ascetics to whom Siva gave his teachings were to be elevated by him from a very low level of spiritual maturity, it was necessary for him to begin by giving them teachings that they would be willing to accept and therefore able to grasp and put into practice, and then he had to lead them gradually from the grosser forms of spiritual practice such as pūjā, japa, dhyāna and prāṇāyāma towards the most refined, namely self-investigation, which is the simple practice of self-attentiveness.
Therefore we should not assume that all the sādhanas or spiritual practices that Bhagavan discusses in Upadēśa Undiyār are his own direct teachings. Though it is true that during his lifetime he had to give instructions concerning almost every kind of spiritual practice in order to guide those who were already following such practices and were not yet willing to come to the direct path of self-investigation, what actually was the core and essence of his teachings? Can it be said that pūjā, japa, dhyāna and prāṇāyāma are core elements of his teachings? Was it to teach such practices that he appeared on earth in our present age?
Though he acknowledged the efficacy of such practices as indirect means that, if practiced with devotion and without desire for achieving any selfish aim, would gradually purify the mind and thereby sooner or later lead one to the direct path of self-investigation (as indicated by him in verse 3 of Upadēśa Undiyār), the main reason he appeared in human form in modern times was not merely to give his approval to such indirect practices, which have already been expounded in detail in ancient texts. The principal purpose of his life was to teach us why and how to practise the simple and direct path of self-investigation, which is the only means by which we can be aware of ourself as we actually are and thereby eradicate ego. That is why his teachings were focussed on the practice of self-investigation, which bypasses the need for any other kind of spiritual practice.
In 1928, one year after he had composed Upadēśa Undiyār, Muruganar prayed to him, ‘So that we may be saved, reveal to us the nature of reality and the means by which to attain it’ (Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu pāyiram: introductory verse), in response to which Bhagavan composed Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, in which the only practice he expounded was self-investigation, and he made no more than a few indirect references to other practices. Therefore, the real essence of his teachings is only the path of self-investigation, which he has expounded in both Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu and the last fifteen verses of Upadēśa Undiyār.
Though he briefly discussed pūjā, japa, dhyāna and prāṇāyāma in the first fifteen verses of Upadēśa Undiyār, if we carefully consider what he actually says in these verses, we will see that he is explaining firstly how each of these practices can ultimately lead one to the path of self-investigation, which alone is the direct means to eradicate ego, and secondly that self-investigation is therefore the culmination of all other varieties of spiritual practice, namely niṣkāmya karma, bhakti, yōga, and jñāna, as he says in verse 10.
In the first two verses he begins by condemning kāmya karmas (actions performed for the fulfilment of temporal desires), declaring that they will not lead to liberation but will only immerse the doer deeper and deeper into the ocean of karma (action). In verse 3 he teaches that action can be conducive to the attainment of liberation only if it is done for the love of God and without any desire for its fruit, because it will then purify the mind and thereby enable one to recognise that the means to liberation is only self-investigation. In verses 4 to 7 he discusses the various kinds of desireless action (niṣkāmya karma), namely pūjā (worship or adoration of God), japa (repetition of a mantra or name of God) and dhyāna (meditation upon a name or form of God), which are done respectively by body, speech and mind, and each succeeding one of which is more efficacious in purifying the mind than the preceding one.
Then in verse 8 he says that rather than meditation upon God as other than oneself, it is better to meditate upon him as not other than oneself, and thereby he reveals how the paths of niṣkāmya pūjā, japa and dhyāna must eventually lead to the path of self-investigation, which is what he described as ananya-bhāva (meditation on what is not other), and which he said is ‘aṉaittiṉum uttamam’, ‘the best among all’, thereby implying that among all the practices of bhakti and also all other forms of spiritual practice it is the best, in the sense that it is the most effective means to purify the mind. He then says in verse 9 that to abide in one’s own true state of being, which is attained by the strength of such ananya-bhāva (self-attentiveness) and which transcends meditation (in the sense of mental activity, as opposed to self-attentiveness, which is a cessation of all such activity), is the truth of para-bhakti (supreme devotion). Thus, in verses 3 to 9 Bhagavan reveals how the paths of desireless action (niṣkāmya karma) and devotion (bhakti) lead to and culminate in the path of self-investigation, which in turn establishes one in the state of self-abidance, which is the true state of liberation. He then concludes this series of verses by saying in verse 10 that subsiding and being in one’s real nature, which is the source from which one had risen as a doer of action, is not only the essence of karma yōga and bhakti yōga, as described in the preceding verses, but is also the essence of rāja yōga and jñāna yōga, as described in the subsequent verses.
In verses 11 to 15 Bhagavan discusses the path of raja yōga. In verses 11 and 12 he explains that prāṇāyāma (breath-control) is an effective means to make the mind subside, but in verse 13 he warns that complete subsidence or dissolution of mind is of two kinds, namely laya and nāśa, the former being temporary and the latter being permanent. By prāṇāyāma only a temporary dissolution of the mind can be achieved, so in verse 14 he teaches us that the mind, which will subside only temporarily when the breath is restrained, should be directed on the one path of self-investigation, for then only will it attain manōnāśa, the state of destruction or permanent dissolution. Thus he reveals that the path of raja yōga must also lead one to the path of self-investigation if it is to enable one to achieve the final goal of liberation. He then concludes this second series of verses by saying in verse 15 that the great yōgi whose mind has thus been destroyed and who thereby abides as what alone is actually real has no more actions to do, because he has attained his natural state, thereby implying that our natural state is not one of doing anything but only one of just being, and that this is the goal we should be seeking.
Thus, though in verses 3 to 15 Bhagavan acknowledges the efficacy of niṣkāmya pūjā, japa, dhyāna and prāṇāyāma, he clearly implies that none of these sādhanas can be an adequate substitute for the direct path of self-investigation, but explains how each of them must finally lead one to self-investigation in order to enable one to attain the final goal of self-knowledge or liberation, which is manōnāśa or complete and permanent eradication of ego.
Having thus briefly summarized the paths of karma yōga, bhakti yōga and raja yōga in the first fifteen verses, showing how they must each sooner lead one to the practice of self-investigation, Bhagavan devotes the last fifteen verses to explaining the practice and goal of jñāna yōga, which he explains to be nothing other than the direct path of self-investigation, the simple practice of attending to and knowing the true nature of ‘I’.
உபதேச வுந்தியார் (Upadēśa-v-Undiyār): Teachings in an Undiyār Song of Thirty Verses
பாயிரம் (pāyiram): Prefatory Verse (composed by Sri Muruganar)
கன்மமய றீர்ந்துகதி காண நெறிமுறையின்
மன்மமுல குய்ய வழங்குகெனச் — சொன்முருகற்
கெந்தைரம ணன்றொகுத் தீந்தா னுபதேச
வுந்தியார் ஞானவிளக் கோர்.
kaṉmamaya ṯīrndugati kāṇa neṟimuṟaiyiṉ
maṉmamula huyya vaṙaṅguheṉac — coṉmurugaṟ
kendairama ṇaṉḏṟohut tīndā ṉupadēśa
vundiyār ñāṉaviḷak kōr.
பதச்சேதம்: ‘கன்ம மயல் தீர்ந்து கதி காண நெறி முறையின் மன்மம் உலகு உய்ய வழங்குக’ என சொல் முருகற்கு எந்தை ரமணன் தொகுத்து ஈந்தான் உபதேச வுந்தியார் ஞான விளக்கு ஓர்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): ‘kaṉma-mayal tīrndu gati kāṇa neṟi muṟaiyiṉ maṉmam ulahu uyya vaṙaṅguha’ eṉa sol murugaṟku endai ramaṇaṉ tohuttu īndāṉ upadēśa-v-undiyār ñāṉa viḷakku ōr.
அன்வயம்: ‘உலகு கன்ம மயல் தீர்ந்து உய்ய, கதி காண நெறி முறையின் மன்மம் வழங்குக’ என சொல் முருகற்கு எந்தை ரமணன் தொகுத்து ஈந்தான் ஞான விளக்கு உபதேச வுந்தியார் ஓர்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): ‘ulahu kaṉma-mayal tīrndu uyya, gati kāṇa neṟi muṟaiyiṉ maṉmam vaṙaṅguha’ eṉa sol murugaṟku endai ramaṇaṉ tohuttu īndāṉ ñāṉa viḷakku upadēśa-v-undiyār ōr.
English translation: Know that Upadēśa Undiyār is a light of jñāna that our father Ramana composed and gave to Muruganar, who said, ‘For the world to be saved, giving up the delusion of karma, tell the secret of the nature of the path to experience liberation’.
Explanatory paraphrase: Know that Upadēśa Undiyār is a light of jñāna [true knowledge or pure awareness] that our father Ramana composed and gave to Muruganar, who said, ‘For [the people of] the world to give up the delusion of karma [action] and be saved [from self-ignorance], tell [us] the secret of the muṟai [nature or orderly process] of the path [way or means] to experience liberation’.
உபோற்காதம் (upōdghātam): Introductory Verses (composed by Sri Muruganar)
Upōdghātam verse 1:
தாரு வனத்திற் றவஞ்செய் திருந்தவர்
பூருவ கன்மத்தா லுந்தீபற
போக்கறை போயின ருந்தீபற.
dāru vaṉattiṯ ṟavañcey dirundavar
pūruva kaṉmattā lundīpaṟa
pōkkaṟai pōyiṉa rundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: தாரு வனத்தில் தவம் செய்து இருந்தவர் பூருவ கன்மத்தால் போக்கறை போயினர்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): dāru vaṉattil tavam seydu irundavar pūruva kaṉmattāl pōkkaṟai pōyiṉar.
English translation: Those who were doing austerities in the Daruka forest were going to ruin by pūrva karma.
Explanatory paraphrase: Those who were doing tavam [austerities or tapas] in the Daruka forest were going to ruin by [following] pūrva karma [the path of ritualistic action as interpreted and prescribed by pūrva mīmāṁsā]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.70)
கன்மத்தை யன்றிக் கடவு ளிலையெனும்
வன்மத்த ராயின ருந்தீபற
வஞ்சச் செருக்கினா லுந்தீபற.
kaṉmattai yaṉḏṟik kaḍavu ḷilaiyeṉum
vaṉmatta rāyiṉa rundīpaṟa
vañjac cerukkiṉā lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: ‘கன்மத்தை அன்றி கடவுள் இலை’ எனும் வல் மத்தர் ஆயினர் வஞ்ச செருக்கினால்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): ‘kaṉmattai aṉḏṟi kaḍavuḷ ilai’ eṉum val mattar āyiṉar vañja serukkiṉāl.
அன்வயம்: வஞ்ச செருக்கினால் ‘கன்மத்தை அன்றி கடவுள் இலை’ எனும் வல் மத்தர் ஆயினர்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): vañja serukkiṉāl ‘kaṉmattai aṉḏṟi kaḍavuḷ ilai’ eṉum val mattar āyiṉar.
English translation: Because of delusive conceit they became intoxicated with intense pride that there is no God except karma.
Explanatory paraphrase: Because of [their] delusive conceit [or infatuation] they became [so] intoxicated [or mad] with intense pride [that they fell prey to the arrogant belief] that there is no God except karma. (Tiruvundiyār 1.71)
கன்ம பலந்தருங் கர்த்தற் பழித்துச்செய்
கன்ம பலங்கண்டா ருந்தீபற
கர்வ மகன்றன ருந்தீபற.
kaṉma phalandaruṅ karttaṟ paṙittuccey
kaṉma phalaṅkaṇḍā rundīpaṟa
garva mahaṉḏṟaṉa rundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: கன்ம பலம் தரும் கர்த்தன் பழித்து செய் கன்ம பலம் கண்டார்; கர்வம் அகன்றனர்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): kaṉma-phalam tarum karttaṉ paṙittu sey kaṉma-phalam kaṇḍār; garvam ahaṉḏṟaṉar.
English translation: They saw the fruit of actions done disparaging God, who gives the fruit of actions. They left arrogance.
Explanatory paraphrase: They saw the fruit of actions done disparaging [spurning or disregarding] God [the kartā or ordainer], who gives karma-phala [the fruit of actions], [and hence] they left [gave up or lost] garva [their pride or arrogance]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.99)
Upōdghātam verse 4:
காத்தரு ளென்று கரையக் கருணைக்கண்
சேர்த்தருள் செய்தன னுந்தீபற
சிவனுப தேசமி துந்தீபற.
kāttaru ḷeṉḏṟu karaiyak karuṇaikkaṇ
sērttaruḷ seydaṉa ṉundīpaṟa
śivaṉupa dēśami dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: காத்து அருள் என்று கரைய, கருணை கண் சேர்த்து அருள் செய்தனன் சிவன் உபதேசம் இது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): kāttu aruḷ eṉḏṟu karaiya, karuṇai kaṇ sērttu aruḷ-seydaṉaṉ śivaṉ upadēśam idu.
அன்வயம்: காத்து அருள் என்று கரைய, கருணை கண் சேர்த்து சிவன் உபதேசம் இது அருள் செய்தனன்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): kāttu aruḷ eṉḏṟu karaiya, karuṇai kaṇ sērttu śivaṉ upadēśam idu aruḷ-seydaṉaṉ.
English translation: When they wept, ‘Graciously protect’, attaching the eye of grace, Śiva graciously gave this upadēśa.
Explanatory paraphrase: When they wept [repentantly], ‘Graciously protect [or save us]’, fixing [his] eye of grace [upon them], Śiva graciously gave this upadēśa [spiritual teaching]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.100)
Upōdghātam verse 5:
உட்கொண் டொழுக வுபதேச சாரத்தை
யுட்கொண் டெழுஞ்சுக முந்தீபற
வுட்டுன் பொழிந்திடு முந்தீபற.
uṭkoṇ ḍoṙuha vupadēśa sārattai
yuṭkoṇ ḍeṙuñsukha mundīpaṟa
vuṭṭuṉ boṙindiḍu mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உள் கொண்டு ஒழுக உபதேச சாரத்தை, உள் கொண்டு எழும் சுகம்; உள் துன்பு ஒழிந்திடும்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uḷ koṇḍu oṙuha upadēśa sārattai, uḷ koṇḍu eṙum sukham; uḷ tuṉbu oṙindiḍum.
அன்வயம்: உபதேச சாரத்தை உள் கொண்டு ஒழுக, சுகம் உள் கொண்டு எழும்; உள் துன்பு ஒழிந்திடும்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): upadēśa sārattai uḷ koṇḍu oṙuha, sukham uḷ koṇḍu eṙum; uḷ tuṉbu oṙindiḍum.
English translation: When one imbibes and follows upadēśa sāram, happiness will rise from within; miseries within will cease.
Explanatory paraphrase: When one imbibes and follows [this] upadēśa sāram [the essence or summary of the spiritual teachings given by Lord Siva], happiness will rise from within [and thereby] miseries within will cease [die or be destroyed]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.101)
Upōdghātam verse 6:
சார வுபதேச சாரமுட் சாரவே
சேரக் களிசேர வுந்தீபற
தீரத் துயர்தீர வுந்தீபற.
sāra vupadēśa sāramuṭ cāravē
sērak kaḷisēra vundīpaṟa
tīrat tuyartīra vundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: சார உபதேச சாரம் உள் சாரவே. சேர களி சேர. தீர துயர் தீர.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): sāra upadēśa sāram uḷ sāravē. sēra kaḷi sēra. tīra tuyar tīra.
அன்வயம்: உபதேச சாரம் சார உள் சாரவே. களி சேர சேர. துயர் தீர தீர.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): upadēśa sāram sāra uḷ sāravē. kaḷi sēra sēra. tuyar tīra tīra.
English translation: May the essence of Upadēśa Sāram enter within. May joy accumulate, accumulate. May suffering cease, cease.
Explanatory paraphrase: May the sāra [essence, substance or import] of Upadēśa Sāram enter within [our heart]. May joy accumulate [or be achieved] abundantly. May suffering cease entirely. (Tiruvundiyār 1.102)
நூல் (nūl): Text
Verse 1:
கன்மம் பயன்றரல் கர்த்தன தாணையாற்
கன்மங் கடவுளோ வுந்தீபற
கன்மஞ் சடமதா லுந்தீபற.
kaṉmam payaṉḏṟaral karttaṉa dāṇaiyāṟ
kaṉmaṅ kaḍavuḷō vundīpaṟa
kaṉmañ jaḍamadā lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: கன்மம் பயன் தரல் கர்த்தனது ஆணையால். கன்மம் கடவுளோ? கன்மம் சடம் அதால்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): kaṉmam payaṉ taral karttaṉadu āṇaiyāl. kaṉmam kaḍavuḷ-ō? kaṉmam jaḍam adāl.
அன்வயம்: கன்மம் பயன் தரல் கர்த்தனது ஆணையால். கன்மம் சடம் அதால், கன்மம் கடவுளோ?
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): kaṉmam payaṉ taral karttaṉadu āṇaiyāl. kaṉmam jaḍam adāl, kaṉmam kaḍavuḷ-ō?
English translation: Action giving fruit is by the ordainment of God. Since action is non-aware, is action God?
Explanatory paraphrase: Karma [action] giving fruit is by the ordainment of God [the kartā or ordainer]. Since karma is jaḍa [devoid of awareness], can karma be God?
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 1: karma is insentient, so it gives fruit only as ordained by God
2019-08-05: Since karma is jaḍa (devoid of awareness), what selects which fruit of past āgāmyas are to form the prārabdha of each life is neither ego nor any of its karmas but only grace
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Why should we believe what Bhagavan taught us?
2014-09-05: The karma theory as taught by Sri Ramana (in this and the subsequent article, Why did Sri Ramana teach a karma theory?, the meaning and some of the implications of this verse are discussed and explained in depth)
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 2:
வினையின் விளைவு விளிவுற்று வித்தாய்
வினைக்கடல் வீழ்த்திடு முந்தீபற
வீடு தரலிலை யுந்தீபற.
viṉaiyiṉ viḷaivu viḷivuṯṟu vittāy
viṉaikkaḍal vīṙttiḍu mundīpaṟa
vīḍu taralilai yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: வினையின் விளைவு விளிவு உற்று வித்தாய் வினை கடல் வீழ்த்திடும். வீடு தரல் இலை.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): viṉaiyiṉ viḷaivu viḷivu uṯṟu vittāy viṉai-kaḍal vīṙttiḍum. vīḍu taral ilai.
English translation: The fruit of action perishing, as seed causes to fall in the ocean of action. It is not giving liberation.
Explanatory paraphrase: The fruit of [any] action will perish [when it is experienced as part of prārabdha], [but what remains] as seed [namely viṣaya-vāsanās (also known as karma-vāsanās): inclinations to seek happiness or satisfaction in experiencing viṣayas (objects or phenomena) by doing actions of mind, speech and body] causes [one] to fall in the ocean of action. [Therefore] it [action or karma] does not give liberation.
Explanations and discussions:
2023-11-08: All vāsanās can be destroyed only when their root, namely ego, is eradicated, because it is the nature of ego to have vāsanās, and until all viṣaya-vāsanās are destroyed we cannot be truly said to be without action (karma), because viṣaya-vāsanās are the seeds that cause us to fall in the great ocean of action
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 2: karma is caused by vāsanās, so it does not give liberation
2022-03-24: The cause for our falling in the vast ocean of action is our viṣaya-vāsanās
2021-12-05: What Bhagavan means in this verse is that it is the seeds (namely vāsanās) that cause us to fall in the ocean of action, and though each fruit perishes as soon as we experience it, the seeds persist and perpetuate themselves, but only to the extent to which we allow ourself to be swayed by them, so the fundamental error we make is allowing ourself to be swayed by our viṣaya-vāsanās, and hence the only solution is for us to cling firmly to being self-attentive and thereby not allow ourself to be swayed by any viṣaya-vāsanās
2021-12-04: All actions are caused by our allowing ourself to be swayed by our viṣaya-vāsanās, as Bhagavan implies here, because the seeds he refers to are viṣaya-vāsanās and consequent karma-vāsanās (inclinations to do actions in order to experience viṣayas), so these are what prompt us to do actions by mind, speech and body and thereby cause us to fall in the great ocean of perpetual action
2021-06-29: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 2: viṣaya-vāsanās are the seeds that cause us to fall in the great ocean of action (karma)
2020-12-18: Using our icchā-kriyā-svatantra (freedom of will and action) to do any āgāmya is a misuse of it, because doing so causes us to fall in the ocean of action
2020-08-24: Experiencing prārabdha is consuming the fruit of past āgāmya (actions done under the sway of our vāsanās), so when we consume that fruit it thereby ceases to exist, but the seeds that drive us to do āgāmya remain, so if we do not curb them by refraining from acting under their sway they will continue driving us to do āgāmya and will thereby immerse us in the vast ocean of action (karma)
2019-12-21: Destiny (prārabdha) is the fruit of our past karmas, so if destiny could determine whether or not we succeed in eradicating ego, that would mean that liberation is the fruit of karma, which cannot be the case
2018-09-01: Even after the fruit of one of the āgāmyas we have done in an earlier life has been experienced by us as part of our prārabdha in a later life, the seed or karma-vāsanā left by that āgāmya will remain until it is either replaced by other vāsanās or eradicated by self-investigation and self-surrender, so karma is self-perpetuating
2018-09-01: Since actions done with desire (kāmya karma), as actions generally tend to be to a greater or lesser extent, not only create fruit but also leave seeds (namely viṣaya-vāsanās and concomitant karma-vāsanās), they are self-perpetuating, so the more we desist from doing such actions the less we will be either creating new seeds or strengthening existing ones
2018-09-01: What binds us to the relentless wheel of karma or saṁsāra, which is like a great ocean in which we have been immersed and drowning since time immemorial, is not the fruits of our past actions, a small selection of which are what we experience as prārabdha in each life or dream, but is our will (the desire or liking that we have to continue doing such actions and experiencing whatever we seem to achieve thereby), which is like a large bag of seeds, each of which is waiting to sprout as thoughts, words or deeds (actions of mind, speech or body) whenever conditions are favourable
2018-09-01: Since liberation is our real nature, we cannot ‘attain’ it by doing anything but only by being what we actually are
2017-09-05: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 2: the cause of bondage is not fate but vāsanās, which belong only to the domain of free will
2017-06-20: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 2: being the fruit of our past actions, prārabdha cannot make our mind turn within and hence can never give us liberation
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: liberation is gained not by doing anything but only by just being
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 2: no action or karma can give liberation (this section also includes the Sanskrit text of verse 2 of Upadēśa Sāram together with my translation of it)
2014-03-20: Ātma-vicāra is the only means by which we can experience ourself as we really are
2013-12-30: Dhyāna-p-Paṭṭu: The Song on Meditation
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 3:
கருத்தனுக் காக்குநிட் காமிய கன்மங்
கருத்தைத் திருத்தியஃ துந்தீபற
கதிவழி காண்பிக்கு முந்தீபற.
karuttaṉuk kākkuniṭ kāmiya kaṉmaṅ
karuttait tiruttiyaḵ dundīpaṟa
gativaṙi kāṇbikku mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: கருத்தனுக்கு ஆக்கும் நிட்காமிய கன்மம் கருத்தை திருத்தி, அஃது கதி வழி காண்பிக்கும்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): karuttaṉukku ākkum niṭkāmiya kaṉmam karuttai tirutti, aḵdu gati vaṙi kāṇbikkum.
English translation: Desireless action done for God, purifying the mind, it will show the path to liberation.
Explanatory paraphrase: Niṣkāmya karma [action not motivated by desire] done [with love] for God purifies the mind and [thereby] it will show the path to liberation [that is, it will enable one to recognise what the correct path to liberation is].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-10: When we start on the path of bhakti, God seems to be something other than ourself, so we try to express our love for him through actions of body, speech and mind, namely pūjā (worship of him), stōtra (singing his praises) or japa (repetition of his name) and dhyāna (meditation on him) respectively, and by the love with which we do such actions our mind is gradually purified, meaning that it is cleansed of all its inclinations to seek happiness in anything other than love for God
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 3: action done for God purifies the mind, so it is an indirect means for liberation
2020-12-18: Instead of misusing our icchā-kriyā-svatantra (freedom of will and action) to do any action under the sway of our viṣaya-vāsanās, it is better to refrain from doing such actions, which are kāmya karmas, and to do only niṣkāmya karmas for the love of God alone
2020-12-18: Niṣkāmya karma is action done without the interference of our will, so it implies that we are free to act either according to our will or solely in accordance with God’s will (that is, in accordance with whatever prārabdha he has allotted us).
2020-08-24: When Bhagavan says here that niṣkāmya karma done for God purifies the mind, he clearly implies that we can refrain from acting under the sway of our vāsanās, and that to the extent that we refrain from acting under their sway we are thereby purifying our mind, which means that we are reducing the strength of whatever vāsanās tend to drive us to do kāmya karmas
2018-09-01: Though karma can never give liberation, if it is done because of love for God and therefore without desire for any fruit, it can help to purify the mind or will (cittam) by weakening or reducing its outgoing propensities (viṣaya-vāsanās and karma-vāsanās), and will thereby enable one to recognise that the means to liberation is not going outwards to do any actions by mind, speech or body but only turning back within to investigate whether one is actually this ego, the one who does action and experiences its fruit
2018-09-01: By whatever means it may be achieved, purity of mind (citta-śuddhi) gives one the clarity of vivēka (discernment, discrimination or judgement) to recognise that the only means by which ego can eradicate itself is to turn its attention back towards itself in order to see what its real nature actually is
2018-09-01: Just as we can choose to attend to ourself rather than to anything else, we can choose to think of a name or form of God, for example, rather than of any other thing, and if our motive for thinking of that name or form is love for God rather than for anything else that we may hope to gain thereby, that will purify our mind, strengthening our devotional inclinations (bhakti-vāsanās) and weakening our inclinations (vāsanās) to be concerned about other things
2018-09-01: Our mind can be purified by practices such as mūrti-dhyāna and mantra-japa only if we do them for the love of God and not for any other desired aim, because if love for God is our sole motivation, such practices will strengthen this love and correspondingly reduce the overall strength of our viṣaya-vāsanās
2018-09-01: The true purpose and only real benefit of all other spiritual practices is the purification of our cittam (even though the purification that can be achieved from them is only partial and not complete), because unless our cittam is purified to a certain extent by such practices we will not have the clarity, subtlety and acuity of vivēka that we need to recognise and accept that liberation is just the annihilation of ego and that the only means to attain it is therefore self-investigation (ātma-vicāra)
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: liberation is gained not by doing anything but only by just being
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 3: niṣkāmya karma done with love for God will show the way to liberation (this section also includes extracts from the Sanskrit and Malayalam texts of verse 3 of Upadēśa Sāram together with my translation of them)
2014-03-20: Ātma-vicāra is the only means by which we can experience ourself as we really are
2013-12-30: Dhyāna-p-Paṭṭu: The Song on Meditation
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 4:
திடமிது பூசை செபமுந் தியான
முடல்வாக் குளத்தொழி லுந்தீபற
வுயர்வாகு மொன்றிலொன் றுந்தீபற.
diḍamidu pūjai jepamun dhiyāṉa
muḍalvāk kuḷattoṙi lundīpaṟa
vuyarvāhu moṉḏṟiloṉ ḏṟundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: திடம் இது: பூசை செபமும் தியானம் உடல் வாக்கு உள தொழில். உயர்வு ஆகும் ஒன்றில் ஒன்று.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): diḍam idu: pūjai jepam-um dhiyāṉam uḍal vākku uḷa toṙil. uyarvu āhum oṉḏṟil oṉḏṟu.
அன்வயம்: பூசை செபமும் தியானம் உடல் வாக்கு உள தொழில். ஒன்றில் ஒன்று உயர்வு ஆகும். இது திடம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): pūjai jepam-um dhiyāṉam uḍal vākku uḷa toṙil. oṉḏṟil oṉḏṟu uyarvu āhum. idu diḍam.
English translation: This is certain: pūjā, japa and dhyāna are actions of body, speech and mind. One than one is superior.
Explanatory paraphrase: This is certain: pūjā [worship], japa [repetition of a name of God or a sacred phrase] and dhyāna [meditation] are [respectively] actions of body, speech and mind, [and hence in this order each subsequent] one is superior to [the previous] one [in the sense that it is a more effective means to purify the mind].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 4: actions of body, speech and mind are progressively more purifying
2018-09-01: Our will drives not only the actions we do by mind and speech but also those that we do by body, as Bhagavan implies in verse 4 of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 4: dhyāna is more effective than japa, which is more effective than pūjā
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 5:
எண்ணுரு யாவு மிறையுரு வாமென
வெண்ணி வழிபட லுந்தீபற
வீசனற் பூசனை யுந்தீபற.
eṇṇuru yāvu miṟaiyuru vāmeṉa
veṇṇi vaṙipaḍa lundīpaṟa
vīśaṉaṯ pūjaṉai yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: எண் உரு யாவும் இறை உரு ஆம் என எண்ணி வழிபடல் ஈசன் நல் பூசனை.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): eṇ uru yāvum iṟai uru ām eṉa eṇṇi vaṙipaḍal īśaṉ nal pūjaṉai.
English translation: Worshipping thinking that all eight forms are forms of God is good pūjā of God.
Explanatory paraphrase: Considering all the eight forms [the aṣṭa-mūrti, the eight forms or manifestations of Siva, namely the five elements (earth, water, fire, air and space), sun, moon and sentient beings (jīvas)] [or all thought-forms, namely all forms, which are just thoughts or mental phenomena] to be forms of God, worshipping [any of them] is good pūjā [worship] of God.
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 5: worshipping anything considering it to be God is worship of God
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 5: anything can be worshipped as God
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 6:
வழுத்தலில் வாக்குச்ச வாய்க்குட் செபத்தில்
விழுப்பமா மானத முந்தீபற
விளம்புந் தியானமி துந்தீபற.
vaṙuttalil vākkucca vāykkuṭ jepattil
viṙuppamā māṉata mundīpaṟa
viḷambun dhiyāṉami dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: வழுத்தலில், வாக்கு உச்ச, வாய்க்குள் செபத்தில் விழுப்பம் ஆம் மானதம். விளம்பும் தியானம் இது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): vaṙuttalil, vākku ucca, vāykkuḷ jepattil viṙuppam ām māṉatam. viḷambum dhiyāṉam idu.
அன்வயம்: வழுத்தலில், உச்ச வாக்கு, வாய்க்குள் செபத்தில் மானதம் விழுப்பம் ஆம். இது தியானம் விளம்பும்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): vaṙuttalil, ucca vākku, vāykkuḷ jepattil māṉatam viṙuppam ām. idu dhiyāṉam viḷambum.
English translation: Rather than praising, loud voice, rather than japa within the mouth, what is done by mind is beneficial. This is called dhyāna.
Explanatory paraphrase: Rather than praising [God by chanting hymns], [japa or repetition of his name is beneficial]; [rather than japa done in a] loud voice, [japa whispered faintly within the mouth is beneficial]; [and] rather than japa within the mouth, mānasa [that which is done by mind] is beneficial [in the sense that it is a more effective means to purify the mind]. This [mental repetition or mānasika japa] is called dhyāna [meditation].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 6: doing japa mentally is more purifying than otherwise
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 6: the relative efficacy of different modes of japa
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 7:
விட்டுக் கருதலி னாறுநெய் வீழ்ச்சிபோல்
விட்டிடா துன்னலே யுந்தீபற
விசேடமா முன்னவே யுந்தீபற.
viṭṭuk karudali ṉāṟuney vīṙccipōl
viṭṭiḍā duṉṉalē yundīpaṟa
viśēḍamā muṉṉavē yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: விட்டு கருதலின் ஆறு நெய் வீழ்ச்சி போல் விட்டிடாது உன்னலே விசேடம் ஆம் உன்னவே.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): viṭṭu karudaliṉ āṟu ney vīṙcci pōl viṭṭiḍādu uṉṉal-ē viśēḍam ām uṉṉa-v-ē.
அன்வயம்: விட்டு கருதலின் ஆறு நெய் வீழ்ச்சி போல் விட்டிடாது உன்னலே உன்னவே விசேடம் ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): viṭṭu karudaliṉ āṟu ney vīṙcci pōl viṭṭiḍādu uṉṉal-ē uṉṉa-v-ē viśēḍam ām.
English translation: Rather than meditating leavingly, certainly meditating unleavingly, like a river or the falling of ghee, is superior to meditate.
Explanatory paraphrase: Rather than meditating [on God] interruptedly [because of being frequently distracted by other thoughts as a result of insufficient love for him], certainly meditating uninterruptedly [without being distracted by any other thoughts because of the intensity of one’s love for him], like a river or the falling of ghee, is a better way to meditate [or is superior, when considered] [in the sense that it is a more effective means to purify the mind].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 7: meditating uninterruptedly is more purifying than otherwise
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 7: uninterrupted meditation is superior to interrupted meditation
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 8:
அனியபா வத்தி னவனக மாகு
மனனிய பாவமே யுந்தீபற
வனைத்தினு முத்தம முந்தீபற.
aṉiyabhā vatti ṉavaṉaha māhu
maṉaṉiya bhāvamē yundīpaṟa
vaṉaittiṉu muttama mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: அனிய பாவத்தின் அவன் அகம் ஆகும் அனனிய பாவமே அனைத்தினும் உத்தமம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): aṉiya-bhāvattiṉ avaṉ aham āhum aṉaṉiya-bhāvam-ē aṉaittiṉ-um uttamam.
English translation: Rather than anya-bhāva, ananya-bhāva, in which he is I, certainly is the best among all.
Explanatory paraphrase: Rather than anya-bhāva [meditation on anything other than oneself, particularly meditation on God as if he were other than oneself], ananya-bhāva [meditation on nothing other than oneself], in which he is [understood to be] I, certainly is the best among all [practices of bhakti, varieties of meditation and kinds of spiritual practice] [in the sense that it is the most effective of all means to purify the mind, and is also the only means to eradicate ego, the root of all impurities].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-10: Since the nature of ourself as ego is to rise, stand and flourish by attending to things other than ourself, we will subside and sink back into the depth of our heart only to the extent to which we attend to ourself alone, as Bhagavan makes clear in verse 25 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, so by meditating on ourself we are surrendering ourself to God, and hence in this verse he says that ananya-bhāva, meditating on nothing other than ourself, is ‘அனைத்தினும் உத்தமம்’ (aṉaittiṉum uttamam), ‘best among all’, implying that it is not only the best practice of bhakti and most effective means to purify the mind but also the only means by which we can eradicate ego and thereby surrender ourself completely to God
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 8: meditation on nothing other than oneself is most purifying of all
2022-03-10: What he describes in the first verse of Śrī Aruṇācala Akṣaramaṇamālai as ‘thinking that Arunachalam is actually I’ is what he describes in this verse as ‘ananya-bhāva [meditation on what is not other], in which he is I’, which implies mediating on nothing other than ‘I’ with the understanding that he (namely God or Arunachalam) is what shines as ‘I’
2022-03-10: Though he says in this verse, ‘Rather than anya-bhāva, ananya-bhāva, in which he is I, certainly is the best among all’, this is not intended to deny the value or efficacy of anya-bhāva, devotion to God as if he were other than oneself, because such devotion will purify the mind and thereby give it the clarity to understand that God is actually what always exists and shines in our heart as ‘I’
2020-12-18: Among all the beneficial uses of our icchā-kriyā-svatantra (freedom of will and action) that he describes in verses 4 to 8, the ‘best of all’ (aṉaittiṉ-um uttamam) is only ananya-bhāva, which means meditation on nothing other than ourself
2020-11-01: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 8 and 9: what Bhagavan described as ananya-bhāva (meditation on what is not other [than oneself]) is keen self-attentiveness, so ‘பாவ பலம்’ (bhāva balam), ‘the strength of meditation’, means keenness of self-attentiveness
2020-08-24: By saying that ananya-bhāva (meditation on what is not other than oneself), which is a synonym for ātma-vicāra, is ‘அனைத்தினும் உத்தமம்’ (aṉaittiṉum uttamam), ‘the best among all’, he implies that it is the most effective of all means to purify the mind
2019-11-26: Meditating on anything other than ourself (anya-bhāva) may be an indirect means to gradually purify our mind, particularly if it is done with heart-melting love for God, but it cannot by itself eradicate ego, so it must eventually lead us to the path of self-investigation (ananya-bhāva), which alone can eradicate ego
2019-09-23: Comment explaining that holding ‘I am’ is the pinnacle of bhakti, because ‘I am’ is the real nature (svarūpa) of both Bhagavan and Arunachala
2018-09-25: In this verse Bhagavan refers to ātma-vicāra as ananya-bhāva (meditation on what is not other, namely oneself) and says that of all it is the best (uttamam), which in the context of the previous five verses means that it is the best or most effective of all means to purify the mind or will
2018-09-01: After explaining in the previous four verses that the mind is purified by niṣkāmya pūjā, japa and dhyāna, which are respectively actions of body, speech and mind and which are in this order progressively more purifying, in this verse he implies that what is most purifying of all is meditating only upon oneself
2018-09-01: Self-attentiveness is the most effective means to purify our will (cittam), as Bhagavan implies in this verse, so it is the best use we can make of our will and our freedom to use it as we like
2018-09-01: What Bhagavan wrote in the previous five verses clearly shows that he did not consider freedom to turn within to be the only freedom of choice we have, because none of the practises that he describes in those verses as being progressively more effective means to purify our mind entail turning it within, and it is only in this verse that he first refers to the practice of turning our attention within, which he describes as ananya-bhāva, ‘meditation on what is not other [than oneself]’, saying that it is ‘அனைத்தினும் உத்தமம்’ (aṉaittiṉum uttamam), the ‘best of all’ or ‘best among all’, thereby implying that it is the most effective of all means to purify the mind
2018-09-01: Though we can free ourself from our viṣaya-vāsanās slowly and to some extent by other practices of bhakti, the most effective means to eradicate them is self-investigation, which is the ultimate practice of bhakti and the only means to eradicate them entirely
2017-06-20: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 8 and 9: by the intensity of self-attentiveness we will be in our real state of being, which is beyond thinking
2017-03-19: What is ‘remembering the Lord’ or ‘remembrance of Arunachala’?
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 8: love for God as nothing other than oneself is best of all
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 8: meditating on nothing other than ourself is ‘the best among all’
2015-03-06: Intensity, frequency and duration of self-attentiveness
2014-05-02: Ātma-vicāra: stress and other related issues
2014-02-24: We should meditate only on ‘I’, not on ideas such as ‘I am brahman’
2013-12-30: Dhyāna-p-Paṭṭu: The Song on Meditation
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 9:
பாவ பலத்தினாற் பாவனா தீதசற்
பாவத் திருத்தலே யுந்தீபற
பரபத்தி தத்துவ முந்தீபற.
bhāva balattiṉāṯ bhāvaṉā tītasaṯ
bhāvat tiruttalē yundīpaṟa
parabhatti tattuva mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: பாவ பலத்தினால் பாவனாதீத சத் பாவத்து இருத்தலே பரபத்தி தத்துவம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): bhāva balattiṉāl bhāvaṉātīta sat-bhāvattu iruttal-ē para-bhatti tattuvam.
English translation: By the strength of meditation, being in sat-bhāva, which transcends bhāvanā, alone is para-bhakti tattva.
Explanatory paraphrase: By the strength [intensity, firmness or stability] of [such] meditation [ananya-bhāva or self-attentiveness], being in sat-bhāva [the state of being], which transcends [all] bhāvanā [thinking, imagination or meditation in the sense of mental activity], alone [or certainly] is para-bhakti tattva [the nature, reality or true state of supreme devotion].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-10: Since we as ego will subside back into our being to the extent to which we attend to ourself, when by persistent practice our self-attentiveness becomes strong and stable enough, we will thereby be firmly fixed in our true state of being (sat-bhāva), which transcends all mental activity, so being in this state is para-bhakti tattva, the true state of supreme devotion, because it is the state in which we have given ourself wholly to God and therefore do not rise as ego to know anything other than o
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 9: being in one’s real state of being by self-attentiveness is supreme devotion
2022-03-10: Meditating on anything other than ourself is a thought or mental activity (bhāvanā), because it entails a movement of our mind or attention away from ourself towards something else, whereas meditating on nothing other than ourself is not a thought or mental activity, because it is just a resting of our mind or attention in its source, namely ourself
2022-03-10: As he implies in verse 10 of Śrī Aruṇācala Padigam, by pulling us inwards to be self-attentive, Arunachala will make us motionless (acala) like itself, meaning that we will be firmly established in the state of just being as we actually are, in accordance with the principle that he implies in this verse, ‘By the strength of meditation [that is, by the strength of ananya-bhāva or self-attentiveness], being in sat-bhāva [the state of being], which transcends bhāvanā [thinking or meditation]’
2020-11-01: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 8 and 9: ‘பாவ பலம்’ (bhāva balam), ‘the strength of meditation’, means keenness of self-attentiveness, so what he implies in these two verses is that by keenness of self-attentiveness we will be in sat-bhāva, the state of being as we actually are
2018-09-01: Meditating upon anything other than oneself (anya-bhāva) is an action (karma), because it entails directing one’s mind or attention away from oneself towards something else, whereas meditating only upon oneself (ananya-bhāva) is not an action but a state of just being, a cessation of all activity, because it does not entail directing one’s mind or attention away from oneself but only allowing it to return to and rest in its source
2018-09-01: So long as we direct our attention away from ourself towards anything else, that outward flow of our attention is what is called thinking or imagining, but when we direct our attention back towards ourself alone, that is the subsidence or cessation of all thinking or imagining, which is what Bhagavan refers to in this verse as பாவனாதீத (bhāvaṉātīta), ‘transcending [or beyond] bhāvana [thinking, imagination or meditation]’
2017-06-20: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 8 and 9: by the intensity of self-attentiveness we will be in our real state of being, which is beyond thinking
2017-02-06: How can we see inaction in action?
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: liberation is gained not by doing anything but only by just being
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 9: by meditating on ourself we will subside in our real state of being
2015-03-06: Intensity, frequency and duration of self-attentiveness
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 10:
உதித்த விடத்தி லொடுங்கி யிருத்த
லதுகன்மம் பத்தியு முந்தீபற
வதுயோக ஞானமு முந்தீபற.
uditta viḍatti loḍuṅgi yirutta
ladukaṉmam bhattiyu mundīpaṟa
vaduyōga ñāṉamu mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உதித்த இடத்தில் ஒடுங்கி இருத்தல்: அது கன்மம் பத்தியும்; அது யோகம் ஞானமும்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uditta iḍattil oḍuṅgi iruttal: adu kaṉmam bhatti-y-um; adu yōgam ñāṉam-um.
English translation: Being, subsiding in the place from which one rose: that is karma and bhakti; that is yōga and jñāna.
Explanatory paraphrase: Being [by inwardly] subsiding in the place from which one rose [namely one’s own real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is pure being-awareness (sat-cit), ‘I am’]: that is [the culmination of the paths of] [niṣkāmya] karma and bhakti [as explained in the previous seven verses]; that is [also the culmination of the paths of] yōga [as will be explained in the next five verses] and jñāna [as will be explained in the final fifteen verses].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 10: being in one’s source is karma, bhakti, yōga and jñāna
2020-01-16: Bhagavan often uses the term ‘இடம்’ (iḍam), which literally means ‘place’, as a metaphor for our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), because it is the ‘place’ or source from which we rise as ego and into which we must eventually subside
2018-09-01: In the previous seven verses Bhagavan explained how the path of bhakti begins with niṣkāmya actions of body, speech and mind (which is the path of niṣkāmya karma) but eventually leads to and culminates in the path of jñāna, which is the practice of self-attentiveness (svarūpa-dhyāna) or self-investigation (ātma-vicāra), and which is not an action (karma) but just one’s natural state of being (sat-bhāva), in which the ego surrenders itself entirely and remains subsided in the source from which it arose, and in this verse he implies that this is the ultimate culmination and goal of all forms of spiritual practice
2017-02-06: How can we see inaction in action?
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: liberation is gained not by doing anything but only by just being
2015-12-10: Is ātma-vicāra an exclusive or inclusive practice?
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 10: subsiding and being in our source is karma, bhakti, yōga and jñāna
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 11:
வளியுள் ளடக்க வலைபடு புட்போ
லுளமு மொடுங்குறு முந்தீபற
வொடுக்க வுபாயமி துந்தீபற.
vaḷiyuḷ ḷaḍakka valaipaḍu puṭpō
luḷamu moḍuṅguṟu mundīpaṟa
voḍukka vupāyami dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: வளி உள் அடக்க, வலை படு புள் போல் உளமும் ஒடுங்குறும். ஒடுக்க உபாயம் இது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): vaḷi uḷ aḍakka, valai paḍu puḷ pōl uḷam-um oḍuṅguṟum. oḍukka upāyam idu.
அன்வயம்: வளி உள் அடக்க, வலை படு புள் போல் உளமும் ஒடுங்குறும். இது ஒடுக்க உபாயம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): vaḷi uḷ aḍakka, valai paḍu puḷ pōl uḷam-um oḍuṅguṟum. idu oḍukka upāyam.
English translation: When one restrains the breath within, like a bird caught in a net the mind also will be restrained. This is a means to restrain.
Explanatory paraphrase: When one restrains [curbs, calms or subdues] the breath within, like a bird caught in a net the mind also will be restrained [sink, subside, calm down, become quiet, be dissolved or cease being active]. This [the practice of breath-restraint or prāṇāyāma] is [therefore] a means to restrain [curb, calm, subdue, shut down or dissolve] [the mind].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 11: when breath is restrained mind will subside
2015-06-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 11 and 12: how breath-restraint is a means to restrain the mind
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 12:
உளமு முயிரு முணர்வுஞ் செயலு
முளவாங் கிளையிரண் டுந்தீபற
வொன்றவற் றின்மூல முந்தீபற.
uḷamu muyiru muṇarvuñ ceyalu
muḷavāṅ kiḷaiyiraṇ ḍundīpaṟa
voṉḏṟavaṯ ṟiṉmūla mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உளமும் உயிரும் உணர்வும் செயலும் உளவாம் கிளை இரண்டு. ஒன்று அவற்றின் மூலம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uḷam-um uyir-um uṇarvu-[u]m ceyal-um uḷavām kiḷai iraṇḍu. oṉḏṟu avaṯṟiṉ mūlam.
அன்வயம்: உளமும் உயிரும் உணர்வும் செயலும் உளவாம் இரண்டு கிளை. அவற்றின் மூலம் ஒன்று.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): uḷam-um uyir-um uṇarvu-[u]m ceyal-um uḷavām iraṇḍu kiḷai. avaṯṟiṉ mūlam oṉḏṟu.
English translation: Mind and breath are two branches, which have knowing and doing. Their root is one.
Explanatory paraphrase: Mind and breath [or life, which includes breath and all other physiological functions] are two branches, which have knowing and doing [as their respective functions]. [However] their mūla [root, base, foundation, origin, source or cause] is one [so this is why when either one is restrained the other one will also be restrained, as pointed out in the previous verse].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 12: the root of mind and breath is one
2015-06-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 11 and 12: how breath-restraint is a means to restrain the mind
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 13:
இலயமு நாச மிரண்டா மொடுக்க
மிலயித் துளதெழு முந்தீபற
வெழாதுரு மாய்ந்ததே லுந்தீபற.
ilayamu nāśa miraṇḍā moḍukka
milayit tuḷadeṙu mundīpaṟa
veṙāduru māyndadē lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: இலயமும் நாசம் இரண்டு ஆம் ஒடுக்கம். இலயித்து உளது எழும். எழாது உரு மாய்ந்ததேல்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): ilayam-um nāśam iraṇḍu ām oḍukkam. ilayittu uḷadu eṙum. eṙādu uru māyndadēl.
அன்வயம்: ஒடுக்கம் இலயமும் நாசம் இரண்டு ஆம். இலயித்து உளது எழும். உரு மாய்ந்ததேல் எழாது.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): oḍukkam ilayam-um nāśam iraṇḍu ām. ilayittu uḷadu eṙum. uru māyndadēl eṙādu.
English translation: Dissolution is two: laya and nāśa. What is lying down will rise. If form dies, it will not rise.
Explanatory paraphrase: Dissolution [complete subsidence or cessation of ego or mind] is [of] two [kinds]: laya [temporary dissolution] and nāśa [permanent dissolution or annihilation]. What is lying down [or dissolved in laya] will rise. If [its] form dies [in nāśa], it will not rise.
Explanations and discussions:
2023-11-08: Bhagavan used to warn those who were inclined to practise prāṇāyāma and other yōga techniques that they should take care not to subside in manōlaya as a result of such practices, and advised them that though they could use such practices to gain a certain degree of mental calmness, they could gain lasting benefit from such calmness only if they use it as a favourable condition to turn their attention back within to investigate who am I
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 13: dissolution of mind is of two kinds, laya and nāśa
2022-03-24: If we withdraw our mind from dṛśya without keenly attending to cittva, our fundamental awareness, ‘I am’, the mind will dissolve in laya, and ‘What has gone in laya arises again’
2022-02-08: Like sleep, any state in which all thoughts cease along with their root, namely ego, but from which they subsequently rise again is just a state of manōlaya (temporary dissolution of mind), whereas the state from which they will never rise again is manōnāśa (annihilation or permanent dissolution of mind), so manōnāśa alone is the solution we should aim for
2020-06-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 13: if it is dissolved in sleep or any other state of laya, ego will rise again, but why?
2019-10-16: Comment explaining that nothing exists in sleep other than our real nature, which is sat-cit-ānanda, so the only difference between sleep (manōlaya) and eradication of ego (manōnāśa) is that ego will never rise again from the latter, whereas it does rise from the former, but this is not a difference in those states but only a difference from the perspective of ourself as ego in waking or dream
2019-07-29: Why does ego rise again from manōlaya and not from manōnāśa?
2017-07-27: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 13: the only difference between manōlaya and manōnāśa is that the ego will rise from manōlaya but never from manōnāśa
2017-07-07: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 13: from the perspective of the ego in waking or dream the distinction between manōlaya and manōnāśa is in effect real
2015-06-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 13: the two kinds of subsidence of mind
2014-04-11: Ātma-vicāra and nirvikalpa samādhi
2014-02-16: Self-attentiveness and citta-vṛtti nirōdha
2011-10-07: Annihilation of mind (manōnāśa) is permanent, whereas any other subsidence of mind (manōlaya) such as sleep, coma, death or samādhi is only temporary
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 14:
ஒடுக்க வளியை யொடுங்கு முளத்தை
விடுக்கவே யோர்வழி யுந்தீபற
வீயு மதனுரு வுந்தீபற.
oḍukka vaḷiyai yoḍuṅgu muḷattai
viḍukkavē yōrvaṙi yundīpaṟa
vīyu madaṉuru vundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: ஒடுக்க வளியை ஒடுங்கும் உளத்தை விடுக்கவே ஓர் வழி, வீயும் அதன் உரு.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): oḍukka vaḷiyai oḍuṅgum uḷattai viḍukka-v-ē ōr vaṙi, vīyum adaṉ uru.
அன்வயம்: வளியை ஒடுக்க ஒடுங்கும் உளத்தை ஓர் வழி விடுக்கவே, அதன் உரு வீயும்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): vaḷiyai oḍukka oḍuṅgum uḷattai ōr vaṙi viḍukka-v-ē, adaṉ uru vīyum.
English translation: Only when one sends the mind, which will be restrained when one restrains the breath, on the investigating path will its form perish.
Explanatory paraphrase: Only when one sends the mind, which will be restrained [become calm or dissolve] when one restrains the breath, on ōr vaṙi [the investigating path or one path, namely the path of self-investigation, which is the one and only means to eradicate ego and thereby annihilate the mind] will its form perish. [However, the mind cannot be sent on this path of self-investigation if it has dissolved in laya, so if one practices breath-restraint in order to restrain the mind, one should take care to send the mind on this path of self-investigation (which means to direct one’s attention back towards oneself) when it has become calm but before it dissolves in laya.]
Explanations and discussions:
2023-11-08: Bhagavan used to warn those who were inclined to practise prāṇāyāma and other yōga techniques that they should take care not to subside in manōlaya as a result of such practices, and advised them that though they could use such practices to gain a certain degree of mental calmness, they could gain lasting benefit from such calmness only if they use it as a favourable condition to turn their attention back within to investigate who am I
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 14: only by self-investigation will the mind die
2020-06-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 14: only by means of self-investigation will ego dissolve in pure awareness in such a way that it will never rise again
2015-06-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 14: our mind will die only by self-investigation (in the section following this, Upadēśa Sāram verse 14: the meaning of ēka-cintanā, I give the Sanskrit text and my English translation of verse 14 of Upadēśa Sāram and discuss its meaning)
2014-04-11: Ātma-vicāra and nirvikalpa samādhi
2011-10-07: The mind will be annihilated only when it is sent on the unique path of self-investigation (ātma-vicāra)
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 15:
மனவுரு மாயமெய்ம் மன்னுமா யோகி
தனக்கோர் செயலிலை யுந்தீபற
தன்னியல் சார்ந்தன னுந்தீபற.
maṉavuru māyameym maṉṉumā yōgi
taṉakkōr seyalilai yundīpaṟa
taṉṉiyal sārndaṉa ṉundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: மன உரு மாய மெய் மன்னும் மா யோகி தனக்கு ஓர் செயல் இலை. தன் இயல் சார்ந்தனன்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): maṉa uru māya mey maṉṉum mā yōgi taṉakku ōr seyal ilai. taṉ iyal sārndaṉaṉ.
English translation: When the form of the mind is annihilated, for the great yōgi who remains permanently as the reality, there is not a single doing. He has attained his nature.
Explanatory paraphrase: When the form of the mind is annihilated, for the great yōgi who [thereby] remains permanently as the reality, there is not a single doing [action or karma], [because] he has attained his [real] nature [which is actionless being].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 15: when the mind is dead, there is no action but only one’s real nature
2018-09-01: The jñāni is not a person but only the infinite space of pure self-awareness, in whose clear view neither a person nor anything else exists at all, so the jñāni never actually does any action, either with or without doership
2018-04-18: What experiences itself as ‘I am doing’ or ‘I am experiencing’ is only the ego, and without the ego nothing else exists, so there is nothing either to do or to experience
2016-12-27: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 15: for the jñāni there is no ego or mind and hence no action
2014-04-11: Ātma-vicāra and nirvikalpa samādhi
2011-10-07: When the mind is annihilated, one is established as the reality, so there is no action (thinking, talking or doing)
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 16:
வெளிவிட யங்களை விட்டு மனந்தன்
னொளியுரு வோர்தலே யுந்தீபற
வுண்மை யுணர்ச்சியா முந்தீபற.
veḷiviḍa yaṅgaḷai viṭṭu maṉantaṉ
ṉoḷiyuru vōrdalē yundīpaṟa
vuṇmai yuṇarcciyā mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: வெளி விடயங்களை விட்டு மனம் தன் ஒளி உரு ஓர்தலே உண்மை உணர்ச்சி ஆம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷai viṭṭu maṉam taṉ oḷi-uru ōrdalē uṇmai uṇarcci ām.
அன்வயம்: மனம் வெளி விடயங்களை விட்டு தன் ஒளி உரு ஓர்தலே உண்மை உணர்ச்சி ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): maṉam veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷai viṭṭu taṉ oḷi-uru ōrdalē uṇmai uṇarcci ām.
English translation: Leaving external phenomena, the mind knowing its own form of light is alone real awareness.
Explanatory paraphrase: Leaving [or letting go of] [awareness of any] external viṣayas [namely phenomena of every kind, all of which are external in the sense that they are other than and hence extraneous to oneself], the mind knowing its own form of light [namely the light of pure awareness, which is its real nature and what illumines it, enabling it to be aware both of itself and of other things] is alone real awareness [true knowledge or knowledge of reality].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-12: Consciousness or awareness is not an object but the reality of the subject, so no objective investigation can enable us to know consciousness as it actually is, and since we ourself are consciousness, in order to know ourself as we actually are we need to turn our entire attention back on ourself, away from all other things
2023-11-08: In order to eradicate ego, we not only need to cease attending to anything other than ourself but also need to attend keenly to ourself
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 16: seeing nothing but awareness is seeing what is real
2022-03-24: To see what is real, the mind must see its own real nature, which is pure awareness
2022-03-24: We cannot see our own cittva merely by keeping our mind back from all dṛśya
2022-03-24: The mind can see its own cittva only by being its own cittva, and it can be it only by being swallowed by it
2022-03-10: As he implies in verse 16 of Upadēśa Sāram, svarūpa-darśana (seeing ourself as we actually are) alone is tattva-darśana (seeing what is real), and in order to see our own cittva (pure awareness), which is ourself as we actually are, we need to turn back and look deep within ourself
2021-08-29: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: real awareness is only awareness of what actually exists, namely ourself, so we can remain as real awareness only by knowing nothing other than ourself
2021-05-13: In order to know ourself as we actually are and thereby eradicate the false awareness called ego, all we need do is to withdraw our attention from all other things by trying to focus it exclusively on ourself alone
2021-02-18: So long as we are looking at anything other than ourself, we seem to be something other than pure awareness, but if we give up looking at anything else by looking at ourself alone, we will see that we are actually just pure awareness
2020-10-16: What Bhagavan refers to in verse 17 as investigating மனத்தின் உரு (maṉattiṉ uru), the ‘form of the mind’, is investigating its real form, which is pure awareness, its ‘ஒளி உரு’ (oḷi-uru) or ‘form of light’
2020-09-19: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: to eradicate ego we not only need to cease being aware of anything other than ourself, but need to do so by being keenly self-attentive
2020-09-19: When the cit element of the mind or ego is turned back to face itself alone, it is thereby turning its back on all external phenomena, so it ceases to be aware of anything else, and thus it remains as pure awareness, which is what it always actually is
2020-06-17: Our experience in sleep is a vital clue that guides us in our self-investigation, because so long as we are aware of anything that we are not aware of in sleep, our attention is still not focused solely and exclusively on ourself
2020-06-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: being so keenly self-attentive that we thereby cease to be aware of anything else is real awareness
2020-04-05: In this verse, as in the first sentence of the thirteenth paragraph of Nāṉ Ār?, Bhagavan clearly implies that we must try to be aware of nothing whatsoever other than ourself
2020-03-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: what is required is that we withdraw our attention from all other things by being keenly self-attentive
2020-02-28: Here ‘light’ is a metaphor for awareness, because awareness is the light by which we know all things, both ourself and everything else, and ‘form’ is a metaphor for nature (svarūpa), so ‘தன் ஒளி உரு’ (taṉ oḷi-uru), ‘its [or one’s] own form of light’, implies that our real nature (or the real nature of the mind) is the light of pure awareness
2020-02-27: In order to be aware of what is real, we not only need to cease perceiving any world, but need to do so by being aware of ‘தன் ஒளி உரு’ (taṉ oḷi-uru), ‘our own form of light’ (our real nature, which is the original light of pure awareness)
2020-02-02: Real awareness or vidyā is the awareness that alone remains when we are clearly aware only of ourself (our own form of light), thereby ceasing to be aware of anything else
2020-01-16: In order to be annihilated and thereby never rise again, we as ego must not only withdraw our attention from all phenomena but must do so by focusing our entire attention on ourself alone
2019-12-16: Comment explaining that in order to be aware of ourself as we actually are we as ego must cease being aware of phenomena and must instead be aware only of our ‘own form of light’, which is pure awareness
2019-12-10: In order to be aware of ourself as we actually are we need to be aware of ourself alone, in complete isolation from awareness of anything else
2019-11-28: Instead of using the reflected light called mind to know other things (which are what Bhagavan calls ‘வெளி விடயங்கள்’ (veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷ), ‘external phenomena’), we must turn it back to face its source, the original light of pure awareness, which is always shining within us as ‘I am’
2019-11-28: What he gave us in this verse is a clear definition of ‘உண்மை உணர்ச்சி’ (uṇmai uṇarcci), which means ‘real awareness’, ‘true knowledge’ or ‘awareness [or knowledge] of reality’, but a definition intended to show us the means by which we can experience real awareness
2019-11-26: In order to dissolve ego, we must eventually turn our entire attention back towards ourself (which is what Bhagavan refers to here as the mind’s ‘ஒளி உரு’ (oḷi-uru) or ‘form of light’) and thereby away from everything else (which is what he refers to as ‘வெளி விடயங்கள்’ (veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷ), ‘external phenomena’)
2019-11-24: In order to be aware of ourself as we actually are, namely as pure awareness, which is our own ‘ஒளி உரு’ (oḷi-uru) or ‘form of light’, we need to cease being aware of any phenomena, including all the adjuncts that we mistake to be ourself
2019-10-25: There are two essential features that define us as ego, namely we are aware of ourself as a set of adjuncts (a body consisting of five sheaths) and consequently we are aware of other phenomena, so in order to see ourself as we actually are we must not only give up our awareness of adjuncts but also our awareness of all other phenomena
2019-06-24: In order for us as ego to eradicate ourself permanently, we not only need to cease being aware of anything else, but also need to be attentively and clearly aware of ourself alone
2018-11-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: since awareness of anything other than ourself is ignorance and unreal, we can be aware of ourself as real awareness only by withdrawing our attention from everything else and turning back towards ourself to know our own ‘form of light’
2018-11-08: In order to be aware of our own ‘form of light’ (the pure awareness that we actually are) we need to give up being aware of any phenomena
2017-10-07: Just giving up attending to external phenomena is not sufficient, because we do so whenever we fall asleep, so what is required is just that we attend only to ourself, that is, to our own fundamental self-awareness, because if we do so we will thereby give up attending to anything else
2018-09-01: When Bhagavan talks of the mind investigating itself, what he means by the term ‘mind’ is ego, which is the perceiving or aware element of it, and which is therefore what needs to investigate itself and thereby surrender itself, as he implies in this verse
2017-04-16: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: to the extent that our attention is focused on ourself it will thereby be withdrawn from other things
2016-10-19: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: we must not just cease attending to other things but must keenly attend to ourself alone
2016-05-17: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: we must attend only to ourself and thereby leave aside all phenomena
2016-04-20: Comment discussing verse 16 of Upadēśa Undiyār
2015-10-12: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: we must attentively observe our own self-awareness
2015-05-20: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: to see what is real we must give up seeing what is seen (dṛśya) (this section also includes the Sanskrit text of verse 16 of Upadēśa Sāram together with my translation of it)
2014-12-13: The teachings of Sri Ramana and Nisargadatta are significantly different
2014-09-09: Comment explaining the meaning of verse 16 of Upadēśa Undiyār
2011-10-07: To be annihilated, the mind must not only cease being aware of any phenomena (viṣayas) but must also attend to ‘its own form of light’ (its fundamental self-awareness)
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 17:
மனத்தி னுருவை மறவா துசாவ
மனமென வொன்றிலை யுந்தீபற
மார்க்கநே ரார்க்குமி துந்தீபற.
maṉatti ṉuruvai maṟavā dusāva
maṉameṉa voṉḏṟilai yundīpaṟa
mārgganē rārkkumi dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: மனத்தின் உருவை மறவாது உசாவ, மனம் என ஒன்று இலை. மார்க்கம் நேர் ஆர்க்கும் இது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): maṉattiṉ uruvai maṟavādu usāva, maṉam eṉa oṉḏṟu ilai. mārggam nēr ārkkum idu.
அன்வயம்: மறவாது மனத்தின் உருவை உசாவ, மனம் என ஒன்று இலை. இது ஆர்க்கும் நேர் மார்க்கம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): maṟavādu maṉattiṉ uruvai usāva, maṉam eṉa oṉḏṟu ilai. idu ārkkum nēr mārggam.
English translation: When one investigates the form of the mind without forgetting, there is not anything called ‘mind’. This is the direct path for everyone whomsoever.
Explanatory paraphrase: When one investigates [examines or scrutinises] the form of the mind without forgetting [neglecting, abandoning, giving up or ceasing], [it will be clear that] there is not anything called ‘mind’. This is the direct [straight or appropriate] path for everyone whomsoever.
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 17: when one keenly investigates it, there is no mind
2022-03-24: Ego is the first cause, and hence the root cause of all other causes, so there cannot be anything that causes ego to rise or come into existence, and there need not be anything that causes it, because if we investigate it keenly enough, it will be clear that no such thing has ever actually existed or risen at all
2021-02-18: If we investigate ego keenly enough, without yielding even in the least to pramāda (negligence or forgetfulness), we will see that what we actually are is just pure awareness, so it will then be clear that there is no such thing as mind or ego at all
2020-10-22: Self-investigation is ‘the direct path for everyone whomsoever’, so if we are attracted to this path and want to follow it, we are mature enough to do so
2020-10-16: This path is the direct path because we are trying to look at ourself directly in order to perceive ourself as we actually are
2020-09-19: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: to see that there is no such thing as ego or mind at all, we need to be so keenly self-attentive that we give not even the slightest room for any pramāda (self-negligence) to creep in
2019-12-21: Bhagavan didn’t give any teachings unasked, but when he was asked his first inclination was to advise all questioners to look within to see what they actually are, because this is ‘மார்க்கம் நேர் ஆர்க்கும்’ (mārggam nēr ārkkum), ‘the direct path for everyone whomsoever’
2019-12-11: Comment explaining that it is the mind (in the sense of ego, the thought called ‘I’, which is the root and essence of the mind, being its perceiving element) that needs to investigate itself, because if it does so keenly enough it will be clear that there is no such thing
2019-11-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: if we incessantly investigate this atiśaya śakti called mind or ego, it will be clear that no such thing exists at all
2019-10-25: As soon as the mind knows its own form of light, which is pure awareness, it dissolves and merges in that, thereby ceasing to be mind and remaining just as pure awareness, so self-investigation ultimately reveals that there is no such thing as mind at all
2019-05-08: Ego seems to exist only when it is attending to or aware of anything other than itself, so if it attends to itself so keenly that it ceases to be aware of anything else, it will be clear that there is no such thing as ego
2019-04-19: On this path of self-investigation and self-surrender there is no such thing as a shortcut, because it is ‘மார்க்கம் நேர் ஆர்க்கும்’ (mārggam nēr ārkkum), ‘the direct path for everyone whomsoever’, and there can obviously be no shorter cut than the direct way
2018-11-08: Ego or mind seems to exist only when it is looking elsewhere, that is, at anything other than itself, but when it looks only at itself, there is no such thing but only pure awareness, which is never aware of anything other than itself
2017-09-24: A series of two comments explaining that the most important of all the fundamental principles of Bhagavan’s teachings is that the ego will cease to cease if and only if we investigate it
2017-07-27: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: if we investigate it keenly enough, we will find that there is no such thing as an ego or mind
2017-06-28: There is absolutely no difference between sleep and pure self-awareness (ātma-jñāna)
2017-03-21: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 17 and 18: what we should watch is only the ego, the root thought called ‘I’, and not any other thought
2016-11-21: Since vivarta vāda contends that non-existent things seem to exist only in the view of the non-existent ego, its logical conclusion can only be ajāta
2016-10-19: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: if we keenly investigate our ego, we will find that there is actually no such thing at all, and hence no world or anything else other than ourself
2015-12-10: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: avoiding self-negligence (pramāda) is the only means to destroy our ego
2015-11-11: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: our ego or mind does not actually exist at all, even now
2015-05-20: The essence of the mind is the ego, and the essence of the ego is pure self-awareness
2014-09-28: The perceiver and the perceived are both unreal
2014-09-26: Metaphysical solipsism, idealism and creation theories in the teachings of Sri Ramana
2014-03-20: Ātma-vicāra is the only means by which we can experience ourself as we really are
2014-03-03: Does the practice of ātma-vicāra work?
2014-02-16: Self-attentiveness and citta-vṛtti nirōdha
2008-02-16: Cultivating uninterrupted self-attentiveness
2011-10-07: Annihilation of mind (manōnāśa) is not actually a state in which something that existed has been destroyed, but is just the clear knowledge that nothing other than ourself has ever existed
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 18:
எண்ணங்க ளேமனம் யாவினு நானெனு
மெண்ணமே மூலமா முந்தீபற
யானா மனமென லுந்தீபற.
eṇṇaṅga ḷēmaṉam yāviṉu nāṉeṉu
meṇṇamē mūlamā mundīpaṟa
yāṉā maṉameṉa lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: எண்ணங்களே மனம். யாவினும் நான் எனும் எண்ணமே மூலம் ஆம். யான் ஆம் மனம் எனல்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): eṇṇaṅgaḷ-ē maṉam. yāviṉ-um nāṉ eṉum eṇṇam-ē mūlam ām. yāṉ ām maṉam eṉal.
அன்வயம்: எண்ணங்களே மனம். யாவினும் நான் எனும் எண்ணமே மூலம் ஆம். மனம் எனல் யான் ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): eṇṇaṅgaḷ-ē maṉam. yāviṉ-um nāṉ eṉum eṇṇam-ē mūlam ām. maṉam eṉal yāṉ ām.
English translation: Thoughts alone are mind. Of all, the thought called ‘I’ alone is the root. What is called mind is ‘I’.
Explanatory paraphrase: Thoughts alone are mind [or the mind is only thoughts]. Of all [thoughts], the thought called ‘I’ alone is the mūla [the root, base, foundation, origin, source or cause]. [Therefore] what is called mind is [essentially just] ‘I’ [namely ego, the root thought called ‘I’].
Explanations and discussions:
2023-12-07: ‘மனம்’ (maṉam) or ‘mind’ is used in a variety of different senses, so the sense in which it is used in each case is determined by the context and needs to be understood accordingly
2023-12-07: Since no other thought could exist without ego, it is the only essential thought in the mind, and hence it is what the mind essentially is, as he says in the final sentence of this verse, ‘யான் ஆம் மனம் எனல்’ (yāṉ ām maṉam eṉal), ‘What is called mind is I’, which implies that the mind is essentially just ego, the root thought called ‘I’
2023-07-27: The mind consists of two elements, namely the subject, which is ego, the thought called ‘I’, and all objects, which are all the other thoughts that constitute the mind, and since all other thoughts are known only by ego, they could not exist independent of ego, so what the mind essentially is is only ego
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 18: mind is essentially just the ego, the root of all other thoughts
2021-02-18: What he refers to in verse 17 as ‘மனத்தின் உரு’ (maṉattiṉ uru), ‘the form of the mind’, is ego, because as he explains in this verse, ego is the root of the mind and hence what the mind essentially is
2021-02-02: Bhagavan is the ultimate reductionist: All phenomena are just thoughts; thoughts are just mind; mind is in essence just ego, the first thought ‘I’; and if instead of looking at anything else we look keenly at ourself alone, we will find that ego is actually just pure awareness, so pure awareness is all that actually exists
2020-09-19: Though the term ‘mind’ is often used to refer to all thoughts collectively, the root of all thoughts is only ego, which is the thought called ‘I’, so what the mind essentially is is only ego
2020-04-15: All other thoughts are objects perceived by ego, whereas ego is the subject, the perceiver of them all, so no other thoughts can exist without ego, and hence ego is the one constant thought, the thread on which all other thoughts are strung
2020-01-16: In many contexts Bhagavan uses ‘mind’ as a synonym for ego, which is what he sometimes calls ‘the thought called I’, but in other contexts he uses it in a broader sense to refer to the totality of all thoughts
2020-01-16: Whenever Bhagavan uses the term ‘the thought called I’, he is referring to ego, which is the first thought and the root of all other thoughts
2019-11-08: When Bhagavan uses the term ‘mind’, in some cases he is referring to the totality of all thoughts, but in most cases he is referring to ego, which is the root of all other thoughts and therefore the essence of the mind
2019-10-25: What he referred to in verse 17 as ‘மனத்தின் உரு’ (maṉattiṉ uru), ‘the form of the mind’, is ego, which is the fundamental form of the mind, being its perceiving element and hence its root, because it is that in whose view all the perceived elements of the mind, namely all other thoughts, seem to exist
2019-05-08: Ego is the perceiving element of the mind and therefore its root and essence
2018-11-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: though all thoughts are included in mind, what mind essentially is is only ego, the root thought called ‘I’
2018-05-13: The term ‘mind’ is used in two distinct senses: in a general sense it is a term that refers to the totality of all thoughts or mental phenomena, but since the root of all thoughts is the ego, the primal thought called ‘I’, what the mind essentially is is only the ego, and hence in a more specific sense ‘mind’ is a term that refers to the ego
2018-04-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: though the term ‘mind’ can refer to all thoughts collectively, what the mind essentially is is just the ego
2017-09-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: though the term ‘mind’ can refer to the totality of all thoughts, what the mind essentially is is just the ego
2017-07-27: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: the mind is essentially just the ego, the primal thought and root of all other thoughts
2017-03-21: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 17 and 18: what we should watch is only the ego, the root thought called ‘I’, and not any other thought
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: the mind is essentially ‘I’, the ego or mixed awareness ‘I am this body’
2016-06-19: The first movement of thought is the rising of our ego, so we are completely ‘off the movement of thought’ only in manōlaya or manōnāśa (this section also includes the Sanskrit text of verse 18 of Upadēśa Sāram together with my translation of it)
2016-04-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: the ego is our first thought, the root of our mind
2015-11-11: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: our mind is in essence just our primal thought called ‘I’
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: our ego is the root of all our mental impurities
2015-05-20: Distinguishing the ego from the rest of the mind
2015-04-03: Any experience we can describe is something other than the experience of pure self-attentiveness
2014-12-13: The teachings of Sri Ramana and Nisargadatta are significantly different
2014-09-26: Metaphysical solipsism, idealism and creation theories in the teachings of Sri Ramana
2014-08-15: Establishing that I am and analysing what I am
2014-05-25: The mind’s role in investigating ‘I’
2014-02-16: Self-attentiveness and citta-vṛtti nirōdha
2014-02-05: Spontaneously and wordlessly applying the clue: ‘to whom? to me; who am I?’
2011-10-07: In essence the mind is just the thought called ‘I’, which is the root of all other thoughts
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 19:
நானென் றெழுமிட மேதென நாடவுண்
ணான்றலை சாய்ந்திடு முந்தீபற
ஞான விசாரமி துந்தீபற.
nāṉeṉ ḏṟeṙumiḍa mēdeṉa nāḍavuṇ
ṇāṉḏṟalai sāyndiḍu mundīpaṟa
ñāṉa vicārami dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: நான் என்று எழும் இடம் ஏது என நாட உள், நான் தலைசாய்ந்திடும். ஞான விசாரம் இது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): nāṉ eṉḏṟu eṙum iḍam ēdu eṉa nāḍa uḷ, nāṉ talai-sāyndiḍum. ñāṉa-vicāram idu.
அன்வயம்: நான் என்று எழும் இடம் ஏது என உள் நாட, நான் தலைசாய்ந்திடும். இது ஞான விசாரம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): nāṉ eṉḏṟu eṙum iḍam ēdu eṉa uḷ nāḍa, nāṉ talai-sāyndiḍum. idu ñāṉa-vicāram.
English translation: When one investigates within what the place is from which one rises as ‘I’, ‘I’ will die. This is awareness-investigation.
Explanatory paraphrase: When one investigates within [or inwardly investigates] what the place is from which one [or it] rises as ‘I’ [ego or mind], ‘I’ will die. This is jñāna-vicāra [investigation of awareness].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-12: Bhagavan defined self-investigation (ātma-vicāra) in the sixteenth paragraph of Nāṉ Ār? as ‘always keeping the mind on oneself’ (sadākālamum maṉattai ātmāvil vaittiruppadu), and as he made clear, keeping our mind on ourself means keeping our attention fixed firmly on what we actually are, namely our fundamental awareness ‘I am’, which is our very being, so he also called this practice ‘awareness-investigation’ (jñāna-vicāra)
2023-05-16: What he refers to here as ‘நான் என்று எழும் இடம்’ (nāṉ eṉḏṟu eṙum iḍam), ‘the place from which one rises as I’ or ‘the place from which it rises as I’, is our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what always shines within us as our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’, so investigating this ‘place’ means keenly attending only to this awareness ‘I am’, which is why he calls this investigation jñāna-vicāra, which means ‘awareness-investigation’
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 19: when one investigates from where the ego rises, it will die
2021-11-26: ‘நான் என்று எழும் இடம்’ (nāṉ eṉḏṟu eṙum iḍam), ‘the place from which one rises as I’, is our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what always shines within us as our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’, so investigating this ‘place’ means keenly attending only to this awareness ‘I am’, which is why he calls this investigation jñāna-vicāra, which means ‘awareness-investigation’
2020-01-16: Bhagavan often uses the term ‘இடம்’ (iḍam), which literally means ‘place’, as a metaphor for our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), because it is the ‘place’ or source from which we rise as ego and into which we must eventually subside
2019-11-24: ஞான விசாரம் (ñāṉa-vicāram) or jñāna-vicāra means ‘awareness-investigation’, so since awareness alone is what we actually are, jñāna-vicāra is the practice of investigating our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what Bhagavan refers to in this verse as ‘நான் என்று எழும் இடம்’ (nāṉ eṉḏṟu eṙum iḍam), ‘the place from which one rises as I’
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 19: if we investigate ourself, the source from which we rose as this ego, it will die
2015-07-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 19: we should investigate the source of our ego, which is what we actually are
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 20:
நானொன்று தானத்து நானானென் றொன்றது
தானாகத் தோன்றுமே யுந்தீபற
தானது பூன்றமா முந்தீபற.
nāṉoṉḏṟu thāṉattu nāṉāṉeṉ ḏṟoṉḏṟadu
tāṉāhat tōṉḏṟumē yundīpaṟa
tāṉadu pūṉḏṟamā mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: ‘நான்’ ஒன்று தானத்து ‘நான் நான்’ என்று ஒன்று அது தானாக தோன்றுமே. தான் அது பூன்றம் ஆம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): ‘nāṉ’ oṉḏṟu thāṉattu ‘nāṉ nāṉ’ eṉḏṟu oṉḏṟu adu tāṉāha tōṉḏṟumē. tāṉ adu pūṉḏṟam ām.
அன்வயம்: ‘நான்’ ஒன்று தானத்து ‘நான் நான்’ என்று ஒன்று அது தானாக தோன்றுமே. அது தான் பூன்றம் ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): ‘nāṉ’ oṉḏṟu thāṉattu ‘nāṉ nāṉ’ eṉḏṟu oṉḏṟu adu tāṉāha tōṉḏṟumē. adu tāṉ pūṉḏṟam ām.
English translation: In the place where ‘I’ merges, that, the one, appears spontaneously as ‘I am I’. That itself is the whole.
Explanatory paraphrase: In the place where ‘I’ [namely ego, the false awareness ‘I am this’] merges, that, the one, appears spontaneously [or as oneself] as ‘I am I’ [that is, as awareness of oneself as oneself alone]. That itself [or that, oneself] is pūṉḏṟam [pūrṇa: the infinite whole or entirety of what is].
Explanations and discussions:
2023-05-16: ‘நான் ஒன்று தானம்’ (nāṉ oṉḏṟu thāṉam), ‘the place where ‘I’ merges’, is the place from which it rose, namely our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’, so when ego merges there, we will cease to be aware of ourself as ‘I am this body’ and will instead be aware of ourself just as ‘I am I’
2023-05-16: What shines forth spontaneously as ‘I am I’ is our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what is also called brahman and which, being ‘one only without a second’ (ēkam ēva advitīyam), is the infinite whole (pūrṇa), other than which nothing actually exists, as Bhagavan implies by saying that it is ‘परम पूर्ण सत्’ (parama pūrṇa sat), ‘the supreme whole existence [being or reality]’
2023-05-16: The Sanskrit verb स्फुर् (sphur), from which the noun स्फुरण (sphuraṇa) is derived, means to shine, be clear, be evident or make itself known in any way, and is particularly used in the sense of shine forth, shine with a fresh clarity or appear afresh, and it is in this sense that he uses it in verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram when he says ‘अहम् अहंतया स्फुरति हृत् स्वयम्’ (aham ahaṁtayā sphurati hṛt svayaṁ), “the heart shines forth spontaneously as ‘I am I’”
2023-05-16: As soon as ego is eradicated, what seemed till then to be a new and fresh clarity of self-awareness (sphuraṇa), which had been gradually growing clearer until it finally swallowed us entirely in its all-consuming effulgence, is recognised to be natural (sahaja), being what Bhagavan calls ‘பூன்றம்’ (pūṉḏṟam), ‘the whole’, in verse 20 of Upadēśa Undiyār and ‘परम पूर्ण सत्’ (parama pūrṇa sat), ‘the supreme whole existence [being or reality]’, in verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 20: when ego is annihated, the infinite whole will shine forth as ‘I am I’
2022-02-08: Since thought alone is the obstacle that stands in the way of our being aware of ourself as we actually are, as soon as all thoughts (including the primal thought, namely ego) are dissolved in such a manner that they can never reappear, our real nature will shine forth spontaneously, just as the sun appears spontaneously as soon as the clouds that concealed it are blown aside
2021-11-26: What we actually are is sat-cit (existence-awareness), which is our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’, so when we are aware of ourself as we actually are, we will be aware of ourself just as ‘I am I’
2021-11-26: As soon as ego is eradicated, what seemed till then to be a new and fresh clarity of self-awareness (sphuraṇa), which had been gradually growing clearer until it finally swallowed us entirely in its all-consuming effulgence, is recognised to be natural (sahaja), being what Bhagavan calls ‘பூன்றம்’ (pūṉḏṟam), ‘the whole’
2021-11-26: What appears spontaneously as ‘I am I’ is our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is ‘परम पूर्ण सत्’ (parama pūrṇa sat), the supreme whole existence, being or reality, as he says in verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram
2021-11-26: The Sanskrit verb स्फुर् (sphur) means to shine, be clear, be evident or make itself known in any way, and is particularly used in the sense of shine forth, shine with a fresh clarity or appear afresh, and it is in this sense that he uses it in verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram when he says ‘अहम् अहंतया स्फुरति हृत् स्वयम्’ (aham ahaṁtayā sphurati hṛt svayaṁ), “the heart shines forth spontaneously as ‘I am I’”
2021-11-26: As soon as ego is eradicated, what seemed till then to be a new and fresh clarity of self-awareness (sphuraṇa), which had been gradually growing clearer until it finally swallowed us entirely in its all-consuming effulgence, is recognised to be natural (sahaja), being what Bhagavan calls ‘परम पूर्ण सत्’ (parama pūrṇa sat), ‘the supreme whole existence [being or reality]’, in verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram
2020-06-21: Bhagavan used the term ‘நான் நான்’ (nāṉ nāṉ), ‘I am I’, to distinguish our real adjunct-free self-awareness from our false adjunct-mixed self-awareness, namely ego, which he referred to as ‘நான் இது’ (nāṉ idu), ‘I am this’, because ‘நான் இது’ (nāṉ idu), ‘I am this’, denotes a false identity, since it is an identification of ourself with something other than ourself, namely a body consisting of five sheaths, whereas ‘நான் நான்’ (nāṉ nāṉ), ‘I am I’, denotes our real identity, since it is an identification of ourself with ourself alone
2019-09-22: Comment explaining that ‘I am I’ is not a circular definition of ‘I’, because it refers to the clear awareness that I am nothing other than I, which is what shines forth when ego, the false awareness ‘I am this’, is destroyed
2019-08-28: Comment explaining that ‘நான் நான்’ (nāṉ nāṉ), ‘I am I’, expresses recognition of the fact that I am nothing other than I, because when ego is eradicated, what remains in its place is just pure self-awareness (ātma-jñāna), which is never aware of itself as anything other than itself
2017-04-12: The second in a series of two comments explaining that when the ego is eradicated (as it will be when it sees itself as it actually is) what we will experience is not that there is no ‘I’ but that ‘I’ is not what it seemed to be so long as it seemed to be mixed and confused with adjuncts such as ‘this’ or ‘that’, which means that we will cease to be aware of ourself as ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’ and will instead be aware of ourself only as ‘I am I’
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 20: where ‘I am this’ merges, what remains shining is ‘I am I’ (this section also includes the Sanskrit text of verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram together with my translation of it)
2016-02-08: We cannot be anything that we do not experience permanently, so ‘I am only I’
2015-09-22: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 20: what remains as ‘I am I’ after the ego dissolves is infinite fullness
2015-03-16: Comment explaining the distinction between the ego, which is the false self-awareness ‘I am this body’, and our real nature, which is the true self-awareness ‘I am I’
2014-07-08: நான் நான் (nāṉ nāṉ) means ‘I am I’, not ‘I-I’
2014-06-23: A series of three comments discussing the significance of the sentence ‘நான் நான்’ (nāṉ nāṉ) and explaining why the correct translation of it is ‘I am I’, not ‘I-I’
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 21:
நானெனுஞ் சொற்பொரு ளாமது நாளுமே
நானற்ற தூக்கத்து முந்தீபற
நமதின்மை நீக்கத்தா லுந்தீபற.
nāṉeṉuñ coṯporu ḷāmadu nāḷumē
nāṉaṯṟa tūkkattu mundīpaṟa
namadiṉmai nīkkattā lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: நான் எனும் சொல் பொருள் ஆம் அது நாளுமே, நான் அற்ற தூக்கத்தும் நமது இன்மை நீக்கத்தால்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): nāṉ eṉum sol poruḷ ām adu nāḷumē, nāṉ aṯṟa tūkkattum namadu iṉmai nīkkattāl.
அன்வயம்: நான் அற்ற தூக்கத்தும் நமது இன்மை நீக்கத்தால், நான் எனும் சொல் பொருள் நாளுமே அது ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): nāṉ aṯṟa tūkkattum namadu iṉmai nīkkattāl, nāṉ eṉum sol poruḷ nāḷumē adu ām.
English translation: That is at all times the substance of the word called ‘I’, because of the exclusion of our non-existence even in sleep, which is devoid of ‘I’.
Explanatory paraphrase: That [the one that appears as ‘I am I’, namely pure awareness, which is our real nature] is at all times the substance [or true import] of the word called ‘I’, because of the exclusion of our non-existence [that is, because we do not become non-existent] even in sleep, which is devoid of ‘I’ [namely ego].
Explanations and discussions:
2023-05-16: We are always clearly aware of ourself as ‘I’, not only in waking and dream, when we rise and stand as ego, the false awareness ‘I am this body’, but also in sleep, when we remain just as ‘I am’ without rising as ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’, so what we actually are is only the pure adjunct-free awareness ‘I’, and hence the clear awareness of ourself as ‘I am I’ (in other words, awareness of ourself as ourself alone) is always the true import of the word ‘I’
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 21: that infinite whole is always the true import of the word ‘I’
2022-03-24: Bhagavan gives us a much deeper explanation about sleep than the one that is usually given in advaita texts, because he points out firstly that in sleep ego does not exist, as he implies in this verse, and secondly that in the absence of ego nothing other than ourself exists, as he says unequivocally in verse 26 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu
2022-03-10: Even when ‘I’ is used to refer to ego, its true import is always our real nature (ātma-svarūpa)
2021-11-26: We are always clearly aware of ourself as ‘I’, not only in waking and dream, when we rise and stand as ego, the false awareness ‘I am this body’, but also in sleep, when we remain just as ‘I am’ without rising as ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’, so since we are never anything other than ‘I’, the clear awareness of ourself as ‘I am I’ is always the true import of the word ‘I’
2020-06-17: What exists and what we are aware of in sleep is only pure awareness, which is our own real nature and which is completely devoid of ego or mind
2017-04-12: Comment explaining that when we cease to be aware of ourself as ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’, we will instead be aware of ourself only as ‘I am I’, which is our real identity, because we cannot be anything other than ourself
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 21: what shines as ‘I am I’ is the real import of the word ‘I’
2015-07-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 21: our infinite self is always the true import of the word ‘I’
2015-07-19: Comment explaining that the term ‘I’ refers only to ourself, whether we experience ourself as we actually are or as this ego, but its real import is the awareness ‘I am I’, which is what we always actually are
2015-02-04: The terms ‘I’ or ‘we’ refer only to ourself, whether we experience ourself as we actually are or as the ego that we now seem to be
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 22:
உடல்பொறி யுள்ள முயிரிரு ளெல்லாஞ்
சடமசத் தானதா லுந்தீபற
சத்தான நானல்ல வுந்தீபற.
uḍalpoṟi yuḷḷa muyiriru ḷellāñ
jaḍamasat tāṉadā lundīpaṟa
sattāṉa nāṉalla vundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உடல் பொறி உள்ளம் உயிர் இருள் எல்லாம் சடம் அசத்து ஆனதால், சத்து ஆன நான் அல்ல.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uḍal poṟi uḷḷam uyir iruḷ ellām jaḍam asattu āṉadāl, sattu āṉa nāṉ alla.
English translation: Since body, mind, intellect, life and darkness are all jaḍa and asat, they are not ‘I’, which is sat.
Explanatory paraphrase: Since [the five sheaths, namely] body [annamaya kōśa], life [prāṇamaya kōśa], mind [manōmaya kōśa], intellect [vijñānamaya kōśa] and darkness [ānandamaya kōśa, namely the cittam or will, which is internal darkness in the form of the dense fog of viṣaya-vāsanās, inclinations or desires to seek happiness in things other than oneself] are all jaḍa [non-aware] and asat [unreal or non-existent], they are not ‘I’, which is [cit, what is aware, and] sat [what actually exists].
Explanations and discussions:
2023-12-07: பொறி (poṟi) means the sense organs, so it refers primarily to the eyes, ears, mouth or tongue (as the organ of taste), nose and body (as the organ of tactile sensation), but just as physical phenomena are made known by these five physical sense organs, mental phenomena are made known by the inner sense organ called ‘mind’, and hence the mind (particularly in the sense of the manōmaya kōśa or mental sheath) is also called பொறி (poṟi), as Bhagavan refers to it in this verse
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 22: the five sheaths are jaḍa and asat, so they are not ‘I’
2022-03-24: Since the five sheaths are all jaḍa and asat, they are not ‘I’, which is sat
2022-03-24: The ānandamaya kōśa is not the darkness of ignorance but the darkness of desire
2021-11-18: Though we as ego experience ourself as if we were all these five sheaths collectively, they are all jaḍa (non-aware) and asat (unreal or non-existent), and hence they are not what we actually are
2020-01-23: All the five sheaths that constitute the person we seem to be, which is what Bhagavan refers to as ‘body’, are jaḍa (non-aware) and asat (unreal or non-existent), so they are not ‘I’
2020-01-16: When Bhagavan says that ego is what rises as ‘I am this body’, what he means by the term ‘body’ is a form composed of five sheaths, namely the physical form, life, mind, intellect and will, all of which are non-aware (jaḍa)
2019-12-15: Whatever person we seem to be is nothing other than these five sheaths, so since none of them are aware, no person is aware, but since what is aware of phenomena is only ego, and since ego is aware of itself as ‘I am this person’, this person seems to be aware
2019-11-13: Series of two comments explaining that intellect and will are both non-aware (jaḍa), so though intellect is ego’s ability to judge and distinguish one thing from another, and will consists of ego’s likes, dislikes, desires, attachments, hopes, fears and so on, neither of them is ego itself
2019-10-25: Ego is the false awareness ‘I am this body’, so it is called cit-jaḍa-granthi, the knot (granthi) formed by the seeming entanglement of awareness (cit) with a body consisting of five sheaths, all of which are insentient or non-aware (jaḍa)
2019-05-30: All the five sheaths are jaḍa (insentient or non-aware) and asat (unreal or non-existent), so though all the elements of the will are part of the person, who is composed of these five sheaths, the person as a whole is non-aware, so what likes, dislikes, desires, feels attached, wants, wishes, hopes or fears is not this person but only ego, who is what is aware of itself as ‘I am this person’
2018-12-30: Since ānandamaya kōśa is our will (cittam), the totality of all our vāsanās, why does Bhagavan refer to it as ‘இருள்’ (iruḷ), ‘darkness’?
2018-11-08: Ego is not any of the five sheaths, which are all jaḍa (non-aware), but only the false awareness ‘I am this body’, which rises and stands by identifying itself with a body consisting of these five sheaths
2018-11-08: All the five sheaths are jaḍa (non-aware) and asat (non-existence)
2018-11-08: Why does Bhagavan refer to the will (the ānandamaya kōśa), which is the totality of all vāsanās (the vast majority of which are viṣaya-vāsanās), as ‘இருள்’ (iruḷ), which means ‘darkness’?
2018-04-18: None of the five sheaths is aware of anything, so they seem to be sentient only because the ego experiences them as if they were itself
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 22: the body and other adjuncts are not real and not aware, so they are not ‘I’
2016-05-05: The person we seem to be is a form composed of five sheaths
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 23:
உள்ள துணர வுணர்வுவே றின்மையி
னுள்ள துணர்வாகு முந்தீபற
வுணர்வேநா மாயுள முந்தீபற.
uḷḷa duṇara vuṇarvuvē ṟiṉmaiyi
ṉuḷḷa duṇarvāhu mundīpaṟa
vuṇarvēnā māyuḷa mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உள்ளது உணர உணர்வு வேறு இன்மையின், உள்ளது உணர்வு ஆகும். உணர்வே நாமாய் உளம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uḷḷadu uṇara uṇarvu vēṟu iṉmaiyiṉ, uḷḷadu uṇarvu āhum. uṇarvē nām-āy uḷam.
அன்வயம்: உள்ளது உணர வேறு உணர்வு இன்மையின், உள்ளது உணர்வு ஆகும். உணர்வே நாமாய் உளம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): uḷḷadu uṇara vēṟu uṇarvu iṉmaiyiṉ, uḷḷadu uṇarvu āhum. uṇarvē nām-āy uḷam.
English translation: Because of the non-existence of other awareness to be aware of what exists, what exists is awareness. Awareness alone exists as we.
Explanatory paraphrase: Because of the non-existence of [any] awareness other [than what exists] to be aware of what exists, what exists (uḷḷadu) is awareness (uṇarvu). Awareness alone exists as we [that is, the awareness that actually exists, namely pure awareness, which is awareness that is aware of nothing other than itself, is what we actually are].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-05: Since God and soul are both aware of their being as ‘I am’, and since their awareness ‘I am’ is not other than their being, the one substance that they both are is pure being-awareness (sat-cit)
2022-10-27: Absolute existence is what is called Arunachala, and since it alone is what actually exists, there cannot be any awareness other than it to know it, so it itself is awareness
2022-07-02: What we actually are is pure awareness (uṇarvu or cit), which alone is what actually exists (uḷḷadu or sat)
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 23: what exists is awareness, which is what we are
2021-08-29: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: what actually exists is only our awareness of our own existence, and that alone is what we actually are
2020-11-01: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: what actually exists is only awareness, awareness that is aware only of its own existence, ‘I am’, and we are that
2020-06-21: Our existence (sat) and our awareness of our existence (sat-cit) are one and the same thing, so we were aware of our existence in sleep because awareness is our very nature, and hence we could never be not aware
2020-03-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: what we actually are is only awareness (uṇarvu or cit), which is what alone actually exists (uḷḷadu or sat)
2019-10-25: Ego is the false awareness ‘I am this body’, but what is real, in the sense of what actually exists, is only our fundamental awareness ‘I am’
2019-10-24: Comment explaining that being is consciousness and consciousness is being, so they are not just ‘two aspects of the same thing’, they are the same thing
2019-08-26: Comment explaining the significance of the unusual syntax of the final sentence, ‘உணர்வே நாமாய் உளம்’ (uṇarvē nām-āy uḷam), ‘Awareness alone exist being we’, ‘Awareness alone exist as we’ or ‘Awareness alone are as we’
2019-08-26: Comment explaining that awareness (in the sense of pure awareness) is our very being, because it is what we actually are, so awareness and being are one and the same thing
2018-12-30: What actually exists is only pure awareness, and that is what we actually are
2018-02-28: What distinguishes our real nature (ātma-svarūpa) from our ego is that our real nature is what actually exists (uḷḷadu), which is aware of nothing other than itself, whereas our ego is just a transitory appearance, which is always aware of things that seem to be other than itself
2018-01-01: The second meaning of the first sentence of the first maṅgalam verse, namely ‘உள்ளது அலது உள்ள உணர்வு உள்ளதோ?’ (uḷḷadu aladu uḷḷa-v-uṇarvu uḷḷadō?), namely ‘Except as [or other than] uḷḷadu [what exists], does uḷḷa-v-uṇarvu [existing or actual awareness] exist?’, is a briefer expression of the same argument that Bhagavan gives in this verse
2017-07-06: What we actually are is just pure self-awareness: awareness that is aware of nothing other than itself
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: we are the one existence-awareness that always shines as ‘I am’
2016-06-19: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: we are awareness, and awareness alone is what actually exists
2016-06-02: Comment explaining that what actually exists is aware, so its existence and awareness are one and the same thing
2016-03-16: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: we are both what exists and what is aware that we exist
2015-09-22: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: what exists (uḷḷadu) is what is aware (uṇarvu)
2015-06-25: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: what exists is what is aware
2014-08-08: We must experience what is, not what merely seems to be
2014-01-24: Only ‘I am’ is certain and self-evident
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 24:
இருக்கு மியற்கையா லீசசீ வர்க
ளொருபொரு ளேயாவ ருந்தீபற
வுபாதி யுணர்வேவே றுந்தீபற.
irukku miyaṟkaiyā līśajī varga
ḷoruporu ḷēyāva rundīpaṟa
vupādhi yuṇarvēvē ṟundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: இருக்கும் இயற்கையால் ஈச சீவர்கள் ஒரு பொருளே ஆவர். உபாதி உணர்வே வேறு.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): irukkum iyaṟkaiyāl īśa-jīvargaḷ oru poruḷē āvar. upādhi-uṇarvē vēṟu.
English translation: By existing nature, God and soul are just one substance. Only adjunct-awareness is different.
Explanatory paraphrase: By [their] existing nature [that is, because the real nature of each of them is what actually exists (uḷḷadu), which is the pure and infinite awareness (uṇarvu) that shines eternally as ‘I am’, devoid of all adjuncts], īśa [God] and jīva [soul] are just one poruḷ [substance or vastu]. Only upādhi-uṇarvu [adjunct-awareness, namely ego or jīva, the adjunct-conflated awareness ‘I am this body’, which is what attributes adjuncts not only to itself but also to God] is [what makes them seem] different. [However, though the soul (jīva) is aware of itself as a certain set of adjuncts, namely the five sheaths that constitute whatever person it currently seems to be, and consequently attributes certain other adjuncts to God, God always remains just as pure awareness, in the clear view of which no adjuncts exist at all, so the differences between God and soul seem to exist only in the view of the soul and not in the view of God.]
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-05: We seem to be ego, which is what is also called ‘soul’ (jīva), only because we have imposed limitations on ourself by being aware of ourself as ‘I am this body’, but these limitations are not real but just illusory adjuncts (upādhi), so even when we seem to have imposed these unreal limitations upon ourself, what we essentially are is just infinite being, which is what is called ‘God’ (īśaṉ)
2023-12-07: ஒரு பொருள் (oru poruḷ), the one substance, is our very existence or being, because it alone is what we actually are, and it is also what God actually is, so in our ‘இருக்கும் இயற்கை’ (irukkum iyaṟkai), ‘existing nature’ or ‘being nature’, God and we are just this one substance, as he says in this verse
2022-11-09: Just as iron is the one substance that constitutes both a magnet and an ordinary piece of iron, sat-cit (pure being, which is pure awareness, ‘I am’) is the one substance (poruḷ or vastu) of both Arunachala and ourself, but just as the magnetic particles of iron in a magnet are all aligned to face in one direction, allowing its magnetic nature to manifest, whereas the magnetic particles in an ordinary piece of iron are scattered to face in many directions, thereby obscuring its magnetic nature, so Arunachala, being pure awareness, is always facing towards itself alone, whereas the attention of ourself as ego is always scattered outwards (away from ourself) under the sway of our viṣaya-vāsanās to face in many different directions, thereby obscuring our real nature as pure awareness
2022-08-24: What he refers to here both as ‘இருக்கும் இயற்கை’ (irukkum iyaṟkai), ‘existing nature’, and as ‘ஒரு பொருள்’ (oru poruḷ), ‘one substance’, is sat-cit, pure existence-awareness, which is what always shines in our heart as our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’, so this alone is what both Arunachala (God or īśa) and we (ego, soul or jīva) actually are
2022-07-02: What he refers to here as ‘இருக்கும் இயற்கை’ (irukkum iyaṟkai), ‘existing nature’ or ‘being nature’, is the real nature of both Arunachala and ourself, which is pure being, so this is what we actually are, and hence it is the ‘ஒரு பொருள்’ (oru poruḷ), the ‘one substance’, that he says is both God (īśa) and soul (jīva)
2022-03-31: Though outwardly அழகு (aṙahu) and சுந்தரம் (sundaram) differ in their form and appearance, inwardly their பொருள் (poruḷ), their substance or meaning, namely beauty, is one, just as the பொருள் (poruḷ) or substance of God and soul is one even though they differ in their external form and appearance
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 24: God and soul are just one substance, but only their adjuncts differ
2021-02-18: Ego as ego is just an illusory appearance, so it has no existence of its own, but as pure awareness it does exist and is therefore real
2020-11-01: What Bhagavan refers to as ‘ஒரு பொருள்’ (oru poruḷ), ‘one substance’, is pure awareness, which is our ‘இருக்கும் இயற்கை’ (irukkum iyaṟkai), ‘existing nature’ or ‘being nature’, which means what we actually are
2020-02-24: Self-awareness + awareness of adjuncts = ego or jīva, whereas self-awareness without any awareness of adjuncts (and hence without any awareness of anything else whatsoever) = our real nature or God
2019-10-25: When we rise and stand as ego our fundamental awareness ‘I am’ seems to be mixed and conflated with awareness of adjuncts (upādhi-uṇarvu), so this is what creates a seeming separation between ourself as we actually are (the pure awareness ‘I am’), which is what is called ‘God’ (īśa), and ourself as ego (the false awareness ‘I am this body’), which is what is called ‘soul’ (jīva)
2018-01-04: This verse clearly illustrates Bhagavan’s use of பொருள் (poruḷ) in the sense of ‘substance’
2017-02-19: What is the difference between God and the ego?
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 24: what seemingly separates us from the reality that we actually are is only our awareness of adjuncts
2015-11-17: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 24 and 25: experiencing ourself without adjuncts is experiencing what we actually are
2015-07-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 24 and 25: the essential oneness of our ego and our real self
2015-06-25: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 24: our ego and God are only one substance
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 25:
தன்னை யுபாதிவிட் டோர்வது தானீசன்
றன்னை யுணர்வதா முந்தீபற
தானா யொளிர்வதா லுந்தீபற.
taṉṉai yupādhiviṭ ṭōrvadu tāṉīśaṉ
ḏṟaṉṉai yuṇarvadā mundīpaṟa
tāṉā yoḷirvadā lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: தன்னை உபாதி விட்டு ஓர்வது தான் ஈசன் தன்னை உணர்வது ஆம், தானாய் ஒளிர்வதால்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): taṉṉai upādhi viṭṭu ōrvadu tāṉ īśaṉ taṉṉai uṇarvadu ām, tāṉ-āy oḷirvadāl.
அன்வயம்: தானாய் ஒளிர்வதால், தன்னை உபாதி விட்டு ஓர்வது தான் ஈசன் தன்னை உணர்வது ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): tāṉ-āy oḷirvadāl, taṉṉai upādhi viṭṭu ōrvadu tāṉ īśaṉ taṉṉai uṇarvadu ām.
English translation: Knowing oneself leaving aside adjuncts is itself knowing God, because of shining as oneself.
Explanatory paraphrase: Knowing [or being aware of] oneself without adjuncts is itself knowing God, because [God is what is always] shining as oneself [one’s own real nature, namely pure awareness, which is oneself without any adjuncts].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-05: Though as ego or soul (jīva) we are aware of ourself as a certain set of adjuncts, namely the five sheaths that constitute whatever person we currently seem to be, and consequently attribute certain other adjuncts to God, God always remains just as pure being-awareness (sat-cit), in the clear view of which no adjuncts exist at all, so the differences between God and ourself seem to exist only in the view of ourself and not in the view of God. In order to know God as he actually is, therefore, all that is required is that we should know ourself without adjuncts
2023-05-16: What brahman actually is is only ‘I’ devoid of all adjuncts, so to know brahman we must know ‘I’ devoid of all adjuncts, and to know ‘I’ devoid of all adjuncts we must attend to nothing other than ‘I’
2022-07-02: Since we mistake ourself to be one set of adjuncts, we take Arunachala to be another set of adjuncts, but since he is never aware of himself as anything other than pure being-awareness (sat-cit), he is never aware of any adjuncts at all, so he never sees us as anything other than himself, and hence if we are to see him as he actually is, which is as he sees himself, all we need to do is to see ourself without adjuncts
2022-03-31: By virtue of our existing nature, ‘I am’, we and Arunachala (jīva and śiva) are always one substance (poruḷ), like aṙahu and sundaram, but to see ourself as such, we need to see ourself without adjuncts
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 25: seeing oneself without adjuncts is seeing God, because he is oneself
2021-02-18: Ego is just a false awareness of ourself, an awareness of ourself as if we were a body, but if we investigate it keenly enough, its adjuncts will slip off and we will see that it is nothing other than pure awareness, ‘I am’
2020-12-27: God is nothing other than our own real nature (ātma-svarūpa), but so long as we rise as ego and thereby limit ourself as a finite set of adjuncts (namely a body consisting of five sheaths) he seems to be something other than ourself, so we can know him as he actually is only by knowing ourself without adjuncts
2020-11-01: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 24-25: we already know ourself, so we do not need to know anything new, but just need to know ourself without adjuncts
2020-02-24: If we attend only to ‘I am’, thereby withdrawing our attention from everything else, including all our adjuncts, we will thereby leave aside all adjuncts, and what will then remain is only pure awareness, which is what we always actually are
2020-02-24: Self-awareness + awareness of adjuncts = ego or jīva, whereas self-awareness without any awareness of adjuncts (and hence without any awareness of anything else whatsoever) = our real nature or God
2019-12-10: We are aware of things other than ourself only when we are aware of ourself as a body, and so long as we are aware of ourself as a body we are not aware of ourself as we actually are, so we need to be aware of ourself without being aware of the body or any other adjuncts
2019-10-25: To see God as he actually is, namely as pure awareness, which is our real nature, all we need do is to see ourself without any adjuncts (upādhi), which means without any awareness of adjuncts (upādhi-uṇarvu)
2017-02-19: What is the difference between God and the ego?
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 25: being aware of ‘I am’ without adjuncts is being aware of the reality
2015-11-17: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 24 and 25: experiencing ourself without adjuncts is experiencing what we actually are
2015-07-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 24 and 25: the essential oneness of our ego and our real self
2015-06-25: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 25: knowing ourself without adjuncts is knowing God
2014-08-01: Self-awareness is the very nature of ‘I’
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 26:
தானா யிருத்தலே தன்னை யறிதலாந்
தானிரண் டற்றதா லுந்தீபற
தன்மய நிட்டையீ துந்தீபற.
tāṉā yiruttalē taṉṉai yaṟidalān
tāṉiraṇ ḍaṯṟadā lundīpaṟa
taṉmaya niṭṭhaiyī dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: தான் ஆய் இருத்தலே தன்னை அறிதல் ஆம், தான் இரண்டு அற்றதால். தன்மய நிட்டை ஈது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): tāṉ-āy iruttal-ē taṉṉai aṟidal ām, tāṉ iraṇḍu aṯṟadāl. taṉmaya niṭṭhai īdu.
அன்வயம்: தான் இரண்டு அற்றதால், தான் ஆய் இருத்தலே தன்னை அறிதல் ஆம். ஈது தன்மய நிட்டை.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): tāṉ iraṇḍu aṯṟadāl, tāṉ-āy iruttal-ē taṉṉai aṟidal ām. īdu taṉmaya niṭṭhai.
English translation: Being oneself alone is knowing oneself, because oneself is devoid of two. This is tanmaya-niṣṭhā.
Explanatory paraphrase: Being oneself [that is, being as one actually is without rising to know anything else] alone is knowing oneself, because oneself [one’s real nature] is devoid of two [that is, devoid of the fundamental duality of subject and object, knower and thing known, and also devoid of any possibility of being divided as two selves, one self as a subject to know the other self as an object]. This is tanmaya-niṣṭhā [‘steadfastness as that’: the state of being firmly fixed or established as ‘that’ (tat), the one infinite reality called brahman].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-12: Since consciousness can never be an object of awareness, we can know it as it is only by being as it is
2024-09-05: Being as we actually are without rising as ego is knowing ourself as we actually are
2023-11-08: Knowing (or being aware of) anything other than ourself is an action, because it entails a movement of our mind or attention away from ourself towards that other thing, whereas knowing ourself is not an action but just being, because it does not entail even the slightest movement of our attention away from ourself
2022-10-27: Being pure awareness, Arunachala alone is both what knows and what it knows, and it itself is also the means by which it knows itself, because it knows itself just by being itself, as Bhagavan points out in this verse: ‘தான் ஆய் இருத்தலே தன்னை அறிதல் ஆம், தான் இரண்டு அற்றதால்’ (tāṉ-āy iruttal-ē taṉṉai aṟidal ām, tāṉ iraṇḍu aṯṟadāl), ‘Being oneself alone is knowing oneself, because oneself is devoid of two’
2022-09-23: Though we as pure awareness always know ourself, our knowing ourself is not a knowing like any other kind of knowing, because knowing anything else is an act of knowing, whereas knowing ourself is not an act of knowing, since we know ourself just by being ourself
2022-07-02: The real nature of Arunachala cannot be seen or known as an object but only as the reality of ourself, the subject, and we can see it only being it, because it cannot be seen or known by anything other than itself
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 26: being oneself alone is seeing oneself, because oneself is not two
2022-03-24: When the mind looks deep enough within itself it will thereby be swallowed by its own cittva, and thus it will cease to be anything other than its own cittva, and since being cittva alone is seeing cittva, as he implies in this verse, it is only by being completely swallowed by its own cittva that the mind can see its own cittva
2021-03-22: We cannot be aware of ourself as we actually are so long as we remain as ego, so it is only by being as we actually are that we can be aware of ourself as we actually are
2021-01-30: What we actually are is pure awareness, and pure awareness can be known only by itself, so it is only by being pure awareness that we can know pure awareness
2020-11-01: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 26: since we are awareness and not an object, we know ourself just by being ourself
2020-11-01: What Bhagavan refers to here as ‘தன்னை அறிதல்’ (taṉṉai aṟidal), ‘knowing oneself’, is knowing ourself as we actually are (in other words, ‘தன்னை உபாதி விட்டு ஓர்வது’ (taṉṉai upādhi viṭṭu ōrvadu), ‘knowing ourself without adjuncts’), and what we actually are is just ‘I am’, our fundamental awareness of our own existence
2020-11-01: In this context ‘தான்’ (tāṉ), ‘oneself’, means ourself as we actually are, and since what we actually are is what is called ‘brahman’, which is often referred to as ‘that’ (tat), he concludes this verse by saying ‘தன்மய நிட்டை ஈது’ (taṉmaya niṭṭhai īdu), ‘This is tanmaya-niṣṭhā [the state of abiding or being firmly fixed as tat]’, in which ‘ஈது’ (īdu), ‘this’, refers to the state of being and knowing oneself, as described in the first sentence of this verse.
2019-12-16: Comment explaining that by being aware of ourself as we actually are we are thereby being as we actually are
2019-10-25: What knows pure awareness is only pure awareness, so in order to know our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is pure awareness, we must just be as we always actually are
2019-08-26: Comment explaining that what we actually are is pure awareness, which is always aware of itself as it actually is, so being as we actually are entails being aware of ourself as we actually are, and being aware of ourself as we actually are entails being as we actually are
2019-08-24: Only by being ātma-jñāna (pure self-awareness) can we know ātma-jñāna, because ātma-jñāna is not anything other than ourself, and therefore cannot be known as anything other than ourself
2018-01-01: What Bhagavan says in the third sentence of the first maṅgalam verse, namely ‘உள்ளத்தே உள்ளபடி உள்ளதே உள்ளல்’ (uḷḷattē uḷḷapaḍi uḷḷadē uḷḷal), ‘Being in the heart as it is alone is thinking [of the existing substance] [or meditating on it]’, echoes what he had earlier written in this verse, namely ‘தானாய் இருத்தலே தன்னை அறிதல் ஆம், தான் இரண்டு அற்றதால்’ (tāṉ-āy iruttal-ē taṉṉai aṟidal ām, tāṉ iraṇḍu aṯṟadāl), ‘Being oneself [or more literally, being as oneself] alone is knowing oneself, because oneself is not two’
2017-01-15: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 26: being oneself is knowing oneself
2016-04-17: Comment in which it is explained that self-attentiveness is not an action (karma) or mental activity but is simply an actionless state of just being (summā iruppadu), because it is a focusing of our awareness on ourself alone, and being aware of ourself alone is our real nature
2016-03-16: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 26: being aware what we are is not transitive awareness but just being the intransitive awareness that we actually are
2014-11-09: Why should we believe that ‘the Self’ is as we believe it to be?
2014-08-01: Self-awareness is the very nature of ‘I’
2014-04-11: Ātma-vicāra and nirvikalpa samādhi
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 27:
அறிவறி யாமையு மற்ற வறிவே
யறிவாகு முண்மையீ துந்தீபற
வறிவதற் கொன்றிலை யுந்தீபற.
aṟivaṟi yāmaiyu maṯṟa vaṟivē
yaṟivāhu muṇmaiyī dundīpaṟa
vaṟivadaṟ koṉḏṟilai yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: அறிவு அறியாமையும் அற்ற அறிவே அறிவு ஆகும். உண்மை ஈது. அறிவதற்கு ஒன்று இலை.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): aṟivu aṟiyāmai-y-um aṯṟa aṟivē aṟivu āhum. uṇmai īdu. aṟivadaṟku oṉḏṟu ilai.
அன்வயம்: அறிவு அறியாமையும் அற்ற அறிவே அறிவு ஆகும். ஈது உண்மை. அறிவதற்கு ஒன்று இலை.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): aṟivu aṟiyāmai-y-um aṯṟa aṟivē aṟivu āhum. īdu uṇmai. aṟivadaṟku oṉḏṟu ilai.
English translation: Only knowledge that is devoid of knowledge and ignorance is knowledge. This is real. There is not anything for knowing.
Explanatory paraphrase: Only knowledge [in the sense of awareness] that is devoid of knowledge and ignorance [of anything other than oneself] is [actual] knowledge [or awareness]. This [alone] is [what is] real [or true], [because in the clear view of oneself as pure awareness] there is not anything [other than oneself for one either] to know [or to not know].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-12: Only consciousness of what actually exists is real consciousness, and since what actually exists is only pure consciousness, it alone is real consciousness
2023-07-27: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 27: real awareness is devoid of both knowledge and ignorance of anything other than itself, because there is nothing other than itself for it either to know or to not know
2022-09-23: What he means in the first sentence by ‘அறிவு அறியாமையும்’ (aṟivu aṟiyāmaiyum), ‘knowledge and ignorance’, is knowledge and ignorance about anything other than oneself, so the awareness (aṟivu) that is devoid of such knowledge and ignorance (or knowing and not knowing) is pure awareness, and hence what he implies in this sentence is that pure awareness alone is real awareness
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 27: there is nothing to know, so real awareness is devoid of knowledge and ignorance
2021-03-22: The distinction between transitive and intransitive awareness is one of the fundamental principles of Bhagavan’s teachings, and it is explained by him, albeit without using these terms, in verse 27 of Upadēśa Undiyār and verses 10, 11, 12, 13 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu
2021-02-02: When it is said that ‘everything is one’, it does not mean that everything is real, but that what appears as everything is only one thing, namely ourself, so instead of trying to know anything else, we should turn within to face ourself alone and thereby know ourself as we actually are, namely as pure awareness: awareness that is never aware of anything other than itself, because nothing else exists for it to be aware of
2020-03-09: Real awareness is devoid of ignorance of anything else for the same reason that it is devoid of awareness or knowledge of anything else, namely that that nothing other than itself exists either for it to know or for it to be ignorant of
2020-02-02: What we actually are is only pure awareness, which means awareness that is not aware of anything other than itself, because in its clear view nothing other than itself exists for it to be aware of
2020-01-16: When we are aware of ourself as we actually are, nothing else will exist for us to know
2020-01-05: One of several comments explaining why Bhagavan says ‘Therefore when the world appears, svarūpa does not appear; when svarūpa appears (shines), the world does not appear’ in the fourth paragraph of Nāṉ Ār?
2019-10-25: Awareness of ourself mixed and conflated with adjuncts is what is called ‘ego’ or ‘mind’, which alone is what is aware of all other phenomena, so being aware of ourself without adjuncts means being aware of absolutely nothing other than ourself
2019-06-28: The reason why real awareness is completely devoid of knowledge and ignorance about other things is explained by Bhagavan in the final sentence of this verse: ‘அறிவதற்கு ஒன்று இலை’ (aṟiyum adu uṇmai aṟivu āhādu), ‘there is not anything for knowing’
2019-02-20: Since nothing other than oneself actually exists, being aware of other things is not real awareness, so real awareness is only awareness that is devoid of awareness or ignorance of anything else
2019-01-31: When we are aware of ourself as we actually are, there will be nothing else for us to know, as Bhagavan implied in the second sentence of verse 3 of Āṉma-Viddai and as he stated more explicitly in this verse
2018-11-08: The reason why real awareness is completely devoid of knowledge (or awareness) and ignorance of any other things is that it alone actually exists, so in its clear view there is absolutely nothing else for it be aware of, or for it to know or be ignorant of
2018-04-30: Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu verse 12 and Upadēśa Undiyār verse 27: real knowledge or awareness is that which is completely devoid of both knowing and not knowing
2018-04-18: Real awareness is devoid of awareness or ignorance of anything else, because there is nothing else for it to know
2017-05-28: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 27: what is real is only awareness devoid of knowledge and ignorance, because nothing at all exists for it to know
2015-09-22: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 27: we are devoid of knowledge and ignorance
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 28:
தனாதியல் யாதெனத் தான்றெரி கிற்பின்
னனாதி யனந்தசத் துந்தீபற
வகண்ட சிதானந்த முந்தீபற.
taṉādiyal yādeṉat tāṉḏṟeri hiṟpiṉ
ṉaṉādi yaṉantasat tundīpaṟa
vakhaṇḍa cidāṉanda mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: தனாது இயல் யாது என தான் தெரிகில், பின் அனாதி அனந்த சத்து அகண்ட சித் ஆனந்தம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): taṉādu iyal yādu eṉa tāṉ terihil, piṉ aṉādi aṉanta sattu akhaṇḍa cit āṉandam.
அன்வயம்: தான் தனாது இயல் யாது என தெரிகில், பின் அனாதி அனந்த அகண்ட சத்து சித் ஆனந்தம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): tāṉ taṉādu iyal yādu eṉa terihil, piṉ aṉādi aṉanta akhaṇḍa sattu cit āṉandam.
English translation: If one knows what the nature of oneself is, then beginningless, endless and unbroken existence-awareness-happiness.
Explanatory paraphrase: If one knows what the [real] nature of oneself is, then [what will remain existing and shining is only the real nature of oneself (ātma-svarūpa), which is] anādi [beginningless], ananta [endless, limitless or infinite] and akhaṇḍa [unbroken, undivided or unfragmented] sat-cit-ānanda [existence-awareness-happiness].
Explanations and discussions:
2023-05-16: Our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what shines eternally as ‘I am I’, is pure being-awareness-happiness (sat-cit-ānanda), which is beginningless (anādi), infinite (ananta) and undivided (akhaṇḍa)
2022-07-02: What we actually are is sat-cit-ānanda, pure being (sat), pure awareness (cit) and pure happiness (ānanda), which is infinite, eternal, indivisible and immutable
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 28: one’s real nature is imperishable unborn full awareness-happiness
2021-11-26: Our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what shines eternally as ‘I am I’, is pure being-awareness-happiness (sat-cit-ānanda), which is beginningless (anādi), infinite (ananta) and undivided (akhaṇḍa)
2020-10-19: Being anādi (beginningless), ananta (endless, limitless or infinite) and akhaṇḍa (unbroken, undivided or unfragmented), this state is timeless, immutable and devoid of even the slightest division of subject and object, and hence devoid of even the subtlest of phenomena or changes
2020-05-28: What we actually are is eternal, infinite and immutable sat-cit-ānanda, so if we want to experience infinite happiness (ānanda), we need to be aware of ourself as we actually are, and in order to be aware of ourself as we actually are we need to investigate ourself and thereby surrender this erroneous self-awareness called ego
2019-10-25: Pure awareness, which is the real nature of ourself (ātma-svarūpa), is sat (being or existence in the sense of what actually exists), cit (awareness in the sense of what is actually aware) and ānanda (happiness in the sense of what is actually happy), so when we know what our real nature is, what will remain is only sat-cit-ānanda, which is beginningless, endless, infinite and indivisible
2019-06-28: When by means of self-investigation and self-surrender we manage to eradicate ego entirely, everything else will cease to exist along with it, so what will then remain as ‘one only without a second’ (ēkam ēva advitīyam) is just pure awareness, whose nature is beginningless, endless, infinite and indivisible sat-cit-ānanda
2018-11-08: What actually exists is only our real nature, which is pure awareness, so it alone is what seems to have been divided or separated into subject (ego) and objects (phenomena), but though it seems to have been divided, it has never actually been divided, because it is indivisible
2018-04-30: When Bhagavan looked at himself, the perceiver (the ego) disappeared, and along with it all perceptions (all phenomena or objects perceived) also disappeared, because he saw that what actually exists is only pure, infinite, indivisible, immutable and eternal self-awareness
2017-07-27: Liberation is eternal: beginningless, endless and unbroken
2017-06-27: Māyā is nothing but our own mind, so it seems to exist only when we seem to be this mind
2017-03-24: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: our real nature is infinite and undivided, so nothing else exists to know it
2017-03-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: when everything else ceases to exist, what remains is only beginningless, infinite and undivided sat-cit-ānanda
2016-12-14: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: the nature of ‘the Self’ is diametrically opposite to the nature of phenomena
2016-10-19: As we actually are, we do nothing and are aware of nothing other than ourself
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: the pure self-awareness ‘I am I’ is beginningless, endless and indivisible
2016-07-13: Ātma-jñāna is the only real state and is immutable and indivisible, so there are no stages of it or states other than it
2015-09-22: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: the real nature of ourself
2015-06-25: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: sat-cit-ānanda is eternal, infinite and indivisible
2014-11-20: Is there any such thing as a ‘self-realised’ person?
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 29:
பந்தவீ டற்ற பரசுக முற்றவா
றிந்த நிலைநிற்ற லுந்தீபற
விறைபணி நிற்றலா முந்தீபற.
bandhavī ḍaṯṟa parasukha muṯṟavā
ṟinda nilainiṯṟa lundīpaṟa
viṟaipaṇi niṯṟalā mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: பந்த வீடு அற்ற பரசுகம் உற்றவாறு இந்த நிலை நிற்றல் இறை பணி நிற்றல் ஆம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): bandha vīḍu aṯṟa para-sukham uṯṟa-v-āṟu inda nilai niṯṟal iṟai-paṇi niṯṟal ām.
English translation: Standing in this state, thereby experiencing supreme bliss, which is devoid of bondage and liberation, is standing in the service of God.
Explanatory paraphrase: Standing [remaining, abiding or steadfastly being] in this state [of beginningless, infinite and indivisible sat-cit-ānanda], thereby experiencing supreme bliss, which is devoid of [the dyad or duality of] bondage and liberation, is standing in the service of God [or is standing as God directed].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 29: the divine soul experiences supreme happiness beyond bondage and liberation
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 30:
யானற் றியல்வது தேரி னெதுவது
தானற் றவமென்றா னுந்தீபற
தானாம் ரமணேச னுந்தீபற.
yāṉaṯ ṟiyalvadu tēri ṉeduvadu
dāṉaṯ ṟavameṉḏṟā ṉundīpaṟa
tāṉām ramaṇēśa ṉundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: ‘யான் அற்று இயல்வது தேரின் எது, அது தான் நல் தவம்’ என்றான் தான் ஆம் ரமணேசன்
Padacchēdam (word-separation): ‘yāṉ aṯṟu iyalvadu tēriṉ edu, adu-dāṉ nal tavam’ eṉḏṟāṉ tāṉ ām ramaṇēśaṉ.
English translation: ‘I ceasing, what if one knows what remains, that alone is good tapas’: thus said Lord Ramana, who is oneself.
Explanatory paraphrase: ‘What [exists and shines alone] if one knows what remains after I [ego] has ceased to exist, [just being] that [namely egoless pure awareness] alone is good tapas [spiritual austerity or asceticism]’: thus said Lord Ramana, who is oneself [one’s own real nature].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 30: one’s shining devoid of ‘I’ is great tapas
2015-08-22: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 30: experiencing what remains when the ego dissolves is tapas
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
வாழ்த்து (vāṙttu): Concluding Verses of Praise (composed by Sri Muruganar)
Vāṙttu verse 1:
இருடிக ளெல்லா மிறைவ னடியை
வருடி வணங்கின ருந்தீபற
வாழ்த்து முழங்கின ருந்தீபற.
iruḍiga ḷellā miṟaiva ṉaḍiyai
varuḍi vaṇaṅgiṉa rundīpaṟa
vāṙttu muṙaṅgiṉa rundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: இருடிகள் எல்லாம் இறைவன் அடியை வருடி வணங்கினர்; வாழ்த்து முழங்கினர்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): iruḍigaḷ ellām iṟaivaṉ aḍiyai varuḍi vaṇaṅgiṉar; vāṙttu muṙaṅgiṉar.
English translation: Touching the feet of God, all the ṛṣis paid obeisance; they sang aloud praise.
Explanatory paraphrase: Touching the feet of God [Lord Siva], all the ṛṣis [the ‘rishis’ or ascetics in the Daruka forest] paid obeisance [and] sang aloud praise [to him]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.133)
Vāṙttu verse 2:
உற்றார்க் குறுதி யுபதேச வுந்தியார்
சொற்ற குருபர னுந்தீபற
சுமங்கள வேங்கட னுந்தீபற.
uṯṟārk kuṟudi yupadēśa vundiyār
soṯṟa gurupara ṉundīpaṟa
sumaṅgaḷa vēṅkaṭa ṉundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உற்றார்க்கு உறுதி உபதேச வுந்தியார் சொற்ற குருபரன் சுமங்கள வேங்கடன்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uṯṟārkku uṟudi upadēśa-v-undiyār soṯṟa guru-paraṉ sumaṅgaḷa vēṅkaṭaṉ.
English translation: The supreme guru who sang Upadēśa Undiyār, an assurance to devotees, is the auspicious Venkatan.
Explanatory paraphrase: The supreme guru who sang Upadēśa Undiyār [as] an assurance to devotees [friends or those close to him, implying those who came to him for salvation] is the auspicious Venkatan [Sri Ramana]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.134)
Vāṙttu verse 3:
பல்லாண்டு பல்லாண்டு பற்பன்னூ றாயிரம்
பல்லாண்டு பல்லாண்டு முந்தீபற
பார்மிசை வாழ்கவே யுந்தீபற.
pallāṇḍu pallāṇḍu paṯpaṉṉū ṟāyiram
pallāṇḍu pallāṇḍu mundīpaṟa
pārmisai vāṙgavē yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: பல் ஆண்டு, பல் ஆண்டு, பல் பல் நூறு ஆயிரம் பல் ஆண்டு, பல் ஆண்டும் பார்மிசை வாழ்கவே.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): pal āṇḍu, pal āṇḍu, pal pal nūṟu āyiram pal āṇḍu, pal āṇḍum pār-misai vāṙga-v-ē.
English translation: Many years, many years, many hundreds of thousands of years, many years may he shine gloriously on earth.
Explanatory paraphrase: [For] many years, many years, many hundreds of thousands of years, many years may he [Sri Ramana] shine gloriously on earth. (Tiruvundiyār 1.135)
Vāṙttu verse 4:
இசையெடுப் போருஞ் செவிமடுப் போரும்
வசையறத் தேர்வோரு முந்தீபற
வாழி பலவூழி யுந்தீபற.
isaiyeḍup pōruñ cevimaḍup pōrum
vasaiyaṟat tērvōru mundīpaṟa
vāṙi palavūṙi yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: இசை எடுப்போரும், செவிமடுப்போரும், வசை அற தேர்வோரும் வாழி பல ஊழி.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): isai eḍuppōr-um, sevimaḍuppōr-um, vasai aṟa tērvōr-um vāṙi pala ūṙi.
அன்வயம்: இசை எடுப்போரும், செவிமடுப்போரும், வசை அற தேர்வோரும் பல ஊழி வாழி.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): isai eḍuppōr-um, sevimaḍuppōr-um, vasai aṟa tērvōr-um pala ūṙi vāṙi.
English translation: May those who sing, those who hear and those who flawlessly understand shine gloriously for many aeons.
Explanatory paraphrase: May those who sing, those who hear [literally feed or fill their ears with] and those who flawlessly understand [this Upadēśa Undiyār] shine gloriously for many aeons. (Tiruvundiyār 1.136)
Vāṙttu verse 5:
கற்கு மவர்களுங் கற்றுணர்ந் தாங்குத்தா
நிற்கு மவர்களு முந்தீபற
நீடூழி வாழியே யுந்தீபற.
kaṟku mavargaḷuṅ kaṯṟuṇarn dāṅguttā
niṟku mavargaḷu mundīpaṟa
nīḍūṙi vāṙiyē yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: கற்கும் அவர்களும் கற்று உணர்ந்து ஆங்கு தான் நிற்கும் அவர்களும் நீடு ஊழி வாழியே.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): kaṟkum avargaḷ-um kaṯṟu uṇarndu āṅgu tāṉ niṟkum avargaḷ-um nīḍu ūṙi vāṙi-y-ē.
English translation: May those who learn, and those who, learning and understanding, stand accordingly, shine gloriously for long aeons.
Explanatory paraphrase: May those who learn [this Upadēśa Undiyār], and those who, learning and understanding [it], stand [remain or abide] accordingly [as beginningless, infinite and indivisible sat-cit-ānanda], shine gloriously for long aeons. (Tiruvundiyār 1.137)
In both these texts Bhagavan expressed the fundamental principles of his teachings in the style of sūtras or aphorisms, so though each verse is relatively short, it is packed with deep meaning and is rich in implications, and hence they require explanation in order for us to understand them more deeply and completely. However no explanation of them should be considered complete, because no matter how much we may study and reflect on their meaning, we can always find fresh depth of meaning and wealth of implications in them, and consequently our understanding of them can become more clear, as I often find while answering questions or replying to comments on this blog, because when I cite and apply these verses in different contexts my understanding of them is deepened and enriched.
Therefore in this article, instead of attempting to give any new explanations of these verses, after each one I will give a list of links in reverse chronological order to places in this blog where I have already cited, explained and discussed it. Later I intend to post a copy of this translation on my website, but until I do so I will try to keep the list of links for each verse up to date by adding new links as and when I write any further explanations of any of these verses.
-
Introduction
- Upōdghātam verse 1
- Upōdghātam verse 2
- Upōdghātam verse 3
- Upōdghātam verse 4
- Upōdghātam verse 5
- Upōdghātam verse 6
- Verse 1: karma is insentient, so it gives fruit only as ordained by God
- Verse 2: karma is caused by vāsanās, so it does not give liberation
- Verse 3: action done for God purifies the mind and shows the way to liberation
- Verse 4: actions of body, speech and mind are progressively more purifying
- Verse 5: worshipping anything considering it to be God is good worship of God
- Verse 6: doing japa mentally is more purifying than otherwise
- Verse 7: meditating uninterruptedly is more purifying than otherwise
- Verse 8: meditation on nothing other than oneself is most purifying of all
- Verse 9: being in one’s real state of being by self-attentiveness is supreme devotion
- Verse 10: being in one’s source is karma, bhakti, yōga and jñāna
- Verse 11: when breath is restrained mind will subside
- Verse 12: the root of mind and breath is one
- Verse 13: dissolution of mind is of two kinds, laya and nāśa
- Verse 14: only by self-investigation will the mind die
- Verse 15: when the mind is dead, there is no action but only one’s real nature
- Verse 16: knowing nothing but awareness is real awareness
- Verse 17: when one keenly investigates it, there is no mind
- Verse 18: mind is essentially just the ego, the root of all other thoughts
- Verse 19: when one investigates from what the ego rises, it will die
- Verse 20: where the ego dies, the infinite whole will shine forth as ‘I am I’
- Verse 21: that infinite whole is always the true import of the word ‘I’
- Verse 22: the five sheaths are jaḍa and asat, so they are not ‘I’
- Verse 23: what exists is awareness, which is what we are
- Verse 24: God and soul are just one substance, but only their adjuncts differ
- Verse 25: knowing oneself without adjuncts is knowing God, because he is oneself
- Verse 26: being oneself alone is knowing oneself, because oneself is not two
- Verse 27: there is nothing to know, so real awareness is devoid of knowledge and ignorance
- Verse 28: one’s real nature is beginningless, infinite and indivisible sat-cit-ānanda
- Verse 29: abiding as supreme bliss devoid of bondage or liberation is serving God
- Verse 30: knowing and being what remains when the ego has ceased is tapas Vāṙttu: Concluding Verses of Praise (composed by Sri Muruganar)
Pāyiram: Prefatory Verse (composed by Sri Muruganar)
Upōdghātam: Introductory Verses (composed by Sri Muruganar)
Like Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu and some of the other important Tamil works of Bhagavan Sri Ramana, Upadēśa Undiyār was composed at the request of Muruganar. In order to understand correctly what Bhagavan teaches us in this text, it is necessary for us to know the context in which he composed it.
Muruganar, who was not only Bhagavan’s foremost disciple but also a great Tamil scholar and poet, first came to him in September 1923, and before coming he composed a song called Dēśika Padigam, which he offered to him on his arrival. Soon after that he composed another song entitled Tiruvembāvai, and on seeing the poetic beauty of these verses and the lofty ideas contained in them, Bhagavan remarked, ‘This is in the style of Manikkavacakar. Can you sing like Manikkavacakar?’. Muruganar was taken aback on hearing these words, and exclaimed, ‘Where is my ignorant mind, which is as blind as an owl in daylight, and which is darker than the darkness of night? And where is the self-experience (ātma-anubhuti) of Manikkavacakar, in whom the darkness of delusion had vanished and in whom true knowledge (mey-jñāna) had surged forth? To compare my base mind with his exalted experience is like comparing a fire-fly with the bright stars’. When Muruganar thus expressed his own deeply felt unworthiness, by his glance of grace Bhagavan shone forth in his heart, thereby making his mind blossom, enabling him to compose the great work Śrī Ramaṇa Sannidhi Muṟai, which in later years Bhagavan himself declared to be equal to Manikkavacakar’s Tiruvācakam.
Śrī Ramaṇa Sannidhi Muṟai is a collection of more than 120 songs composed by Muruganar in praise of Bhagavan, and many of them are sung in the same style and metres as the songs of Tiruvācakam. Among the songs in Tiruvācakam, there is one song of 20 verses called Tiruvundiyār, in which Manikkavacakar sings about some of the līlās or divine games played by Lord Siva. Therefore in 1927 when Muruganar began to compose a song called Tiruvundiyār in praise of Bhagavan, he decided to follow a similar theme, and thus he started to sing about various līlās played by several Gods, taking all those Gods to be none other than Bhagavan Ramana himself.
Once some devotees asked Sadhu Om, ‘Kavyakantha Ganapati Sastri claimed that Bhagavan is an incarnation or avatāra of Subrahmanya. Other devotees say that he is an incarnation of Siva. What was Muruganar’s opinion? According to him, of which God was Bhagavan an incarnation?’, to which he replied with a smile, ‘According to Muruganar, it is the other way around. His conviction was that all Gods are incarnations or manifestations of Bhagavan’. This conviction of Muruganar’s is beautifully expressed by him in his song Tiruvundiyār.
Having attained self-knowledge by the grace of Bhagavan, Muruganar knew from his own direct experience that Bhagavan is the one unlimited supreme reality, and that all Gods and divine incarnations are truly manifestations of that same supreme reality. Although the supreme reality can manifest itself in any number of divine names and forms, the highest of all those manifestations is the name and form of the sadguru. Therefore being an exemplary disciple, Muruganar was drawn in devotion only to the name and form of his sadguru, Bhagavan Ramana, as he expresses beautifully in Śrī Ramaṇa Jñāna Bōdham, volume 3, verse 1023:
அறியாதே னல்ல னநேகர்போற் றோன்றுHence, even when he had occasion to sing about the līlās of some of the different names and forms in which the supreme reality had manifested itself, he was able to sing about those names and forms only as various manifestations of his Lord and sadguru, Bhagavan Ramana.
மிறைவ ரெலாருமொன் றென்றே — அறிந்து
மவரனைவ ருள்ளு மவாவியென் சிந்தை
சிவரமணன் பாலே செலும்.
aṟiyādē ṉalla ṉanēkarpōṯ ṟōṉḏṟu
miṟaiva relārumoṉ ḏṟeṉḏṟē — aṟindu
mavaraṉaiva ruḷḷu mavāviyeṉ cintai
śivaramaṇaṉ bālē selum.
பதச்சேதம்: அறியாதேன் அல்லன். அநேகர் போல் தோன்றும் இறைவர் எலாரும் ஒன்று என்றே அறிந்தும், அவர் அனைவர் உள்ளும் அவாவி என் சிந்தை சிவரமணன் பாலே செலும்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): aṟiyādēṉ allaṉ. anēkar pōl tōṉḏṟum iṟaivar elārum oṉḏṟu eṉḏṟē aṟindum, avar aṉaivar uḷḷum avāvi eṉ cintai śiva-ramaṇaṉ pālē selum.
English translation: It is not that I do not know. Though I know that all Gods, who appear as if many, are one, among all of them my mind flows lovingly only towards Siva-Ramana.
Thus in Tiruvundiyār Muruganar sings about the līlās of Vinayaka, Subrahmanya, Vishnu and his various incarnations such as Rama and Krishna, Siva, Buddha and Jesus, taking all these Gods to be manifestations of Bhagavan Ramana. Tiruvundiyār is divided into two parts, the first part consisting of 137 verses (Sannidhi Murai, vv. 1277-1413) about the līlās of various Gods narrated in the Hindu Purāṇas, and the second part consisting of 7 verses (Sannidhi Murai, vv. 1414-1420) about Buddha upholding the dharma of compassion (vv. 1-5) and Jesus Christ suffering crucifixion to expiate the sins of others (vv. 6-7).
In the first part of Tiruvundiyār Muruganar sings about Vinayaka breaking the axle of his father’s chariot (1-2), about Subrahmanya subduing the ego of Brahma (3), giving upadēśa to Siva (4-9) and playing with Vishnu (10-11), about Vishnu killing Hiranaya (12) and bestowing grace upon Mahabali (13-16), about Rama being merciful to Ravana (17), about Krishna teaching Arjuna his duty (18), and about Siva drinking poison (19), subduing Kali by his dance (20-21), plucking off one of the heads of Brahma (22), killing Andhakasura (23), burning the Tripurasuras with a mere laugh (24-34), punishing Daksha (35-36), destroying Jalandharasura (37), flaying the elephant (38), burning Kama (39-51), kicking Yama (52-61), showing compassion to Ravana (62-66), blessing Brahma and Vishnu when they worshipped him in the form of Annamalai, having failed to reach his head and feet (67-69), and finally enlightening the ascetics in the Daruka Forest (70-137). While singing about these līlās, Muruganar sings of them as the līlās of Bhagavan Ramana, who had manifested as all these various Gods.
It was in the context of the last līlā related in the first part of Tiruvundiyār that the work Upadēśa Undiyār came into existence. Having sung in verses 70 to 102 how Bhagavan in the form of Siva had appeared in the Daruka Forest to subdue the pride of the ascetics (tapasvis) and bring them to the path of liberation, Muruganar came to the point where Siva was to give them his spiritual teachings (upadēśa). Thinking that it would not be appropriate for him to decide what teachings Siva would have given in order to uplift the ascetics from their then level of maturity, in which they were blinded by their attachment to the path of ritualistic action (karma), and to elevate their minds gradually till they would be fit to come to the direct path to liberation, Muruganar prayed to Bhagavan to reveal the essence of the teachings which he had himself given to the ascetics in those ancient days, when he had manifested in their midst in the form of Siva. Accordingly in verses 103 to 132 of the first part of Tiruvundiyār (verses 1379 to 1408 of Sannidhi Murai) Bhagavan composed the essence of the upadēśa that Siva gave to the ascetics in the Daruka Forest.
While composing these thirty verses, which he did in one sitting, Bhagavan discussed in detail with Muruganar all the ideas which were to be presented one after another in a carefully arranged and balanced sequence, and in the course of these discussions the original drafts of verses 16, 28 and 30 were composed by Muruganar and were then revised by Bhagavan. Such was the close co-operation with which they worked together.
These thirty verses form the main text (nūl) of Upadēśa Undiyār, and Bhagavan subsequently translated them into Telugu, Sanskrit and Malayalam under the title Upadēśa Saram (The Essence of Teachings). In Tamil the entire work consists of a prefatory verse (pāyiram) composed by Muruganar, six introductory verses (upōdghātam) that Bhagavan selected from Muruganar’s Tiruvundiyār in order to present the teachings in their proper context, the main text (nūl) of thirty verses, and five concluding verses of praise (vāṙttu), which are the last five verses of the first part of Tiruvundiyār.
In each of the verses of the upōdghātam, nūl and vāṙttu the final word of the second and third lines is உந்தீபற (undīpaṟa), which is a poetic elongation of the verb உந்திபற (undipaṟa), in which பற (paṟa) is the root and an imperative form of a verb that means to fly, hover, flutter or float in the air, and உந்தி (undi) seems to have been the name of an ancient game played by women, which was perhaps an early non-competitive form of what later evolved into the modern competitive sports of ball badminton and badminton, and the aim of which may have been for the group of players to keep the ball or shuttlecock flying about in the air without touching the ground for as long as possible. உந்தி (undi) may therefore have also meant the ball or shuttlecock used in such a game, in which case உந்தீ (undī) would be a vocative (or eighth case) form of it, so ‘உந்தீ பற’ (undī paṟa) may have been an exclamation that meant ‘ball, fly’ or ‘shuttlecock, fly’. The Tiruvundiyār song composed by Manikkavacakar was perhaps intended to be sung while playing this game, and hence he adopted a metre in which this word occurs at the end of the second and third lines of each verse. When these verses are translated into English, உந்தீபற (undīpaṟa) is obviously to be treated as a poetic expletive, but it is worth noting that it does lend a very joyful and playful spirit to the profound spiritual teachings that Bhagavan gives us in Upadēśa Undiyār.
In order to understand what Bhagavan is teaching us in Upadēśa Undiyār, particularly in the first fifteen verses, we need to read and carefully consider the upōdghātam and the summary of the story contained in it. Though in the Purāṇas the ascetics who were living in the Daruka Forest are described as ‘rishis’ (ṛṣis) who were performing tapas or austerities, what actually was their state of mind, what kind of tapas were they performing, and what was it that they were seeking to achieve through their tapas?
These so-called rishis were following the path of kāmya karma (ritualistic actions performed for the fulfilment of temporal desires), which is the path prescribed by the pūrva mīmāṁsā, a system of philosophy focused on the interpretation and practice of the Karma Kāṇḍa, the preliminary (and by far the largest) portion of the Vedas, which is concerned with performance of sacrifices and other ritualistic actions. Not knowing that the true goal of life is liberation, which is eradication of ego, they exhibited their ignorance by their actions such as the performance of various kinds of yāgas and yajñas (sacrificial rites), whereby they sought to attain powers, siddhis and other sources of enjoyment both in this world and the next. Being adept in the performance of such sacrificial rites and in the use of other techniques such as mantras, yantras and tantras, they had become intoxicated with conceit. Their pride in the power and efficacy of their karmas (ritualistic actions) was so great that they had even come to believe that there is no God except karma. ‘Karma alone is of foremost importance. The efforts we make in performing karmas have the power to yield their own fruit; they must yield their fruit; even God cannot prevent them from yielding fruit. So there is no need for us to be concerned about any God other than our own karmas’ – such was their arrogant attitude.
Thus, though in the Purāṇas they are politely referred to as ‘rishis’, their state of mind reveals that they were in fact only students in the first standard of the school of bhakti described in chapter two of the supplement to The Path of Sri Ramana. Can the karmas that they were performing for the fulfilment of their own selfish desires be called real tapas? As Bhagavan taught us in verse 30 of Upadēśa Undiyār, real tapas is nothing but complete cessation of ego, the false awareness ‘I am this body’, which is what gives rise to the sense of doership, ‘I am doing karma’.
Since the ascetics had thus strayed so far from the path that leads to the real goal of egolessness, it was necessary for Lord Siva, the ocean of compassion, to make them understand the error of their ways and guide them back to the proper path. Therefore he manifested in the form of a mendicant and made them understand that even their most powerful karmas were rendered powerless in front of him. Thus their pride was subdued and they prayed to him for salvation.
Knowing how gross and unrefined the minds of the ascetics had become due to their longstanding attachment to karma, Siva knew that it would not be possible to bring them immediately to the subtle path of self-investigation (ātma-vicāra), which alone is the direct path to liberation. Therefore he had to guide them towards the path of self-investigation in a gradual manner. That is why in the first fifteen verses of Upadēśa Undiyār it was necessary for Bhagavan to summarise the paths of niṣkāmya karma, bhakti and yōga, which Siva first had to teach to the ascetics in order to elevate their minds gradually to the level of maturity in which they could understand that liberation can ultimately be attained only by means of self-investigation. Only after summarising those paths and explaining how they are each intended to lead eventually to the path of self-investigation, which is the true path of jñāna, could he begin to explain this path in more detail from verse 16 onwards.
Either because they do not know the context in which he composed this work, or because they have not carefully considered the connection between the context and what he taught in it, many people wrongly assume that Upadēśa Undiyār or Upadēśa Sāram is the essence of Bhagavan Ramana’s own teachings. However, if we consider the context and what he wrote in the first fifteen verses, it should be clear that the intention with which he composed this work was to summarise not his own teachings but the teachings that Siva gave in ancient days to the ascetics in the Daruka Forest to suit their level of spiritual maturity.
As Bhagavan often used to say, whatever spiritual teachings are given must be suited to the grasping power and maturity of whomever they are given to, so many different levels of teachings and practices are necessary to suit the needs of people of many different levels of spiritual development (see for example section 107 of Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi (1978 edition, page 103; 2006 edition, page 105), where it is recorded that he said that the instructions to be given ‘differ according to the temperaments of the individuals and according to the spiritual ripeness of their minds’). Since the ascetics to whom Siva gave his teachings were to be elevated by him from a very low level of spiritual maturity, it was necessary for him to begin by giving them teachings that they would be willing to accept and therefore able to grasp and put into practice, and then he had to lead them gradually from the grosser forms of spiritual practice such as pūjā, japa, dhyāna and prāṇāyāma towards the most refined, namely self-investigation, which is the simple practice of self-attentiveness.
Therefore we should not assume that all the sādhanas or spiritual practices that Bhagavan discusses in Upadēśa Undiyār are his own direct teachings. Though it is true that during his lifetime he had to give instructions concerning almost every kind of spiritual practice in order to guide those who were already following such practices and were not yet willing to come to the direct path of self-investigation, what actually was the core and essence of his teachings? Can it be said that pūjā, japa, dhyāna and prāṇāyāma are core elements of his teachings? Was it to teach such practices that he appeared on earth in our present age?
Though he acknowledged the efficacy of such practices as indirect means that, if practiced with devotion and without desire for achieving any selfish aim, would gradually purify the mind and thereby sooner or later lead one to the direct path of self-investigation (as indicated by him in verse 3 of Upadēśa Undiyār), the main reason he appeared in human form in modern times was not merely to give his approval to such indirect practices, which have already been expounded in detail in ancient texts. The principal purpose of his life was to teach us why and how to practise the simple and direct path of self-investigation, which is the only means by which we can be aware of ourself as we actually are and thereby eradicate ego. That is why his teachings were focussed on the practice of self-investigation, which bypasses the need for any other kind of spiritual practice.
In 1928, one year after he had composed Upadēśa Undiyār, Muruganar prayed to him, ‘So that we may be saved, reveal to us the nature of reality and the means by which to attain it’ (Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu pāyiram: introductory verse), in response to which Bhagavan composed Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, in which the only practice he expounded was self-investigation, and he made no more than a few indirect references to other practices. Therefore, the real essence of his teachings is only the path of self-investigation, which he has expounded in both Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu and the last fifteen verses of Upadēśa Undiyār.
Though he briefly discussed pūjā, japa, dhyāna and prāṇāyāma in the first fifteen verses of Upadēśa Undiyār, if we carefully consider what he actually says in these verses, we will see that he is explaining firstly how each of these practices can ultimately lead one to the path of self-investigation, which alone is the direct means to eradicate ego, and secondly that self-investigation is therefore the culmination of all other varieties of spiritual practice, namely niṣkāmya karma, bhakti, yōga, and jñāna, as he says in verse 10.
In the first two verses he begins by condemning kāmya karmas (actions performed for the fulfilment of temporal desires), declaring that they will not lead to liberation but will only immerse the doer deeper and deeper into the ocean of karma (action). In verse 3 he teaches that action can be conducive to the attainment of liberation only if it is done for the love of God and without any desire for its fruit, because it will then purify the mind and thereby enable one to recognise that the means to liberation is only self-investigation. In verses 4 to 7 he discusses the various kinds of desireless action (niṣkāmya karma), namely pūjā (worship or adoration of God), japa (repetition of a mantra or name of God) and dhyāna (meditation upon a name or form of God), which are done respectively by body, speech and mind, and each succeeding one of which is more efficacious in purifying the mind than the preceding one.
Then in verse 8 he says that rather than meditation upon God as other than oneself, it is better to meditate upon him as not other than oneself, and thereby he reveals how the paths of niṣkāmya pūjā, japa and dhyāna must eventually lead to the path of self-investigation, which is what he described as ananya-bhāva (meditation on what is not other), and which he said is ‘aṉaittiṉum uttamam’, ‘the best among all’, thereby implying that among all the practices of bhakti and also all other forms of spiritual practice it is the best, in the sense that it is the most effective means to purify the mind. He then says in verse 9 that to abide in one’s own true state of being, which is attained by the strength of such ananya-bhāva (self-attentiveness) and which transcends meditation (in the sense of mental activity, as opposed to self-attentiveness, which is a cessation of all such activity), is the truth of para-bhakti (supreme devotion). Thus, in verses 3 to 9 Bhagavan reveals how the paths of desireless action (niṣkāmya karma) and devotion (bhakti) lead to and culminate in the path of self-investigation, which in turn establishes one in the state of self-abidance, which is the true state of liberation. He then concludes this series of verses by saying in verse 10 that subsiding and being in one’s real nature, which is the source from which one had risen as a doer of action, is not only the essence of karma yōga and bhakti yōga, as described in the preceding verses, but is also the essence of rāja yōga and jñāna yōga, as described in the subsequent verses.
In verses 11 to 15 Bhagavan discusses the path of raja yōga. In verses 11 and 12 he explains that prāṇāyāma (breath-control) is an effective means to make the mind subside, but in verse 13 he warns that complete subsidence or dissolution of mind is of two kinds, namely laya and nāśa, the former being temporary and the latter being permanent. By prāṇāyāma only a temporary dissolution of the mind can be achieved, so in verse 14 he teaches us that the mind, which will subside only temporarily when the breath is restrained, should be directed on the one path of self-investigation, for then only will it attain manōnāśa, the state of destruction or permanent dissolution. Thus he reveals that the path of raja yōga must also lead one to the path of self-investigation if it is to enable one to achieve the final goal of liberation. He then concludes this second series of verses by saying in verse 15 that the great yōgi whose mind has thus been destroyed and who thereby abides as what alone is actually real has no more actions to do, because he has attained his natural state, thereby implying that our natural state is not one of doing anything but only one of just being, and that this is the goal we should be seeking.
Thus, though in verses 3 to 15 Bhagavan acknowledges the efficacy of niṣkāmya pūjā, japa, dhyāna and prāṇāyāma, he clearly implies that none of these sādhanas can be an adequate substitute for the direct path of self-investigation, but explains how each of them must finally lead one to self-investigation in order to enable one to attain the final goal of self-knowledge or liberation, which is manōnāśa or complete and permanent eradication of ego.
Having thus briefly summarized the paths of karma yōga, bhakti yōga and raja yōga in the first fifteen verses, showing how they must each sooner lead one to the practice of self-investigation, Bhagavan devotes the last fifteen verses to explaining the practice and goal of jñāna yōga, which he explains to be nothing other than the direct path of self-investigation, the simple practice of attending to and knowing the true nature of ‘I’.
உபதேச வுந்தியார் (Upadēśa-v-Undiyār): Teachings in an Undiyār Song of Thirty Verses
பாயிரம் (pāyiram): Prefatory Verse (composed by Sri Muruganar)
கன்மமய றீர்ந்துகதி காண நெறிமுறையின்
மன்மமுல குய்ய வழங்குகெனச் — சொன்முருகற்
கெந்தைரம ணன்றொகுத் தீந்தா னுபதேச
வுந்தியார் ஞானவிளக் கோர்.
kaṉmamaya ṯīrndugati kāṇa neṟimuṟaiyiṉ
maṉmamula huyya vaṙaṅguheṉac — coṉmurugaṟ
kendairama ṇaṉḏṟohut tīndā ṉupadēśa
vundiyār ñāṉaviḷak kōr.
பதச்சேதம்: ‘கன்ம மயல் தீர்ந்து கதி காண நெறி முறையின் மன்மம் உலகு உய்ய வழங்குக’ என சொல் முருகற்கு எந்தை ரமணன் தொகுத்து ஈந்தான் உபதேச வுந்தியார் ஞான விளக்கு ஓர்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): ‘kaṉma-mayal tīrndu gati kāṇa neṟi muṟaiyiṉ maṉmam ulahu uyya vaṙaṅguha’ eṉa sol murugaṟku endai ramaṇaṉ tohuttu īndāṉ upadēśa-v-undiyār ñāṉa viḷakku ōr.
அன்வயம்: ‘உலகு கன்ம மயல் தீர்ந்து உய்ய, கதி காண நெறி முறையின் மன்மம் வழங்குக’ என சொல் முருகற்கு எந்தை ரமணன் தொகுத்து ஈந்தான் ஞான விளக்கு உபதேச வுந்தியார் ஓர்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): ‘ulahu kaṉma-mayal tīrndu uyya, gati kāṇa neṟi muṟaiyiṉ maṉmam vaṙaṅguha’ eṉa sol murugaṟku endai ramaṇaṉ tohuttu īndāṉ ñāṉa viḷakku upadēśa-v-undiyār ōr.
English translation: Know that Upadēśa Undiyār is a light of jñāna that our father Ramana composed and gave to Muruganar, who said, ‘For the world to be saved, giving up the delusion of karma, tell the secret of the nature of the path to experience liberation’.
Explanatory paraphrase: Know that Upadēśa Undiyār is a light of jñāna [true knowledge or pure awareness] that our father Ramana composed and gave to Muruganar, who said, ‘For [the people of] the world to give up the delusion of karma [action] and be saved [from self-ignorance], tell [us] the secret of the muṟai [nature or orderly process] of the path [way or means] to experience liberation’.
உபோற்காதம் (upōdghātam): Introductory Verses (composed by Sri Muruganar)
Upōdghātam verse 1:
தாரு வனத்திற் றவஞ்செய் திருந்தவர்
பூருவ கன்மத்தா லுந்தீபற
போக்கறை போயின ருந்தீபற.
dāru vaṉattiṯ ṟavañcey dirundavar
pūruva kaṉmattā lundīpaṟa
pōkkaṟai pōyiṉa rundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: தாரு வனத்தில் தவம் செய்து இருந்தவர் பூருவ கன்மத்தால் போக்கறை போயினர்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): dāru vaṉattil tavam seydu irundavar pūruva kaṉmattāl pōkkaṟai pōyiṉar.
English translation: Those who were doing austerities in the Daruka forest were going to ruin by pūrva karma.
Explanatory paraphrase: Those who were doing tavam [austerities or tapas] in the Daruka forest were going to ruin by [following] pūrva karma [the path of ritualistic action as interpreted and prescribed by pūrva mīmāṁsā]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.70)
Note: The term pūrva-karma here means the path of kāmya-karmas, actions done for the fulfilment of selfish desires, which is the path prescribed by pūrva mīmāṁsā, a system of philosophy that interprets the Vēdas in a particular way, emphasising the Karma Kāṇḍa, the preliminary portion of the Vēdas, which teaches the path of ritualistic action. Pūrva mīmāṁsā elevates action (karma) to a level of such paramount importance that, as explained in the next verse, it even goes so far as to deny that there is any God except karma. This doctrine that there is no God except karma is emphatically repudiated by Bhagavan in the first verse of Upadēśa Undiyār.Upōdghātam verse 2:
கன்மத்தை யன்றிக் கடவு ளிலையெனும்
வன்மத்த ராயின ருந்தீபற
வஞ்சச் செருக்கினா லுந்தீபற.
kaṉmattai yaṉḏṟik kaḍavu ḷilaiyeṉum
vaṉmatta rāyiṉa rundīpaṟa
vañjac cerukkiṉā lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: ‘கன்மத்தை அன்றி கடவுள் இலை’ எனும் வல் மத்தர் ஆயினர் வஞ்ச செருக்கினால்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): ‘kaṉmattai aṉḏṟi kaḍavuḷ ilai’ eṉum val mattar āyiṉar vañja serukkiṉāl.
அன்வயம்: வஞ்ச செருக்கினால் ‘கன்மத்தை அன்றி கடவுள் இலை’ எனும் வல் மத்தர் ஆயினர்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): vañja serukkiṉāl ‘kaṉmattai aṉḏṟi kaḍavuḷ ilai’ eṉum val mattar āyiṉar.
English translation: Because of delusive conceit they became intoxicated with intense pride that there is no God except karma.
Explanatory paraphrase: Because of [their] delusive conceit [or infatuation] they became [so] intoxicated [or mad] with intense pride [that they fell prey to the arrogant belief] that there is no God except karma. (Tiruvundiyār 1.71)
Note: These first two verses of the upōdghātam are verses 70 and 71 of the first part of Tiruvundiyār, and the following is a free rendering of the story narrated by Muruganar in verses 72 to 98:Upōdghātam verse 3:
Even the wives who conducted their lives with those great ascetics had become deluded, proudly believing that in all the seven worlds there were none as virtuous as themselves in venerating their husbands. (72-3) The wonderful Venkatan [Sri Ramana], who is pure awareness shining like a crystal to which no blemish can cling, appeared singing melodiously with such beauty that would make men desire womanhood. (74-5) Plundering the souls of all who saw his beauty, he wandered about carrying a trident and a skull. (76)
Knowing the cruel enmity of the ascetics, Vishnu also appeared suddenly in their midst as a virtuous maiden with tender beauty. (77) Becoming infatuated with Mohini [that beautiful maiden], all the ahaṅkāra-yōgis [egotistical ascetics] were ashamed [or afraid] when their strength was thereby destroyed. (78)
That male form that wandered there excelling in lustre was not a real form but just an imaginary appearance. (79) [What appeared in that form is] what cannot be measured [or comprehended] by speech or mind; what does not go or come; the real substance, the whole. (80) As soon as they saw his manly self, those good ladies’ ornament [of modesty and chastity] departed entirely. (81) Desiring [his] youthful beauty and drinking it with their eyes, they were intoxicated and enchanted. (82) They forgot their virtue; they forgot their reputation; they forgot themselves; they followed after [him]. (83)
Coming to know about the downfall of their wives, the great ascetic brahmins who knew such things became agitated, quaking [with pain, grief or anger]. (84) [Seeing] that their agreeable life helpmates had become so contemptible, they trembled [with rage]. (85) What a wonder that those who so clearly saw the defects [faults or errors] that took birth in the case of their wives could not see their own defects! (86) If one sees one’s own defects like [one sees] the defects of others, then will even the slightest evil attach to one’s soul? [an adaptation of verse 190 of Tirukkuṟaḷ] (87)
Saying ‘What defilement of the chastity of [our] wives!’, to kill him who is the first [God, the primal being] they thought of a plan. (88) With malicious anger those who had vast learning raised a raging sinful black magic sacrificial fire. (89) To devour the life of Purāri [Tripurāri, Lord Siva, the destroyer of the three demon cities, who did so with a mere laugh or smile], those who did not have subtle awareness [or understanding] discharged a pouncing tiger [from the sacrificial fire]. (90) Flaying it with his fingernail, he aptly wore the skin of that tiger [around his waist]. The ascetics stood perplexed [terrified or abashed]. (91)
To destroy him they unleashed furious serpents, but he transformed them into fine ornaments [to wear] on his poison-adorned throat. (92) After that parātpara Venkatan [Sri Ramana, the highest of the high] seized in his hands the deer, axe, fire and drum that they conjured up and set upon him. (93) Laughing in a terrifying manner and roaring like thunder, they discharged a whirling and exceedingly white skull on the handsome youth. (94) To the wonder of many, he aptly wore that white skull as an ornament for his head. (95) Hordes of demons [conjured up by them] coming close to him fell unconscious at his feet. He took these as his army. (96) To kill the primal one, they conjured up and set upon him a heinous demon called Muyalagan, but he crushed it under his feet. (97) When all their efforts proved ineffectual, they became weary and understood him to be God. (98)
The final four verses of the upōdghātam are verses 99 to 102 of the first part of Tiruvundiyār, after which verses 103 to 132 are the the main text (nūl) of Upadēśa Undiyār, and verses 133 to 137 are the concluding verses of praise (vāṙttu).
கன்ம பலந்தருங் கர்த்தற் பழித்துச்செய்
கன்ம பலங்கண்டா ருந்தீபற
கர்வ மகன்றன ருந்தீபற.
kaṉma phalandaruṅ karttaṟ paṙittuccey
kaṉma phalaṅkaṇḍā rundīpaṟa
garva mahaṉḏṟaṉa rundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: கன்ம பலம் தரும் கர்த்தன் பழித்து செய் கன்ம பலம் கண்டார்; கர்வம் அகன்றனர்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): kaṉma-phalam tarum karttaṉ paṙittu sey kaṉma-phalam kaṇḍār; garvam ahaṉḏṟaṉar.
English translation: They saw the fruit of actions done disparaging God, who gives the fruit of actions. They left arrogance.
Explanatory paraphrase: They saw the fruit of actions done disparaging [spurning or disregarding] God [the kartā or ordainer], who gives karma-phala [the fruit of actions], [and hence] they left [gave up or lost] garva [their pride or arrogance]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.99)
Upōdghātam verse 4:
காத்தரு ளென்று கரையக் கருணைக்கண்
சேர்த்தருள் செய்தன னுந்தீபற
சிவனுப தேசமி துந்தீபற.
kāttaru ḷeṉḏṟu karaiyak karuṇaikkaṇ
sērttaruḷ seydaṉa ṉundīpaṟa
śivaṉupa dēśami dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: காத்து அருள் என்று கரைய, கருணை கண் சேர்த்து அருள் செய்தனன் சிவன் உபதேசம் இது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): kāttu aruḷ eṉḏṟu karaiya, karuṇai kaṇ sērttu aruḷ-seydaṉaṉ śivaṉ upadēśam idu.
அன்வயம்: காத்து அருள் என்று கரைய, கருணை கண் சேர்த்து சிவன் உபதேசம் இது அருள் செய்தனன்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): kāttu aruḷ eṉḏṟu karaiya, karuṇai kaṇ sērttu śivaṉ upadēśam idu aruḷ-seydaṉaṉ.
English translation: When they wept, ‘Graciously protect’, attaching the eye of grace, Śiva graciously gave this upadēśa.
Explanatory paraphrase: When they wept [repentantly], ‘Graciously protect [or save us]’, fixing [his] eye of grace [upon them], Śiva graciously gave this upadēśa [spiritual teaching]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.100)
Upōdghātam verse 5:
உட்கொண் டொழுக வுபதேச சாரத்தை
யுட்கொண் டெழுஞ்சுக முந்தீபற
வுட்டுன் பொழிந்திடு முந்தீபற.
uṭkoṇ ḍoṙuha vupadēśa sārattai
yuṭkoṇ ḍeṙuñsukha mundīpaṟa
vuṭṭuṉ boṙindiḍu mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உள் கொண்டு ஒழுக உபதேச சாரத்தை, உள் கொண்டு எழும் சுகம்; உள் துன்பு ஒழிந்திடும்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uḷ koṇḍu oṙuha upadēśa sārattai, uḷ koṇḍu eṙum sukham; uḷ tuṉbu oṙindiḍum.
அன்வயம்: உபதேச சாரத்தை உள் கொண்டு ஒழுக, சுகம் உள் கொண்டு எழும்; உள் துன்பு ஒழிந்திடும்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): upadēśa sārattai uḷ koṇḍu oṙuha, sukham uḷ koṇḍu eṙum; uḷ tuṉbu oṙindiḍum.
English translation: When one imbibes and follows upadēśa sāram, happiness will rise from within; miseries within will cease.
Explanatory paraphrase: When one imbibes and follows [this] upadēśa sāram [the essence or summary of the spiritual teachings given by Lord Siva], happiness will rise from within [and thereby] miseries within will cease [die or be destroyed]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.101)
Upōdghātam verse 6:
சார வுபதேச சாரமுட் சாரவே
சேரக் களிசேர வுந்தீபற
தீரத் துயர்தீர வுந்தீபற.
sāra vupadēśa sāramuṭ cāravē
sērak kaḷisēra vundīpaṟa
tīrat tuyartīra vundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: சார உபதேச சாரம் உள் சாரவே. சேர களி சேர. தீர துயர் தீர.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): sāra upadēśa sāram uḷ sāravē. sēra kaḷi sēra. tīra tuyar tīra.
அன்வயம்: உபதேச சாரம் சார உள் சாரவே. களி சேர சேர. துயர் தீர தீர.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): upadēśa sāram sāra uḷ sāravē. kaḷi sēra sēra. tuyar tīra tīra.
English translation: May the essence of Upadēśa Sāram enter within. May joy accumulate, accumulate. May suffering cease, cease.
Explanatory paraphrase: May the sāra [essence, substance or import] of Upadēśa Sāram enter within [our heart]. May joy accumulate [or be achieved] abundantly. May suffering cease entirely. (Tiruvundiyār 1.102)
நூல் (nūl): Text
Verse 1:
கன்மம் பயன்றரல் கர்த்தன தாணையாற்
கன்மங் கடவுளோ வுந்தீபற
கன்மஞ் சடமதா லுந்தீபற.
kaṉmam payaṉḏṟaral karttaṉa dāṇaiyāṟ
kaṉmaṅ kaḍavuḷō vundīpaṟa
kaṉmañ jaḍamadā lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: கன்மம் பயன் தரல் கர்த்தனது ஆணையால். கன்மம் கடவுளோ? கன்மம் சடம் அதால்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): kaṉmam payaṉ taral karttaṉadu āṇaiyāl. kaṉmam kaḍavuḷ-ō? kaṉmam jaḍam adāl.
அன்வயம்: கன்மம் பயன் தரல் கர்த்தனது ஆணையால். கன்மம் சடம் அதால், கன்மம் கடவுளோ?
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): kaṉmam payaṉ taral karttaṉadu āṇaiyāl. kaṉmam jaḍam adāl, kaṉmam kaḍavuḷ-ō?
English translation: Action giving fruit is by the ordainment of God. Since action is non-aware, is action God?
Explanatory paraphrase: Karma [action] giving fruit is by the ordainment of God [the kartā or ordainer]. Since karma is jaḍa [devoid of awareness], can karma be God?
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 1: karma is insentient, so it gives fruit only as ordained by God
2019-08-05: Since karma is jaḍa (devoid of awareness), what selects which fruit of past āgāmyas are to form the prārabdha of each life is neither ego nor any of its karmas but only grace
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Why should we believe what Bhagavan taught us?
2014-09-05: The karma theory as taught by Sri Ramana (in this and the subsequent article, Why did Sri Ramana teach a karma theory?, the meaning and some of the implications of this verse are discussed and explained in depth)
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 2:
வினையின் விளைவு விளிவுற்று வித்தாய்
வினைக்கடல் வீழ்த்திடு முந்தீபற
வீடு தரலிலை யுந்தீபற.
viṉaiyiṉ viḷaivu viḷivuṯṟu vittāy
viṉaikkaḍal vīṙttiḍu mundīpaṟa
vīḍu taralilai yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: வினையின் விளைவு விளிவு உற்று வித்தாய் வினை கடல் வீழ்த்திடும். வீடு தரல் இலை.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): viṉaiyiṉ viḷaivu viḷivu uṯṟu vittāy viṉai-kaḍal vīṙttiḍum. vīḍu taral ilai.
English translation: The fruit of action perishing, as seed causes to fall in the ocean of action. It is not giving liberation.
Explanatory paraphrase: The fruit of [any] action will perish [when it is experienced as part of prārabdha], [but what remains] as seed [namely viṣaya-vāsanās (also known as karma-vāsanās): inclinations to seek happiness or satisfaction in experiencing viṣayas (objects or phenomena) by doing actions of mind, speech and body] causes [one] to fall in the ocean of action. [Therefore] it [action or karma] does not give liberation.
Explanations and discussions:
2023-11-08: All vāsanās can be destroyed only when their root, namely ego, is eradicated, because it is the nature of ego to have vāsanās, and until all viṣaya-vāsanās are destroyed we cannot be truly said to be without action (karma), because viṣaya-vāsanās are the seeds that cause us to fall in the great ocean of action
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 2: karma is caused by vāsanās, so it does not give liberation
2022-03-24: The cause for our falling in the vast ocean of action is our viṣaya-vāsanās
2021-12-05: What Bhagavan means in this verse is that it is the seeds (namely vāsanās) that cause us to fall in the ocean of action, and though each fruit perishes as soon as we experience it, the seeds persist and perpetuate themselves, but only to the extent to which we allow ourself to be swayed by them, so the fundamental error we make is allowing ourself to be swayed by our viṣaya-vāsanās, and hence the only solution is for us to cling firmly to being self-attentive and thereby not allow ourself to be swayed by any viṣaya-vāsanās
2021-12-04: All actions are caused by our allowing ourself to be swayed by our viṣaya-vāsanās, as Bhagavan implies here, because the seeds he refers to are viṣaya-vāsanās and consequent karma-vāsanās (inclinations to do actions in order to experience viṣayas), so these are what prompt us to do actions by mind, speech and body and thereby cause us to fall in the great ocean of perpetual action
2021-06-29: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 2: viṣaya-vāsanās are the seeds that cause us to fall in the great ocean of action (karma)
2020-12-18: Using our icchā-kriyā-svatantra (freedom of will and action) to do any āgāmya is a misuse of it, because doing so causes us to fall in the ocean of action
2020-08-24: Experiencing prārabdha is consuming the fruit of past āgāmya (actions done under the sway of our vāsanās), so when we consume that fruit it thereby ceases to exist, but the seeds that drive us to do āgāmya remain, so if we do not curb them by refraining from acting under their sway they will continue driving us to do āgāmya and will thereby immerse us in the vast ocean of action (karma)
2019-12-21: Destiny (prārabdha) is the fruit of our past karmas, so if destiny could determine whether or not we succeed in eradicating ego, that would mean that liberation is the fruit of karma, which cannot be the case
2018-09-01: Even after the fruit of one of the āgāmyas we have done in an earlier life has been experienced by us as part of our prārabdha in a later life, the seed or karma-vāsanā left by that āgāmya will remain until it is either replaced by other vāsanās or eradicated by self-investigation and self-surrender, so karma is self-perpetuating
2018-09-01: Since actions done with desire (kāmya karma), as actions generally tend to be to a greater or lesser extent, not only create fruit but also leave seeds (namely viṣaya-vāsanās and concomitant karma-vāsanās), they are self-perpetuating, so the more we desist from doing such actions the less we will be either creating new seeds or strengthening existing ones
2018-09-01: What binds us to the relentless wheel of karma or saṁsāra, which is like a great ocean in which we have been immersed and drowning since time immemorial, is not the fruits of our past actions, a small selection of which are what we experience as prārabdha in each life or dream, but is our will (the desire or liking that we have to continue doing such actions and experiencing whatever we seem to achieve thereby), which is like a large bag of seeds, each of which is waiting to sprout as thoughts, words or deeds (actions of mind, speech or body) whenever conditions are favourable
2018-09-01: Since liberation is our real nature, we cannot ‘attain’ it by doing anything but only by being what we actually are
2017-09-05: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 2: the cause of bondage is not fate but vāsanās, which belong only to the domain of free will
2017-06-20: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 2: being the fruit of our past actions, prārabdha cannot make our mind turn within and hence can never give us liberation
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: liberation is gained not by doing anything but only by just being
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 2: no action or karma can give liberation (this section also includes the Sanskrit text of verse 2 of Upadēśa Sāram together with my translation of it)
2014-03-20: Ātma-vicāra is the only means by which we can experience ourself as we really are
2013-12-30: Dhyāna-p-Paṭṭu: The Song on Meditation
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 3:
கருத்தனுக் காக்குநிட் காமிய கன்மங்
கருத்தைத் திருத்தியஃ துந்தீபற
கதிவழி காண்பிக்கு முந்தீபற.
karuttaṉuk kākkuniṭ kāmiya kaṉmaṅ
karuttait tiruttiyaḵ dundīpaṟa
gativaṙi kāṇbikku mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: கருத்தனுக்கு ஆக்கும் நிட்காமிய கன்மம் கருத்தை திருத்தி, அஃது கதி வழி காண்பிக்கும்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): karuttaṉukku ākkum niṭkāmiya kaṉmam karuttai tirutti, aḵdu gati vaṙi kāṇbikkum.
English translation: Desireless action done for God, purifying the mind, it will show the path to liberation.
Explanatory paraphrase: Niṣkāmya karma [action not motivated by desire] done [with love] for God purifies the mind and [thereby] it will show the path to liberation [that is, it will enable one to recognise what the correct path to liberation is].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-10: When we start on the path of bhakti, God seems to be something other than ourself, so we try to express our love for him through actions of body, speech and mind, namely pūjā (worship of him), stōtra (singing his praises) or japa (repetition of his name) and dhyāna (meditation on him) respectively, and by the love with which we do such actions our mind is gradually purified, meaning that it is cleansed of all its inclinations to seek happiness in anything other than love for God
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 3: action done for God purifies the mind, so it is an indirect means for liberation
2020-12-18: Instead of misusing our icchā-kriyā-svatantra (freedom of will and action) to do any action under the sway of our viṣaya-vāsanās, it is better to refrain from doing such actions, which are kāmya karmas, and to do only niṣkāmya karmas for the love of God alone
2020-12-18: Niṣkāmya karma is action done without the interference of our will, so it implies that we are free to act either according to our will or solely in accordance with God’s will (that is, in accordance with whatever prārabdha he has allotted us).
2020-08-24: When Bhagavan says here that niṣkāmya karma done for God purifies the mind, he clearly implies that we can refrain from acting under the sway of our vāsanās, and that to the extent that we refrain from acting under their sway we are thereby purifying our mind, which means that we are reducing the strength of whatever vāsanās tend to drive us to do kāmya karmas
2018-09-01: Though karma can never give liberation, if it is done because of love for God and therefore without desire for any fruit, it can help to purify the mind or will (cittam) by weakening or reducing its outgoing propensities (viṣaya-vāsanās and karma-vāsanās), and will thereby enable one to recognise that the means to liberation is not going outwards to do any actions by mind, speech or body but only turning back within to investigate whether one is actually this ego, the one who does action and experiences its fruit
2018-09-01: By whatever means it may be achieved, purity of mind (citta-śuddhi) gives one the clarity of vivēka (discernment, discrimination or judgement) to recognise that the only means by which ego can eradicate itself is to turn its attention back towards itself in order to see what its real nature actually is
2018-09-01: Just as we can choose to attend to ourself rather than to anything else, we can choose to think of a name or form of God, for example, rather than of any other thing, and if our motive for thinking of that name or form is love for God rather than for anything else that we may hope to gain thereby, that will purify our mind, strengthening our devotional inclinations (bhakti-vāsanās) and weakening our inclinations (vāsanās) to be concerned about other things
2018-09-01: Our mind can be purified by practices such as mūrti-dhyāna and mantra-japa only if we do them for the love of God and not for any other desired aim, because if love for God is our sole motivation, such practices will strengthen this love and correspondingly reduce the overall strength of our viṣaya-vāsanās
2018-09-01: The true purpose and only real benefit of all other spiritual practices is the purification of our cittam (even though the purification that can be achieved from them is only partial and not complete), because unless our cittam is purified to a certain extent by such practices we will not have the clarity, subtlety and acuity of vivēka that we need to recognise and accept that liberation is just the annihilation of ego and that the only means to attain it is therefore self-investigation (ātma-vicāra)
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: liberation is gained not by doing anything but only by just being
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 3: niṣkāmya karma done with love for God will show the way to liberation (this section also includes extracts from the Sanskrit and Malayalam texts of verse 3 of Upadēśa Sāram together with my translation of them)
2014-03-20: Ātma-vicāra is the only means by which we can experience ourself as we really are
2013-12-30: Dhyāna-p-Paṭṭu: The Song on Meditation
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 4:
திடமிது பூசை செபமுந் தியான
முடல்வாக் குளத்தொழி லுந்தீபற
வுயர்வாகு மொன்றிலொன் றுந்தீபற.
diḍamidu pūjai jepamun dhiyāṉa
muḍalvāk kuḷattoṙi lundīpaṟa
vuyarvāhu moṉḏṟiloṉ ḏṟundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: திடம் இது: பூசை செபமும் தியானம் உடல் வாக்கு உள தொழில். உயர்வு ஆகும் ஒன்றில் ஒன்று.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): diḍam idu: pūjai jepam-um dhiyāṉam uḍal vākku uḷa toṙil. uyarvu āhum oṉḏṟil oṉḏṟu.
அன்வயம்: பூசை செபமும் தியானம் உடல் வாக்கு உள தொழில். ஒன்றில் ஒன்று உயர்வு ஆகும். இது திடம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): pūjai jepam-um dhiyāṉam uḍal vākku uḷa toṙil. oṉḏṟil oṉḏṟu uyarvu āhum. idu diḍam.
English translation: This is certain: pūjā, japa and dhyāna are actions of body, speech and mind. One than one is superior.
Explanatory paraphrase: This is certain: pūjā [worship], japa [repetition of a name of God or a sacred phrase] and dhyāna [meditation] are [respectively] actions of body, speech and mind, [and hence in this order each subsequent] one is superior to [the previous] one [in the sense that it is a more effective means to purify the mind].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 4: actions of body, speech and mind are progressively more purifying
2018-09-01: Our will drives not only the actions we do by mind and speech but also those that we do by body, as Bhagavan implies in verse 4 of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 4: dhyāna is more effective than japa, which is more effective than pūjā
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 5:
எண்ணுரு யாவு மிறையுரு வாமென
வெண்ணி வழிபட லுந்தீபற
வீசனற் பூசனை யுந்தீபற.
eṇṇuru yāvu miṟaiyuru vāmeṉa
veṇṇi vaṙipaḍa lundīpaṟa
vīśaṉaṯ pūjaṉai yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: எண் உரு யாவும் இறை உரு ஆம் என எண்ணி வழிபடல் ஈசன் நல் பூசனை.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): eṇ uru yāvum iṟai uru ām eṉa eṇṇi vaṙipaḍal īśaṉ nal pūjaṉai.
English translation: Worshipping thinking that all eight forms are forms of God is good pūjā of God.
Explanatory paraphrase: Considering all the eight forms [the aṣṭa-mūrti, the eight forms or manifestations of Siva, namely the five elements (earth, water, fire, air and space), sun, moon and sentient beings (jīvas)] [or all thought-forms, namely all forms, which are just thoughts or mental phenomena] to be forms of God, worshipping [any of them] is good pūjā [worship] of God.
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 5: worshipping anything considering it to be God is worship of God
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 5: anything can be worshipped as God
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 6:
வழுத்தலில் வாக்குச்ச வாய்க்குட் செபத்தில்
விழுப்பமா மானத முந்தீபற
விளம்புந் தியானமி துந்தீபற.
vaṙuttalil vākkucca vāykkuṭ jepattil
viṙuppamā māṉata mundīpaṟa
viḷambun dhiyāṉami dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: வழுத்தலில், வாக்கு உச்ச, வாய்க்குள் செபத்தில் விழுப்பம் ஆம் மானதம். விளம்பும் தியானம் இது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): vaṙuttalil, vākku ucca, vāykkuḷ jepattil viṙuppam ām māṉatam. viḷambum dhiyāṉam idu.
அன்வயம்: வழுத்தலில், உச்ச வாக்கு, வாய்க்குள் செபத்தில் மானதம் விழுப்பம் ஆம். இது தியானம் விளம்பும்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): vaṙuttalil, ucca vākku, vāykkuḷ jepattil māṉatam viṙuppam ām. idu dhiyāṉam viḷambum.
English translation: Rather than praising, loud voice, rather than japa within the mouth, what is done by mind is beneficial. This is called dhyāna.
Explanatory paraphrase: Rather than praising [God by chanting hymns], [japa or repetition of his name is beneficial]; [rather than japa done in a] loud voice, [japa whispered faintly within the mouth is beneficial]; [and] rather than japa within the mouth, mānasa [that which is done by mind] is beneficial [in the sense that it is a more effective means to purify the mind]. This [mental repetition or mānasika japa] is called dhyāna [meditation].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 6: doing japa mentally is more purifying than otherwise
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 6: the relative efficacy of different modes of japa
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 7:
விட்டுக் கருதலி னாறுநெய் வீழ்ச்சிபோல்
விட்டிடா துன்னலே யுந்தீபற
விசேடமா முன்னவே யுந்தீபற.
viṭṭuk karudali ṉāṟuney vīṙccipōl
viṭṭiḍā duṉṉalē yundīpaṟa
viśēḍamā muṉṉavē yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: விட்டு கருதலின் ஆறு நெய் வீழ்ச்சி போல் விட்டிடாது உன்னலே விசேடம் ஆம் உன்னவே.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): viṭṭu karudaliṉ āṟu ney vīṙcci pōl viṭṭiḍādu uṉṉal-ē viśēḍam ām uṉṉa-v-ē.
அன்வயம்: விட்டு கருதலின் ஆறு நெய் வீழ்ச்சி போல் விட்டிடாது உன்னலே உன்னவே விசேடம் ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): viṭṭu karudaliṉ āṟu ney vīṙcci pōl viṭṭiḍādu uṉṉal-ē uṉṉa-v-ē viśēḍam ām.
English translation: Rather than meditating leavingly, certainly meditating unleavingly, like a river or the falling of ghee, is superior to meditate.
Explanatory paraphrase: Rather than meditating [on God] interruptedly [because of being frequently distracted by other thoughts as a result of insufficient love for him], certainly meditating uninterruptedly [without being distracted by any other thoughts because of the intensity of one’s love for him], like a river or the falling of ghee, is a better way to meditate [or is superior, when considered] [in the sense that it is a more effective means to purify the mind].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 7: meditating uninterruptedly is more purifying than otherwise
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 7: uninterrupted meditation is superior to interrupted meditation
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 8:
அனியபா வத்தி னவனக மாகு
மனனிய பாவமே யுந்தீபற
வனைத்தினு முத்தம முந்தீபற.
aṉiyabhā vatti ṉavaṉaha māhu
maṉaṉiya bhāvamē yundīpaṟa
vaṉaittiṉu muttama mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: அனிய பாவத்தின் அவன் அகம் ஆகும் அனனிய பாவமே அனைத்தினும் உத்தமம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): aṉiya-bhāvattiṉ avaṉ aham āhum aṉaṉiya-bhāvam-ē aṉaittiṉ-um uttamam.
English translation: Rather than anya-bhāva, ananya-bhāva, in which he is I, certainly is the best among all.
Explanatory paraphrase: Rather than anya-bhāva [meditation on anything other than oneself, particularly meditation on God as if he were other than oneself], ananya-bhāva [meditation on nothing other than oneself], in which he is [understood to be] I, certainly is the best among all [practices of bhakti, varieties of meditation and kinds of spiritual practice] [in the sense that it is the most effective of all means to purify the mind, and is also the only means to eradicate ego, the root of all impurities].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-10: Since the nature of ourself as ego is to rise, stand and flourish by attending to things other than ourself, we will subside and sink back into the depth of our heart only to the extent to which we attend to ourself alone, as Bhagavan makes clear in verse 25 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, so by meditating on ourself we are surrendering ourself to God, and hence in this verse he says that ananya-bhāva, meditating on nothing other than ourself, is ‘அனைத்தினும் உத்தமம்’ (aṉaittiṉum uttamam), ‘best among all’, implying that it is not only the best practice of bhakti and most effective means to purify the mind but also the only means by which we can eradicate ego and thereby surrender ourself completely to God
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 8: meditation on nothing other than oneself is most purifying of all
2022-03-10: What he describes in the first verse of Śrī Aruṇācala Akṣaramaṇamālai as ‘thinking that Arunachalam is actually I’ is what he describes in this verse as ‘ananya-bhāva [meditation on what is not other], in which he is I’, which implies mediating on nothing other than ‘I’ with the understanding that he (namely God or Arunachalam) is what shines as ‘I’
2022-03-10: Though he says in this verse, ‘Rather than anya-bhāva, ananya-bhāva, in which he is I, certainly is the best among all’, this is not intended to deny the value or efficacy of anya-bhāva, devotion to God as if he were other than oneself, because such devotion will purify the mind and thereby give it the clarity to understand that God is actually what always exists and shines in our heart as ‘I’
2020-12-18: Among all the beneficial uses of our icchā-kriyā-svatantra (freedom of will and action) that he describes in verses 4 to 8, the ‘best of all’ (aṉaittiṉ-um uttamam) is only ananya-bhāva, which means meditation on nothing other than ourself
2020-11-01: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 8 and 9: what Bhagavan described as ananya-bhāva (meditation on what is not other [than oneself]) is keen self-attentiveness, so ‘பாவ பலம்’ (bhāva balam), ‘the strength of meditation’, means keenness of self-attentiveness
2020-08-24: By saying that ananya-bhāva (meditation on what is not other than oneself), which is a synonym for ātma-vicāra, is ‘அனைத்தினும் உத்தமம்’ (aṉaittiṉum uttamam), ‘the best among all’, he implies that it is the most effective of all means to purify the mind
2019-11-26: Meditating on anything other than ourself (anya-bhāva) may be an indirect means to gradually purify our mind, particularly if it is done with heart-melting love for God, but it cannot by itself eradicate ego, so it must eventually lead us to the path of self-investigation (ananya-bhāva), which alone can eradicate ego
2019-09-23: Comment explaining that holding ‘I am’ is the pinnacle of bhakti, because ‘I am’ is the real nature (svarūpa) of both Bhagavan and Arunachala
2018-09-25: In this verse Bhagavan refers to ātma-vicāra as ananya-bhāva (meditation on what is not other, namely oneself) and says that of all it is the best (uttamam), which in the context of the previous five verses means that it is the best or most effective of all means to purify the mind or will
2018-09-01: After explaining in the previous four verses that the mind is purified by niṣkāmya pūjā, japa and dhyāna, which are respectively actions of body, speech and mind and which are in this order progressively more purifying, in this verse he implies that what is most purifying of all is meditating only upon oneself
2018-09-01: Self-attentiveness is the most effective means to purify our will (cittam), as Bhagavan implies in this verse, so it is the best use we can make of our will and our freedom to use it as we like
2018-09-01: What Bhagavan wrote in the previous five verses clearly shows that he did not consider freedom to turn within to be the only freedom of choice we have, because none of the practises that he describes in those verses as being progressively more effective means to purify our mind entail turning it within, and it is only in this verse that he first refers to the practice of turning our attention within, which he describes as ananya-bhāva, ‘meditation on what is not other [than oneself]’, saying that it is ‘அனைத்தினும் உத்தமம்’ (aṉaittiṉum uttamam), the ‘best of all’ or ‘best among all’, thereby implying that it is the most effective of all means to purify the mind
2018-09-01: Though we can free ourself from our viṣaya-vāsanās slowly and to some extent by other practices of bhakti, the most effective means to eradicate them is self-investigation, which is the ultimate practice of bhakti and the only means to eradicate them entirely
2017-06-20: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 8 and 9: by the intensity of self-attentiveness we will be in our real state of being, which is beyond thinking
2017-03-19: What is ‘remembering the Lord’ or ‘remembrance of Arunachala’?
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 8: love for God as nothing other than oneself is best of all
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 8: meditating on nothing other than ourself is ‘the best among all’
2015-03-06: Intensity, frequency and duration of self-attentiveness
2014-05-02: Ātma-vicāra: stress and other related issues
2014-02-24: We should meditate only on ‘I’, not on ideas such as ‘I am brahman’
2013-12-30: Dhyāna-p-Paṭṭu: The Song on Meditation
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 9:
பாவ பலத்தினாற் பாவனா தீதசற்
பாவத் திருத்தலே யுந்தீபற
பரபத்தி தத்துவ முந்தீபற.
bhāva balattiṉāṯ bhāvaṉā tītasaṯ
bhāvat tiruttalē yundīpaṟa
parabhatti tattuva mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: பாவ பலத்தினால் பாவனாதீத சத் பாவத்து இருத்தலே பரபத்தி தத்துவம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): bhāva balattiṉāl bhāvaṉātīta sat-bhāvattu iruttal-ē para-bhatti tattuvam.
English translation: By the strength of meditation, being in sat-bhāva, which transcends bhāvanā, alone is para-bhakti tattva.
Explanatory paraphrase: By the strength [intensity, firmness or stability] of [such] meditation [ananya-bhāva or self-attentiveness], being in sat-bhāva [the state of being], which transcends [all] bhāvanā [thinking, imagination or meditation in the sense of mental activity], alone [or certainly] is para-bhakti tattva [the nature, reality or true state of supreme devotion].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-10: Since we as ego will subside back into our being to the extent to which we attend to ourself, when by persistent practice our self-attentiveness becomes strong and stable enough, we will thereby be firmly fixed in our true state of being (sat-bhāva), which transcends all mental activity, so being in this state is para-bhakti tattva, the true state of supreme devotion, because it is the state in which we have given ourself wholly to God and therefore do not rise as ego to know anything other than o
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 9: being in one’s real state of being by self-attentiveness is supreme devotion
2022-03-10: Meditating on anything other than ourself is a thought or mental activity (bhāvanā), because it entails a movement of our mind or attention away from ourself towards something else, whereas meditating on nothing other than ourself is not a thought or mental activity, because it is just a resting of our mind or attention in its source, namely ourself
2022-03-10: As he implies in verse 10 of Śrī Aruṇācala Padigam, by pulling us inwards to be self-attentive, Arunachala will make us motionless (acala) like itself, meaning that we will be firmly established in the state of just being as we actually are, in accordance with the principle that he implies in this verse, ‘By the strength of meditation [that is, by the strength of ananya-bhāva or self-attentiveness], being in sat-bhāva [the state of being], which transcends bhāvanā [thinking or meditation]’
2020-11-01: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 8 and 9: ‘பாவ பலம்’ (bhāva balam), ‘the strength of meditation’, means keenness of self-attentiveness, so what he implies in these two verses is that by keenness of self-attentiveness we will be in sat-bhāva, the state of being as we actually are
2018-09-01: Meditating upon anything other than oneself (anya-bhāva) is an action (karma), because it entails directing one’s mind or attention away from oneself towards something else, whereas meditating only upon oneself (ananya-bhāva) is not an action but a state of just being, a cessation of all activity, because it does not entail directing one’s mind or attention away from oneself but only allowing it to return to and rest in its source
2018-09-01: So long as we direct our attention away from ourself towards anything else, that outward flow of our attention is what is called thinking or imagining, but when we direct our attention back towards ourself alone, that is the subsidence or cessation of all thinking or imagining, which is what Bhagavan refers to in this verse as பாவனாதீத (bhāvaṉātīta), ‘transcending [or beyond] bhāvana [thinking, imagination or meditation]’
2017-06-20: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 8 and 9: by the intensity of self-attentiveness we will be in our real state of being, which is beyond thinking
2017-02-06: How can we see inaction in action?
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: liberation is gained not by doing anything but only by just being
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 9: by meditating on ourself we will subside in our real state of being
2015-03-06: Intensity, frequency and duration of self-attentiveness
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 10:
உதித்த விடத்தி லொடுங்கி யிருத்த
லதுகன்மம் பத்தியு முந்தீபற
வதுயோக ஞானமு முந்தீபற.
uditta viḍatti loḍuṅgi yirutta
ladukaṉmam bhattiyu mundīpaṟa
vaduyōga ñāṉamu mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உதித்த இடத்தில் ஒடுங்கி இருத்தல்: அது கன்மம் பத்தியும்; அது யோகம் ஞானமும்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uditta iḍattil oḍuṅgi iruttal: adu kaṉmam bhatti-y-um; adu yōgam ñāṉam-um.
English translation: Being, subsiding in the place from which one rose: that is karma and bhakti; that is yōga and jñāna.
Explanatory paraphrase: Being [by inwardly] subsiding in the place from which one rose [namely one’s own real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is pure being-awareness (sat-cit), ‘I am’]: that is [the culmination of the paths of] [niṣkāmya] karma and bhakti [as explained in the previous seven verses]; that is [also the culmination of the paths of] yōga [as will be explained in the next five verses] and jñāna [as will be explained in the final fifteen verses].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 10: being in one’s source is karma, bhakti, yōga and jñāna
2020-01-16: Bhagavan often uses the term ‘இடம்’ (iḍam), which literally means ‘place’, as a metaphor for our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), because it is the ‘place’ or source from which we rise as ego and into which we must eventually subside
2018-09-01: In the previous seven verses Bhagavan explained how the path of bhakti begins with niṣkāmya actions of body, speech and mind (which is the path of niṣkāmya karma) but eventually leads to and culminates in the path of jñāna, which is the practice of self-attentiveness (svarūpa-dhyāna) or self-investigation (ātma-vicāra), and which is not an action (karma) but just one’s natural state of being (sat-bhāva), in which the ego surrenders itself entirely and remains subsided in the source from which it arose, and in this verse he implies that this is the ultimate culmination and goal of all forms of spiritual practice
2017-02-06: How can we see inaction in action?
2016-10-12: An explanation of the first ten verses of Upadēśa Undiyār
2016-02-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: liberation is gained not by doing anything but only by just being
2015-12-10: Is ātma-vicāra an exclusive or inclusive practice?
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 10: subsiding and being in our source is karma, bhakti, yōga and jñāna
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 11:
வளியுள் ளடக்க வலைபடு புட்போ
லுளமு மொடுங்குறு முந்தீபற
வொடுக்க வுபாயமி துந்தீபற.
vaḷiyuḷ ḷaḍakka valaipaḍu puṭpō
luḷamu moḍuṅguṟu mundīpaṟa
voḍukka vupāyami dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: வளி உள் அடக்க, வலை படு புள் போல் உளமும் ஒடுங்குறும். ஒடுக்க உபாயம் இது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): vaḷi uḷ aḍakka, valai paḍu puḷ pōl uḷam-um oḍuṅguṟum. oḍukka upāyam idu.
அன்வயம்: வளி உள் அடக்க, வலை படு புள் போல் உளமும் ஒடுங்குறும். இது ஒடுக்க உபாயம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): vaḷi uḷ aḍakka, valai paḍu puḷ pōl uḷam-um oḍuṅguṟum. idu oḍukka upāyam.
English translation: When one restrains the breath within, like a bird caught in a net the mind also will be restrained. This is a means to restrain.
Explanatory paraphrase: When one restrains [curbs, calms or subdues] the breath within, like a bird caught in a net the mind also will be restrained [sink, subside, calm down, become quiet, be dissolved or cease being active]. This [the practice of breath-restraint or prāṇāyāma] is [therefore] a means to restrain [curb, calm, subdue, shut down or dissolve] [the mind].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 11: when breath is restrained mind will subside
2015-06-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 11 and 12: how breath-restraint is a means to restrain the mind
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 12:
உளமு முயிரு முணர்வுஞ் செயலு
முளவாங் கிளையிரண் டுந்தீபற
வொன்றவற் றின்மூல முந்தீபற.
uḷamu muyiru muṇarvuñ ceyalu
muḷavāṅ kiḷaiyiraṇ ḍundīpaṟa
voṉḏṟavaṯ ṟiṉmūla mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உளமும் உயிரும் உணர்வும் செயலும் உளவாம் கிளை இரண்டு. ஒன்று அவற்றின் மூலம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uḷam-um uyir-um uṇarvu-[u]m ceyal-um uḷavām kiḷai iraṇḍu. oṉḏṟu avaṯṟiṉ mūlam.
அன்வயம்: உளமும் உயிரும் உணர்வும் செயலும் உளவாம் இரண்டு கிளை. அவற்றின் மூலம் ஒன்று.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): uḷam-um uyir-um uṇarvu-[u]m ceyal-um uḷavām iraṇḍu kiḷai. avaṯṟiṉ mūlam oṉḏṟu.
English translation: Mind and breath are two branches, which have knowing and doing. Their root is one.
Explanatory paraphrase: Mind and breath [or life, which includes breath and all other physiological functions] are two branches, which have knowing and doing [as their respective functions]. [However] their mūla [root, base, foundation, origin, source or cause] is one [so this is why when either one is restrained the other one will also be restrained, as pointed out in the previous verse].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 12: the root of mind and breath is one
2015-06-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 11 and 12: how breath-restraint is a means to restrain the mind
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 13:
இலயமு நாச மிரண்டா மொடுக்க
மிலயித் துளதெழு முந்தீபற
வெழாதுரு மாய்ந்ததே லுந்தீபற.
ilayamu nāśa miraṇḍā moḍukka
milayit tuḷadeṙu mundīpaṟa
veṙāduru māyndadē lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: இலயமும் நாசம் இரண்டு ஆம் ஒடுக்கம். இலயித்து உளது எழும். எழாது உரு மாய்ந்ததேல்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): ilayam-um nāśam iraṇḍu ām oḍukkam. ilayittu uḷadu eṙum. eṙādu uru māyndadēl.
அன்வயம்: ஒடுக்கம் இலயமும் நாசம் இரண்டு ஆம். இலயித்து உளது எழும். உரு மாய்ந்ததேல் எழாது.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): oḍukkam ilayam-um nāśam iraṇḍu ām. ilayittu uḷadu eṙum. uru māyndadēl eṙādu.
English translation: Dissolution is two: laya and nāśa. What is lying down will rise. If form dies, it will not rise.
Explanatory paraphrase: Dissolution [complete subsidence or cessation of ego or mind] is [of] two [kinds]: laya [temporary dissolution] and nāśa [permanent dissolution or annihilation]. What is lying down [or dissolved in laya] will rise. If [its] form dies [in nāśa], it will not rise.
Explanations and discussions:
2023-11-08: Bhagavan used to warn those who were inclined to practise prāṇāyāma and other yōga techniques that they should take care not to subside in manōlaya as a result of such practices, and advised them that though they could use such practices to gain a certain degree of mental calmness, they could gain lasting benefit from such calmness only if they use it as a favourable condition to turn their attention back within to investigate who am I
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 13: dissolution of mind is of two kinds, laya and nāśa
2022-03-24: If we withdraw our mind from dṛśya without keenly attending to cittva, our fundamental awareness, ‘I am’, the mind will dissolve in laya, and ‘What has gone in laya arises again’
2022-02-08: Like sleep, any state in which all thoughts cease along with their root, namely ego, but from which they subsequently rise again is just a state of manōlaya (temporary dissolution of mind), whereas the state from which they will never rise again is manōnāśa (annihilation or permanent dissolution of mind), so manōnāśa alone is the solution we should aim for
2020-06-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 13: if it is dissolved in sleep or any other state of laya, ego will rise again, but why?
2019-10-16: Comment explaining that nothing exists in sleep other than our real nature, which is sat-cit-ānanda, so the only difference between sleep (manōlaya) and eradication of ego (manōnāśa) is that ego will never rise again from the latter, whereas it does rise from the former, but this is not a difference in those states but only a difference from the perspective of ourself as ego in waking or dream
2019-07-29: Why does ego rise again from manōlaya and not from manōnāśa?
2017-07-27: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 13: the only difference between manōlaya and manōnāśa is that the ego will rise from manōlaya but never from manōnāśa
2017-07-07: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 13: from the perspective of the ego in waking or dream the distinction between manōlaya and manōnāśa is in effect real
2015-06-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 13: the two kinds of subsidence of mind
2014-04-11: Ātma-vicāra and nirvikalpa samādhi
2014-02-16: Self-attentiveness and citta-vṛtti nirōdha
2011-10-07: Annihilation of mind (manōnāśa) is permanent, whereas any other subsidence of mind (manōlaya) such as sleep, coma, death or samādhi is only temporary
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 14:
ஒடுக்க வளியை யொடுங்கு முளத்தை
விடுக்கவே யோர்வழி யுந்தீபற
வீயு மதனுரு வுந்தீபற.
oḍukka vaḷiyai yoḍuṅgu muḷattai
viḍukkavē yōrvaṙi yundīpaṟa
vīyu madaṉuru vundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: ஒடுக்க வளியை ஒடுங்கும் உளத்தை விடுக்கவே ஓர் வழி, வீயும் அதன் உரு.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): oḍukka vaḷiyai oḍuṅgum uḷattai viḍukka-v-ē ōr vaṙi, vīyum adaṉ uru.
அன்வயம்: வளியை ஒடுக்க ஒடுங்கும் உளத்தை ஓர் வழி விடுக்கவே, அதன் உரு வீயும்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): vaḷiyai oḍukka oḍuṅgum uḷattai ōr vaṙi viḍukka-v-ē, adaṉ uru vīyum.
English translation: Only when one sends the mind, which will be restrained when one restrains the breath, on the investigating path will its form perish.
Explanatory paraphrase: Only when one sends the mind, which will be restrained [become calm or dissolve] when one restrains the breath, on ōr vaṙi [the investigating path or one path, namely the path of self-investigation, which is the one and only means to eradicate ego and thereby annihilate the mind] will its form perish. [However, the mind cannot be sent on this path of self-investigation if it has dissolved in laya, so if one practices breath-restraint in order to restrain the mind, one should take care to send the mind on this path of self-investigation (which means to direct one’s attention back towards oneself) when it has become calm but before it dissolves in laya.]
Explanations and discussions:
2023-11-08: Bhagavan used to warn those who were inclined to practise prāṇāyāma and other yōga techniques that they should take care not to subside in manōlaya as a result of such practices, and advised them that though they could use such practices to gain a certain degree of mental calmness, they could gain lasting benefit from such calmness only if they use it as a favourable condition to turn their attention back within to investigate who am I
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 14: only by self-investigation will the mind die
2020-06-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 14: only by means of self-investigation will ego dissolve in pure awareness in such a way that it will never rise again
2015-06-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 14: our mind will die only by self-investigation (in the section following this, Upadēśa Sāram verse 14: the meaning of ēka-cintanā, I give the Sanskrit text and my English translation of verse 14 of Upadēśa Sāram and discuss its meaning)
2014-04-11: Ātma-vicāra and nirvikalpa samādhi
2011-10-07: The mind will be annihilated only when it is sent on the unique path of self-investigation (ātma-vicāra)
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 15:
மனவுரு மாயமெய்ம் மன்னுமா யோகி
தனக்கோர் செயலிலை யுந்தீபற
தன்னியல் சார்ந்தன னுந்தீபற.
maṉavuru māyameym maṉṉumā yōgi
taṉakkōr seyalilai yundīpaṟa
taṉṉiyal sārndaṉa ṉundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: மன உரு மாய மெய் மன்னும் மா யோகி தனக்கு ஓர் செயல் இலை. தன் இயல் சார்ந்தனன்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): maṉa uru māya mey maṉṉum mā yōgi taṉakku ōr seyal ilai. taṉ iyal sārndaṉaṉ.
English translation: When the form of the mind is annihilated, for the great yōgi who remains permanently as the reality, there is not a single doing. He has attained his nature.
Explanatory paraphrase: When the form of the mind is annihilated, for the great yōgi who [thereby] remains permanently as the reality, there is not a single doing [action or karma], [because] he has attained his [real] nature [which is actionless being].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 15: when the mind is dead, there is no action but only one’s real nature
2018-09-01: The jñāni is not a person but only the infinite space of pure self-awareness, in whose clear view neither a person nor anything else exists at all, so the jñāni never actually does any action, either with or without doership
2018-04-18: What experiences itself as ‘I am doing’ or ‘I am experiencing’ is only the ego, and without the ego nothing else exists, so there is nothing either to do or to experience
2016-12-27: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 15: for the jñāni there is no ego or mind and hence no action
2014-04-11: Ātma-vicāra and nirvikalpa samādhi
2011-10-07: When the mind is annihilated, one is established as the reality, so there is no action (thinking, talking or doing)
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 16:
வெளிவிட யங்களை விட்டு மனந்தன்
னொளியுரு வோர்தலே யுந்தீபற
வுண்மை யுணர்ச்சியா முந்தீபற.
veḷiviḍa yaṅgaḷai viṭṭu maṉantaṉ
ṉoḷiyuru vōrdalē yundīpaṟa
vuṇmai yuṇarcciyā mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: வெளி விடயங்களை விட்டு மனம் தன் ஒளி உரு ஓர்தலே உண்மை உணர்ச்சி ஆம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷai viṭṭu maṉam taṉ oḷi-uru ōrdalē uṇmai uṇarcci ām.
அன்வயம்: மனம் வெளி விடயங்களை விட்டு தன் ஒளி உரு ஓர்தலே உண்மை உணர்ச்சி ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): maṉam veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷai viṭṭu taṉ oḷi-uru ōrdalē uṇmai uṇarcci ām.
English translation: Leaving external phenomena, the mind knowing its own form of light is alone real awareness.
Explanatory paraphrase: Leaving [or letting go of] [awareness of any] external viṣayas [namely phenomena of every kind, all of which are external in the sense that they are other than and hence extraneous to oneself], the mind knowing its own form of light [namely the light of pure awareness, which is its real nature and what illumines it, enabling it to be aware both of itself and of other things] is alone real awareness [true knowledge or knowledge of reality].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-12: Consciousness or awareness is not an object but the reality of the subject, so no objective investigation can enable us to know consciousness as it actually is, and since we ourself are consciousness, in order to know ourself as we actually are we need to turn our entire attention back on ourself, away from all other things
2023-11-08: In order to eradicate ego, we not only need to cease attending to anything other than ourself but also need to attend keenly to ourself
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 16: seeing nothing but awareness is seeing what is real
2022-03-24: To see what is real, the mind must see its own real nature, which is pure awareness
2022-03-24: We cannot see our own cittva merely by keeping our mind back from all dṛśya
2022-03-24: The mind can see its own cittva only by being its own cittva, and it can be it only by being swallowed by it
2022-03-10: As he implies in verse 16 of Upadēśa Sāram, svarūpa-darśana (seeing ourself as we actually are) alone is tattva-darśana (seeing what is real), and in order to see our own cittva (pure awareness), which is ourself as we actually are, we need to turn back and look deep within ourself
2021-08-29: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: real awareness is only awareness of what actually exists, namely ourself, so we can remain as real awareness only by knowing nothing other than ourself
2021-05-13: In order to know ourself as we actually are and thereby eradicate the false awareness called ego, all we need do is to withdraw our attention from all other things by trying to focus it exclusively on ourself alone
2021-02-18: So long as we are looking at anything other than ourself, we seem to be something other than pure awareness, but if we give up looking at anything else by looking at ourself alone, we will see that we are actually just pure awareness
2020-10-16: What Bhagavan refers to in verse 17 as investigating மனத்தின் உரு (maṉattiṉ uru), the ‘form of the mind’, is investigating its real form, which is pure awareness, its ‘ஒளி உரு’ (oḷi-uru) or ‘form of light’
2020-09-19: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: to eradicate ego we not only need to cease being aware of anything other than ourself, but need to do so by being keenly self-attentive
2020-09-19: When the cit element of the mind or ego is turned back to face itself alone, it is thereby turning its back on all external phenomena, so it ceases to be aware of anything else, and thus it remains as pure awareness, which is what it always actually is
2020-06-17: Our experience in sleep is a vital clue that guides us in our self-investigation, because so long as we are aware of anything that we are not aware of in sleep, our attention is still not focused solely and exclusively on ourself
2020-06-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: being so keenly self-attentive that we thereby cease to be aware of anything else is real awareness
2020-04-05: In this verse, as in the first sentence of the thirteenth paragraph of Nāṉ Ār?, Bhagavan clearly implies that we must try to be aware of nothing whatsoever other than ourself
2020-03-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: what is required is that we withdraw our attention from all other things by being keenly self-attentive
2020-02-28: Here ‘light’ is a metaphor for awareness, because awareness is the light by which we know all things, both ourself and everything else, and ‘form’ is a metaphor for nature (svarūpa), so ‘தன் ஒளி உரு’ (taṉ oḷi-uru), ‘its [or one’s] own form of light’, implies that our real nature (or the real nature of the mind) is the light of pure awareness
2020-02-27: In order to be aware of what is real, we not only need to cease perceiving any world, but need to do so by being aware of ‘தன் ஒளி உரு’ (taṉ oḷi-uru), ‘our own form of light’ (our real nature, which is the original light of pure awareness)
2020-02-02: Real awareness or vidyā is the awareness that alone remains when we are clearly aware only of ourself (our own form of light), thereby ceasing to be aware of anything else
2020-01-16: In order to be annihilated and thereby never rise again, we as ego must not only withdraw our attention from all phenomena but must do so by focusing our entire attention on ourself alone
2019-12-16: Comment explaining that in order to be aware of ourself as we actually are we as ego must cease being aware of phenomena and must instead be aware only of our ‘own form of light’, which is pure awareness
2019-12-10: In order to be aware of ourself as we actually are we need to be aware of ourself alone, in complete isolation from awareness of anything else
2019-11-28: Instead of using the reflected light called mind to know other things (which are what Bhagavan calls ‘வெளி விடயங்கள்’ (veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷ), ‘external phenomena’), we must turn it back to face its source, the original light of pure awareness, which is always shining within us as ‘I am’
2019-11-28: What he gave us in this verse is a clear definition of ‘உண்மை உணர்ச்சி’ (uṇmai uṇarcci), which means ‘real awareness’, ‘true knowledge’ or ‘awareness [or knowledge] of reality’, but a definition intended to show us the means by which we can experience real awareness
2019-11-26: In order to dissolve ego, we must eventually turn our entire attention back towards ourself (which is what Bhagavan refers to here as the mind’s ‘ஒளி உரு’ (oḷi-uru) or ‘form of light’) and thereby away from everything else (which is what he refers to as ‘வெளி விடயங்கள்’ (veḷi viḍayaṅgaḷ), ‘external phenomena’)
2019-11-24: In order to be aware of ourself as we actually are, namely as pure awareness, which is our own ‘ஒளி உரு’ (oḷi-uru) or ‘form of light’, we need to cease being aware of any phenomena, including all the adjuncts that we mistake to be ourself
2019-10-25: There are two essential features that define us as ego, namely we are aware of ourself as a set of adjuncts (a body consisting of five sheaths) and consequently we are aware of other phenomena, so in order to see ourself as we actually are we must not only give up our awareness of adjuncts but also our awareness of all other phenomena
2019-06-24: In order for us as ego to eradicate ourself permanently, we not only need to cease being aware of anything else, but also need to be attentively and clearly aware of ourself alone
2018-11-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: since awareness of anything other than ourself is ignorance and unreal, we can be aware of ourself as real awareness only by withdrawing our attention from everything else and turning back towards ourself to know our own ‘form of light’
2018-11-08: In order to be aware of our own ‘form of light’ (the pure awareness that we actually are) we need to give up being aware of any phenomena
2017-10-07: Just giving up attending to external phenomena is not sufficient, because we do so whenever we fall asleep, so what is required is just that we attend only to ourself, that is, to our own fundamental self-awareness, because if we do so we will thereby give up attending to anything else
2018-09-01: When Bhagavan talks of the mind investigating itself, what he means by the term ‘mind’ is ego, which is the perceiving or aware element of it, and which is therefore what needs to investigate itself and thereby surrender itself, as he implies in this verse
2017-04-16: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: to the extent that our attention is focused on ourself it will thereby be withdrawn from other things
2016-10-19: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: we must not just cease attending to other things but must keenly attend to ourself alone
2016-05-17: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: we must attend only to ourself and thereby leave aside all phenomena
2016-04-20: Comment discussing verse 16 of Upadēśa Undiyār
2015-10-12: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: we must attentively observe our own self-awareness
2015-05-20: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 16: to see what is real we must give up seeing what is seen (dṛśya) (this section also includes the Sanskrit text of verse 16 of Upadēśa Sāram together with my translation of it)
2014-12-13: The teachings of Sri Ramana and Nisargadatta are significantly different
2014-09-09: Comment explaining the meaning of verse 16 of Upadēśa Undiyār
2011-10-07: To be annihilated, the mind must not only cease being aware of any phenomena (viṣayas) but must also attend to ‘its own form of light’ (its fundamental self-awareness)
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 17:
மனத்தி னுருவை மறவா துசாவ
மனமென வொன்றிலை யுந்தீபற
மார்க்கநே ரார்க்குமி துந்தீபற.
maṉatti ṉuruvai maṟavā dusāva
maṉameṉa voṉḏṟilai yundīpaṟa
mārgganē rārkkumi dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: மனத்தின் உருவை மறவாது உசாவ, மனம் என ஒன்று இலை. மார்க்கம் நேர் ஆர்க்கும் இது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): maṉattiṉ uruvai maṟavādu usāva, maṉam eṉa oṉḏṟu ilai. mārggam nēr ārkkum idu.
அன்வயம்: மறவாது மனத்தின் உருவை உசாவ, மனம் என ஒன்று இலை. இது ஆர்க்கும் நேர் மார்க்கம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): maṟavādu maṉattiṉ uruvai usāva, maṉam eṉa oṉḏṟu ilai. idu ārkkum nēr mārggam.
English translation: When one investigates the form of the mind without forgetting, there is not anything called ‘mind’. This is the direct path for everyone whomsoever.
Explanatory paraphrase: When one investigates [examines or scrutinises] the form of the mind without forgetting [neglecting, abandoning, giving up or ceasing], [it will be clear that] there is not anything called ‘mind’. This is the direct [straight or appropriate] path for everyone whomsoever.
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 17: when one keenly investigates it, there is no mind
2022-03-24: Ego is the first cause, and hence the root cause of all other causes, so there cannot be anything that causes ego to rise or come into existence, and there need not be anything that causes it, because if we investigate it keenly enough, it will be clear that no such thing has ever actually existed or risen at all
2021-02-18: If we investigate ego keenly enough, without yielding even in the least to pramāda (negligence or forgetfulness), we will see that what we actually are is just pure awareness, so it will then be clear that there is no such thing as mind or ego at all
2020-10-22: Self-investigation is ‘the direct path for everyone whomsoever’, so if we are attracted to this path and want to follow it, we are mature enough to do so
2020-10-16: This path is the direct path because we are trying to look at ourself directly in order to perceive ourself as we actually are
2020-09-19: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: to see that there is no such thing as ego or mind at all, we need to be so keenly self-attentive that we give not even the slightest room for any pramāda (self-negligence) to creep in
2019-12-21: Bhagavan didn’t give any teachings unasked, but when he was asked his first inclination was to advise all questioners to look within to see what they actually are, because this is ‘மார்க்கம் நேர் ஆர்க்கும்’ (mārggam nēr ārkkum), ‘the direct path for everyone whomsoever’
2019-12-11: Comment explaining that it is the mind (in the sense of ego, the thought called ‘I’, which is the root and essence of the mind, being its perceiving element) that needs to investigate itself, because if it does so keenly enough it will be clear that there is no such thing
2019-11-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: if we incessantly investigate this atiśaya śakti called mind or ego, it will be clear that no such thing exists at all
2019-10-25: As soon as the mind knows its own form of light, which is pure awareness, it dissolves and merges in that, thereby ceasing to be mind and remaining just as pure awareness, so self-investigation ultimately reveals that there is no such thing as mind at all
2019-05-08: Ego seems to exist only when it is attending to or aware of anything other than itself, so if it attends to itself so keenly that it ceases to be aware of anything else, it will be clear that there is no such thing as ego
2019-04-19: On this path of self-investigation and self-surrender there is no such thing as a shortcut, because it is ‘மார்க்கம் நேர் ஆர்க்கும்’ (mārggam nēr ārkkum), ‘the direct path for everyone whomsoever’, and there can obviously be no shorter cut than the direct way
2018-11-08: Ego or mind seems to exist only when it is looking elsewhere, that is, at anything other than itself, but when it looks only at itself, there is no such thing but only pure awareness, which is never aware of anything other than itself
2017-09-24: A series of two comments explaining that the most important of all the fundamental principles of Bhagavan’s teachings is that the ego will cease to cease if and only if we investigate it
2017-07-27: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: if we investigate it keenly enough, we will find that there is no such thing as an ego or mind
2017-06-28: There is absolutely no difference between sleep and pure self-awareness (ātma-jñāna)
2017-03-21: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 17 and 18: what we should watch is only the ego, the root thought called ‘I’, and not any other thought
2016-11-21: Since vivarta vāda contends that non-existent things seem to exist only in the view of the non-existent ego, its logical conclusion can only be ajāta
2016-10-19: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: if we keenly investigate our ego, we will find that there is actually no such thing at all, and hence no world or anything else other than ourself
2015-12-10: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: avoiding self-negligence (pramāda) is the only means to destroy our ego
2015-11-11: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 17: our ego or mind does not actually exist at all, even now
2015-05-20: The essence of the mind is the ego, and the essence of the ego is pure self-awareness
2014-09-28: The perceiver and the perceived are both unreal
2014-09-26: Metaphysical solipsism, idealism and creation theories in the teachings of Sri Ramana
2014-03-20: Ātma-vicāra is the only means by which we can experience ourself as we really are
2014-03-03: Does the practice of ātma-vicāra work?
2014-02-16: Self-attentiveness and citta-vṛtti nirōdha
2008-02-16: Cultivating uninterrupted self-attentiveness
2011-10-07: Annihilation of mind (manōnāśa) is not actually a state in which something that existed has been destroyed, but is just the clear knowledge that nothing other than ourself has ever existed
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 18:
எண்ணங்க ளேமனம் யாவினு நானெனு
மெண்ணமே மூலமா முந்தீபற
யானா மனமென லுந்தீபற.
eṇṇaṅga ḷēmaṉam yāviṉu nāṉeṉu
meṇṇamē mūlamā mundīpaṟa
yāṉā maṉameṉa lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: எண்ணங்களே மனம். யாவினும் நான் எனும் எண்ணமே மூலம் ஆம். யான் ஆம் மனம் எனல்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): eṇṇaṅgaḷ-ē maṉam. yāviṉ-um nāṉ eṉum eṇṇam-ē mūlam ām. yāṉ ām maṉam eṉal.
அன்வயம்: எண்ணங்களே மனம். யாவினும் நான் எனும் எண்ணமே மூலம் ஆம். மனம் எனல் யான் ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): eṇṇaṅgaḷ-ē maṉam. yāviṉ-um nāṉ eṉum eṇṇam-ē mūlam ām. maṉam eṉal yāṉ ām.
English translation: Thoughts alone are mind. Of all, the thought called ‘I’ alone is the root. What is called mind is ‘I’.
Explanatory paraphrase: Thoughts alone are mind [or the mind is only thoughts]. Of all [thoughts], the thought called ‘I’ alone is the mūla [the root, base, foundation, origin, source or cause]. [Therefore] what is called mind is [essentially just] ‘I’ [namely ego, the root thought called ‘I’].
Explanations and discussions:
2023-12-07: ‘மனம்’ (maṉam) or ‘mind’ is used in a variety of different senses, so the sense in which it is used in each case is determined by the context and needs to be understood accordingly
2023-12-07: Since no other thought could exist without ego, it is the only essential thought in the mind, and hence it is what the mind essentially is, as he says in the final sentence of this verse, ‘யான் ஆம் மனம் எனல்’ (yāṉ ām maṉam eṉal), ‘What is called mind is I’, which implies that the mind is essentially just ego, the root thought called ‘I’
2023-07-27: The mind consists of two elements, namely the subject, which is ego, the thought called ‘I’, and all objects, which are all the other thoughts that constitute the mind, and since all other thoughts are known only by ego, they could not exist independent of ego, so what the mind essentially is is only ego
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 18: mind is essentially just the ego, the root of all other thoughts
2021-02-18: What he refers to in verse 17 as ‘மனத்தின் உரு’ (maṉattiṉ uru), ‘the form of the mind’, is ego, because as he explains in this verse, ego is the root of the mind and hence what the mind essentially is
2021-02-02: Bhagavan is the ultimate reductionist: All phenomena are just thoughts; thoughts are just mind; mind is in essence just ego, the first thought ‘I’; and if instead of looking at anything else we look keenly at ourself alone, we will find that ego is actually just pure awareness, so pure awareness is all that actually exists
2020-09-19: Though the term ‘mind’ is often used to refer to all thoughts collectively, the root of all thoughts is only ego, which is the thought called ‘I’, so what the mind essentially is is only ego
2020-04-15: All other thoughts are objects perceived by ego, whereas ego is the subject, the perceiver of them all, so no other thoughts can exist without ego, and hence ego is the one constant thought, the thread on which all other thoughts are strung
2020-01-16: In many contexts Bhagavan uses ‘mind’ as a synonym for ego, which is what he sometimes calls ‘the thought called I’, but in other contexts he uses it in a broader sense to refer to the totality of all thoughts
2020-01-16: Whenever Bhagavan uses the term ‘the thought called I’, he is referring to ego, which is the first thought and the root of all other thoughts
2019-11-08: When Bhagavan uses the term ‘mind’, in some cases he is referring to the totality of all thoughts, but in most cases he is referring to ego, which is the root of all other thoughts and therefore the essence of the mind
2019-10-25: What he referred to in verse 17 as ‘மனத்தின் உரு’ (maṉattiṉ uru), ‘the form of the mind’, is ego, which is the fundamental form of the mind, being its perceiving element and hence its root, because it is that in whose view all the perceived elements of the mind, namely all other thoughts, seem to exist
2019-05-08: Ego is the perceiving element of the mind and therefore its root and essence
2018-11-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: though all thoughts are included in mind, what mind essentially is is only ego, the root thought called ‘I’
2018-05-13: The term ‘mind’ is used in two distinct senses: in a general sense it is a term that refers to the totality of all thoughts or mental phenomena, but since the root of all thoughts is the ego, the primal thought called ‘I’, what the mind essentially is is only the ego, and hence in a more specific sense ‘mind’ is a term that refers to the ego
2018-04-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: though the term ‘mind’ can refer to all thoughts collectively, what the mind essentially is is just the ego
2017-09-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: though the term ‘mind’ can refer to the totality of all thoughts, what the mind essentially is is just the ego
2017-07-27: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: the mind is essentially just the ego, the primal thought and root of all other thoughts
2017-03-21: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 17 and 18: what we should watch is only the ego, the root thought called ‘I’, and not any other thought
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: the mind is essentially ‘I’, the ego or mixed awareness ‘I am this body’
2016-06-19: The first movement of thought is the rising of our ego, so we are completely ‘off the movement of thought’ only in manōlaya or manōnāśa (this section also includes the Sanskrit text of verse 18 of Upadēśa Sāram together with my translation of it)
2016-04-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: the ego is our first thought, the root of our mind
2015-11-11: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: our mind is in essence just our primal thought called ‘I’
2015-07-18: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 18: our ego is the root of all our mental impurities
2015-05-20: Distinguishing the ego from the rest of the mind
2015-04-03: Any experience we can describe is something other than the experience of pure self-attentiveness
2014-12-13: The teachings of Sri Ramana and Nisargadatta are significantly different
2014-09-26: Metaphysical solipsism, idealism and creation theories in the teachings of Sri Ramana
2014-08-15: Establishing that I am and analysing what I am
2014-05-25: The mind’s role in investigating ‘I’
2014-02-16: Self-attentiveness and citta-vṛtti nirōdha
2014-02-05: Spontaneously and wordlessly applying the clue: ‘to whom? to me; who am I?’
2011-10-07: In essence the mind is just the thought called ‘I’, which is the root of all other thoughts
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 19:
நானென் றெழுமிட மேதென நாடவுண்
ணான்றலை சாய்ந்திடு முந்தீபற
ஞான விசாரமி துந்தீபற.
nāṉeṉ ḏṟeṙumiḍa mēdeṉa nāḍavuṇ
ṇāṉḏṟalai sāyndiḍu mundīpaṟa
ñāṉa vicārami dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: நான் என்று எழும் இடம் ஏது என நாட உள், நான் தலைசாய்ந்திடும். ஞான விசாரம் இது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): nāṉ eṉḏṟu eṙum iḍam ēdu eṉa nāḍa uḷ, nāṉ talai-sāyndiḍum. ñāṉa-vicāram idu.
அன்வயம்: நான் என்று எழும் இடம் ஏது என உள் நாட, நான் தலைசாய்ந்திடும். இது ஞான விசாரம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): nāṉ eṉḏṟu eṙum iḍam ēdu eṉa uḷ nāḍa, nāṉ talai-sāyndiḍum. idu ñāṉa-vicāram.
English translation: When one investigates within what the place is from which one rises as ‘I’, ‘I’ will die. This is awareness-investigation.
Explanatory paraphrase: When one investigates within [or inwardly investigates] what the place is from which one [or it] rises as ‘I’ [ego or mind], ‘I’ will die. This is jñāna-vicāra [investigation of awareness].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-12: Bhagavan defined self-investigation (ātma-vicāra) in the sixteenth paragraph of Nāṉ Ār? as ‘always keeping the mind on oneself’ (sadākālamum maṉattai ātmāvil vaittiruppadu), and as he made clear, keeping our mind on ourself means keeping our attention fixed firmly on what we actually are, namely our fundamental awareness ‘I am’, which is our very being, so he also called this practice ‘awareness-investigation’ (jñāna-vicāra)
2023-05-16: What he refers to here as ‘நான் என்று எழும் இடம்’ (nāṉ eṉḏṟu eṙum iḍam), ‘the place from which one rises as I’ or ‘the place from which it rises as I’, is our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what always shines within us as our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’, so investigating this ‘place’ means keenly attending only to this awareness ‘I am’, which is why he calls this investigation jñāna-vicāra, which means ‘awareness-investigation’
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 19: when one investigates from where the ego rises, it will die
2021-11-26: ‘நான் என்று எழும் இடம்’ (nāṉ eṉḏṟu eṙum iḍam), ‘the place from which one rises as I’, is our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what always shines within us as our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’, so investigating this ‘place’ means keenly attending only to this awareness ‘I am’, which is why he calls this investigation jñāna-vicāra, which means ‘awareness-investigation’
2020-01-16: Bhagavan often uses the term ‘இடம்’ (iḍam), which literally means ‘place’, as a metaphor for our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), because it is the ‘place’ or source from which we rise as ego and into which we must eventually subside
2019-11-24: ஞான விசாரம் (ñāṉa-vicāram) or jñāna-vicāra means ‘awareness-investigation’, so since awareness alone is what we actually are, jñāna-vicāra is the practice of investigating our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what Bhagavan refers to in this verse as ‘நான் என்று எழும் இடம்’ (nāṉ eṉḏṟu eṙum iḍam), ‘the place from which one rises as I’
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 19: if we investigate ourself, the source from which we rose as this ego, it will die
2015-07-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 19: we should investigate the source of our ego, which is what we actually are
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 20:
நானொன்று தானத்து நானானென் றொன்றது
தானாகத் தோன்றுமே யுந்தீபற
தானது பூன்றமா முந்தீபற.
nāṉoṉḏṟu thāṉattu nāṉāṉeṉ ḏṟoṉḏṟadu
tāṉāhat tōṉḏṟumē yundīpaṟa
tāṉadu pūṉḏṟamā mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: ‘நான்’ ஒன்று தானத்து ‘நான் நான்’ என்று ஒன்று அது தானாக தோன்றுமே. தான் அது பூன்றம் ஆம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): ‘nāṉ’ oṉḏṟu thāṉattu ‘nāṉ nāṉ’ eṉḏṟu oṉḏṟu adu tāṉāha tōṉḏṟumē. tāṉ adu pūṉḏṟam ām.
அன்வயம்: ‘நான்’ ஒன்று தானத்து ‘நான் நான்’ என்று ஒன்று அது தானாக தோன்றுமே. அது தான் பூன்றம் ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): ‘nāṉ’ oṉḏṟu thāṉattu ‘nāṉ nāṉ’ eṉḏṟu oṉḏṟu adu tāṉāha tōṉḏṟumē. adu tāṉ pūṉḏṟam ām.
English translation: In the place where ‘I’ merges, that, the one, appears spontaneously as ‘I am I’. That itself is the whole.
Explanatory paraphrase: In the place where ‘I’ [namely ego, the false awareness ‘I am this’] merges, that, the one, appears spontaneously [or as oneself] as ‘I am I’ [that is, as awareness of oneself as oneself alone]. That itself [or that, oneself] is pūṉḏṟam [pūrṇa: the infinite whole or entirety of what is].
Explanations and discussions:
2023-05-16: ‘நான் ஒன்று தானம்’ (nāṉ oṉḏṟu thāṉam), ‘the place where ‘I’ merges’, is the place from which it rose, namely our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’, so when ego merges there, we will cease to be aware of ourself as ‘I am this body’ and will instead be aware of ourself just as ‘I am I’
2023-05-16: What shines forth spontaneously as ‘I am I’ is our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what is also called brahman and which, being ‘one only without a second’ (ēkam ēva advitīyam), is the infinite whole (pūrṇa), other than which nothing actually exists, as Bhagavan implies by saying that it is ‘परम पूर्ण सत्’ (parama pūrṇa sat), ‘the supreme whole existence [being or reality]’
2023-05-16: The Sanskrit verb स्फुर् (sphur), from which the noun स्फुरण (sphuraṇa) is derived, means to shine, be clear, be evident or make itself known in any way, and is particularly used in the sense of shine forth, shine with a fresh clarity or appear afresh, and it is in this sense that he uses it in verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram when he says ‘अहम् अहंतया स्फुरति हृत् स्वयम्’ (aham ahaṁtayā sphurati hṛt svayaṁ), “the heart shines forth spontaneously as ‘I am I’”
2023-05-16: As soon as ego is eradicated, what seemed till then to be a new and fresh clarity of self-awareness (sphuraṇa), which had been gradually growing clearer until it finally swallowed us entirely in its all-consuming effulgence, is recognised to be natural (sahaja), being what Bhagavan calls ‘பூன்றம்’ (pūṉḏṟam), ‘the whole’, in verse 20 of Upadēśa Undiyār and ‘परम पूर्ण सत्’ (parama pūrṇa sat), ‘the supreme whole existence [being or reality]’, in verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 20: when ego is annihated, the infinite whole will shine forth as ‘I am I’
2022-02-08: Since thought alone is the obstacle that stands in the way of our being aware of ourself as we actually are, as soon as all thoughts (including the primal thought, namely ego) are dissolved in such a manner that they can never reappear, our real nature will shine forth spontaneously, just as the sun appears spontaneously as soon as the clouds that concealed it are blown aside
2021-11-26: What we actually are is sat-cit (existence-awareness), which is our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’, so when we are aware of ourself as we actually are, we will be aware of ourself just as ‘I am I’
2021-11-26: As soon as ego is eradicated, what seemed till then to be a new and fresh clarity of self-awareness (sphuraṇa), which had been gradually growing clearer until it finally swallowed us entirely in its all-consuming effulgence, is recognised to be natural (sahaja), being what Bhagavan calls ‘பூன்றம்’ (pūṉḏṟam), ‘the whole’
2021-11-26: What appears spontaneously as ‘I am I’ is our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is ‘परम पूर्ण सत्’ (parama pūrṇa sat), the supreme whole existence, being or reality, as he says in verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram
2021-11-26: The Sanskrit verb स्फुर् (sphur) means to shine, be clear, be evident or make itself known in any way, and is particularly used in the sense of shine forth, shine with a fresh clarity or appear afresh, and it is in this sense that he uses it in verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram when he says ‘अहम् अहंतया स्फुरति हृत् स्वयम्’ (aham ahaṁtayā sphurati hṛt svayaṁ), “the heart shines forth spontaneously as ‘I am I’”
2021-11-26: As soon as ego is eradicated, what seemed till then to be a new and fresh clarity of self-awareness (sphuraṇa), which had been gradually growing clearer until it finally swallowed us entirely in its all-consuming effulgence, is recognised to be natural (sahaja), being what Bhagavan calls ‘परम पूर्ण सत्’ (parama pūrṇa sat), ‘the supreme whole existence [being or reality]’, in verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram
2020-06-21: Bhagavan used the term ‘நான் நான்’ (nāṉ nāṉ), ‘I am I’, to distinguish our real adjunct-free self-awareness from our false adjunct-mixed self-awareness, namely ego, which he referred to as ‘நான் இது’ (nāṉ idu), ‘I am this’, because ‘நான் இது’ (nāṉ idu), ‘I am this’, denotes a false identity, since it is an identification of ourself with something other than ourself, namely a body consisting of five sheaths, whereas ‘நான் நான்’ (nāṉ nāṉ), ‘I am I’, denotes our real identity, since it is an identification of ourself with ourself alone
2019-09-22: Comment explaining that ‘I am I’ is not a circular definition of ‘I’, because it refers to the clear awareness that I am nothing other than I, which is what shines forth when ego, the false awareness ‘I am this’, is destroyed
2019-08-28: Comment explaining that ‘நான் நான்’ (nāṉ nāṉ), ‘I am I’, expresses recognition of the fact that I am nothing other than I, because when ego is eradicated, what remains in its place is just pure self-awareness (ātma-jñāna), which is never aware of itself as anything other than itself
2017-04-12: The second in a series of two comments explaining that when the ego is eradicated (as it will be when it sees itself as it actually is) what we will experience is not that there is no ‘I’ but that ‘I’ is not what it seemed to be so long as it seemed to be mixed and confused with adjuncts such as ‘this’ or ‘that’, which means that we will cease to be aware of ourself as ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’ and will instead be aware of ourself only as ‘I am I’
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 20: where ‘I am this’ merges, what remains shining is ‘I am I’ (this section also includes the Sanskrit text of verse 20 of Upadēśa Sāram together with my translation of it)
2016-02-08: We cannot be anything that we do not experience permanently, so ‘I am only I’
2015-09-22: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 20: what remains as ‘I am I’ after the ego dissolves is infinite fullness
2015-03-16: Comment explaining the distinction between the ego, which is the false self-awareness ‘I am this body’, and our real nature, which is the true self-awareness ‘I am I’
2014-07-08: நான் நான் (nāṉ nāṉ) means ‘I am I’, not ‘I-I’
2014-06-23: A series of three comments discussing the significance of the sentence ‘நான் நான்’ (nāṉ nāṉ) and explaining why the correct translation of it is ‘I am I’, not ‘I-I’
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 21:
நானெனுஞ் சொற்பொரு ளாமது நாளுமே
நானற்ற தூக்கத்து முந்தீபற
நமதின்மை நீக்கத்தா லுந்தீபற.
nāṉeṉuñ coṯporu ḷāmadu nāḷumē
nāṉaṯṟa tūkkattu mundīpaṟa
namadiṉmai nīkkattā lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: நான் எனும் சொல் பொருள் ஆம் அது நாளுமே, நான் அற்ற தூக்கத்தும் நமது இன்மை நீக்கத்தால்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): nāṉ eṉum sol poruḷ ām adu nāḷumē, nāṉ aṯṟa tūkkattum namadu iṉmai nīkkattāl.
அன்வயம்: நான் அற்ற தூக்கத்தும் நமது இன்மை நீக்கத்தால், நான் எனும் சொல் பொருள் நாளுமே அது ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): nāṉ aṯṟa tūkkattum namadu iṉmai nīkkattāl, nāṉ eṉum sol poruḷ nāḷumē adu ām.
English translation: That is at all times the substance of the word called ‘I’, because of the exclusion of our non-existence even in sleep, which is devoid of ‘I’.
Explanatory paraphrase: That [the one that appears as ‘I am I’, namely pure awareness, which is our real nature] is at all times the substance [or true import] of the word called ‘I’, because of the exclusion of our non-existence [that is, because we do not become non-existent] even in sleep, which is devoid of ‘I’ [namely ego].
Explanations and discussions:
2023-05-16: We are always clearly aware of ourself as ‘I’, not only in waking and dream, when we rise and stand as ego, the false awareness ‘I am this body’, but also in sleep, when we remain just as ‘I am’ without rising as ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’, so what we actually are is only the pure adjunct-free awareness ‘I’, and hence the clear awareness of ourself as ‘I am I’ (in other words, awareness of ourself as ourself alone) is always the true import of the word ‘I’
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 21: that infinite whole is always the true import of the word ‘I’
2022-03-24: Bhagavan gives us a much deeper explanation about sleep than the one that is usually given in advaita texts, because he points out firstly that in sleep ego does not exist, as he implies in this verse, and secondly that in the absence of ego nothing other than ourself exists, as he says unequivocally in verse 26 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu
2022-03-10: Even when ‘I’ is used to refer to ego, its true import is always our real nature (ātma-svarūpa)
2021-11-26: We are always clearly aware of ourself as ‘I’, not only in waking and dream, when we rise and stand as ego, the false awareness ‘I am this body’, but also in sleep, when we remain just as ‘I am’ without rising as ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’, so since we are never anything other than ‘I’, the clear awareness of ourself as ‘I am I’ is always the true import of the word ‘I’
2020-06-17: What exists and what we are aware of in sleep is only pure awareness, which is our own real nature and which is completely devoid of ego or mind
2017-04-12: Comment explaining that when we cease to be aware of ourself as ‘I am this’ or ‘I am that’, we will instead be aware of ourself only as ‘I am I’, which is our real identity, because we cannot be anything other than ourself
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 21: what shines as ‘I am I’ is the real import of the word ‘I’
2015-07-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 21: our infinite self is always the true import of the word ‘I’
2015-07-19: Comment explaining that the term ‘I’ refers only to ourself, whether we experience ourself as we actually are or as this ego, but its real import is the awareness ‘I am I’, which is what we always actually are
2015-02-04: The terms ‘I’ or ‘we’ refer only to ourself, whether we experience ourself as we actually are or as the ego that we now seem to be
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 22:
உடல்பொறி யுள்ள முயிரிரு ளெல்லாஞ்
சடமசத் தானதா லுந்தீபற
சத்தான நானல்ல வுந்தீபற.
uḍalpoṟi yuḷḷa muyiriru ḷellāñ
jaḍamasat tāṉadā lundīpaṟa
sattāṉa nāṉalla vundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உடல் பொறி உள்ளம் உயிர் இருள் எல்லாம் சடம் அசத்து ஆனதால், சத்து ஆன நான் அல்ல.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uḍal poṟi uḷḷam uyir iruḷ ellām jaḍam asattu āṉadāl, sattu āṉa nāṉ alla.
English translation: Since body, mind, intellect, life and darkness are all jaḍa and asat, they are not ‘I’, which is sat.
Explanatory paraphrase: Since [the five sheaths, namely] body [annamaya kōśa], life [prāṇamaya kōśa], mind [manōmaya kōśa], intellect [vijñānamaya kōśa] and darkness [ānandamaya kōśa, namely the cittam or will, which is internal darkness in the form of the dense fog of viṣaya-vāsanās, inclinations or desires to seek happiness in things other than oneself] are all jaḍa [non-aware] and asat [unreal or non-existent], they are not ‘I’, which is [cit, what is aware, and] sat [what actually exists].
Explanations and discussions:
2023-12-07: பொறி (poṟi) means the sense organs, so it refers primarily to the eyes, ears, mouth or tongue (as the organ of taste), nose and body (as the organ of tactile sensation), but just as physical phenomena are made known by these five physical sense organs, mental phenomena are made known by the inner sense organ called ‘mind’, and hence the mind (particularly in the sense of the manōmaya kōśa or mental sheath) is also called பொறி (poṟi), as Bhagavan refers to it in this verse
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 22: the five sheaths are jaḍa and asat, so they are not ‘I’
2022-03-24: Since the five sheaths are all jaḍa and asat, they are not ‘I’, which is sat
2022-03-24: The ānandamaya kōśa is not the darkness of ignorance but the darkness of desire
2021-11-18: Though we as ego experience ourself as if we were all these five sheaths collectively, they are all jaḍa (non-aware) and asat (unreal or non-existent), and hence they are not what we actually are
2020-01-23: All the five sheaths that constitute the person we seem to be, which is what Bhagavan refers to as ‘body’, are jaḍa (non-aware) and asat (unreal or non-existent), so they are not ‘I’
2020-01-16: When Bhagavan says that ego is what rises as ‘I am this body’, what he means by the term ‘body’ is a form composed of five sheaths, namely the physical form, life, mind, intellect and will, all of which are non-aware (jaḍa)
2019-12-15: Whatever person we seem to be is nothing other than these five sheaths, so since none of them are aware, no person is aware, but since what is aware of phenomena is only ego, and since ego is aware of itself as ‘I am this person’, this person seems to be aware
2019-11-13: Series of two comments explaining that intellect and will are both non-aware (jaḍa), so though intellect is ego’s ability to judge and distinguish one thing from another, and will consists of ego’s likes, dislikes, desires, attachments, hopes, fears and so on, neither of them is ego itself
2019-10-25: Ego is the false awareness ‘I am this body’, so it is called cit-jaḍa-granthi, the knot (granthi) formed by the seeming entanglement of awareness (cit) with a body consisting of five sheaths, all of which are insentient or non-aware (jaḍa)
2019-05-30: All the five sheaths are jaḍa (insentient or non-aware) and asat (unreal or non-existent), so though all the elements of the will are part of the person, who is composed of these five sheaths, the person as a whole is non-aware, so what likes, dislikes, desires, feels attached, wants, wishes, hopes or fears is not this person but only ego, who is what is aware of itself as ‘I am this person’
2018-12-30: Since ānandamaya kōśa is our will (cittam), the totality of all our vāsanās, why does Bhagavan refer to it as ‘இருள்’ (iruḷ), ‘darkness’?
2018-11-08: Ego is not any of the five sheaths, which are all jaḍa (non-aware), but only the false awareness ‘I am this body’, which rises and stands by identifying itself with a body consisting of these five sheaths
2018-11-08: All the five sheaths are jaḍa (non-aware) and asat (non-existence)
2018-11-08: Why does Bhagavan refer to the will (the ānandamaya kōśa), which is the totality of all vāsanās (the vast majority of which are viṣaya-vāsanās), as ‘இருள்’ (iruḷ), which means ‘darkness’?
2018-04-18: None of the five sheaths is aware of anything, so they seem to be sentient only because the ego experiences them as if they were itself
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 22: the body and other adjuncts are not real and not aware, so they are not ‘I’
2016-05-05: The person we seem to be is a form composed of five sheaths
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 23:
உள்ள துணர வுணர்வுவே றின்மையி
னுள்ள துணர்வாகு முந்தீபற
வுணர்வேநா மாயுள முந்தீபற.
uḷḷa duṇara vuṇarvuvē ṟiṉmaiyi
ṉuḷḷa duṇarvāhu mundīpaṟa
vuṇarvēnā māyuḷa mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உள்ளது உணர உணர்வு வேறு இன்மையின், உள்ளது உணர்வு ஆகும். உணர்வே நாமாய் உளம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uḷḷadu uṇara uṇarvu vēṟu iṉmaiyiṉ, uḷḷadu uṇarvu āhum. uṇarvē nām-āy uḷam.
அன்வயம்: உள்ளது உணர வேறு உணர்வு இன்மையின், உள்ளது உணர்வு ஆகும். உணர்வே நாமாய் உளம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): uḷḷadu uṇara vēṟu uṇarvu iṉmaiyiṉ, uḷḷadu uṇarvu āhum. uṇarvē nām-āy uḷam.
English translation: Because of the non-existence of other awareness to be aware of what exists, what exists is awareness. Awareness alone exists as we.
Explanatory paraphrase: Because of the non-existence of [any] awareness other [than what exists] to be aware of what exists, what exists (uḷḷadu) is awareness (uṇarvu). Awareness alone exists as we [that is, the awareness that actually exists, namely pure awareness, which is awareness that is aware of nothing other than itself, is what we actually are].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-05: Since God and soul are both aware of their being as ‘I am’, and since their awareness ‘I am’ is not other than their being, the one substance that they both are is pure being-awareness (sat-cit)
2022-10-27: Absolute existence is what is called Arunachala, and since it alone is what actually exists, there cannot be any awareness other than it to know it, so it itself is awareness
2022-07-02: What we actually are is pure awareness (uṇarvu or cit), which alone is what actually exists (uḷḷadu or sat)
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 23: what exists is awareness, which is what we are
2021-08-29: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: what actually exists is only our awareness of our own existence, and that alone is what we actually are
2020-11-01: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: what actually exists is only awareness, awareness that is aware only of its own existence, ‘I am’, and we are that
2020-06-21: Our existence (sat) and our awareness of our existence (sat-cit) are one and the same thing, so we were aware of our existence in sleep because awareness is our very nature, and hence we could never be not aware
2020-03-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: what we actually are is only awareness (uṇarvu or cit), which is what alone actually exists (uḷḷadu or sat)
2019-10-25: Ego is the false awareness ‘I am this body’, but what is real, in the sense of what actually exists, is only our fundamental awareness ‘I am’
2019-10-24: Comment explaining that being is consciousness and consciousness is being, so they are not just ‘two aspects of the same thing’, they are the same thing
2019-08-26: Comment explaining the significance of the unusual syntax of the final sentence, ‘உணர்வே நாமாய் உளம்’ (uṇarvē nām-āy uḷam), ‘Awareness alone exist being we’, ‘Awareness alone exist as we’ or ‘Awareness alone are as we’
2019-08-26: Comment explaining that awareness (in the sense of pure awareness) is our very being, because it is what we actually are, so awareness and being are one and the same thing
2018-12-30: What actually exists is only pure awareness, and that is what we actually are
2018-02-28: What distinguishes our real nature (ātma-svarūpa) from our ego is that our real nature is what actually exists (uḷḷadu), which is aware of nothing other than itself, whereas our ego is just a transitory appearance, which is always aware of things that seem to be other than itself
2018-01-01: The second meaning of the first sentence of the first maṅgalam verse, namely ‘உள்ளது அலது உள்ள உணர்வு உள்ளதோ?’ (uḷḷadu aladu uḷḷa-v-uṇarvu uḷḷadō?), namely ‘Except as [or other than] uḷḷadu [what exists], does uḷḷa-v-uṇarvu [existing or actual awareness] exist?’, is a briefer expression of the same argument that Bhagavan gives in this verse
2017-07-06: What we actually are is just pure self-awareness: awareness that is aware of nothing other than itself
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: we are the one existence-awareness that always shines as ‘I am’
2016-06-19: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: we are awareness, and awareness alone is what actually exists
2016-06-02: Comment explaining that what actually exists is aware, so its existence and awareness are one and the same thing
2016-03-16: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: we are both what exists and what is aware that we exist
2015-09-22: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: what exists (uḷḷadu) is what is aware (uṇarvu)
2015-06-25: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 23: what exists is what is aware
2014-08-08: We must experience what is, not what merely seems to be
2014-01-24: Only ‘I am’ is certain and self-evident
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 24:
இருக்கு மியற்கையா லீசசீ வர்க
ளொருபொரு ளேயாவ ருந்தீபற
வுபாதி யுணர்வேவே றுந்தீபற.
irukku miyaṟkaiyā līśajī varga
ḷoruporu ḷēyāva rundīpaṟa
vupādhi yuṇarvēvē ṟundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: இருக்கும் இயற்கையால் ஈச சீவர்கள் ஒரு பொருளே ஆவர். உபாதி உணர்வே வேறு.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): irukkum iyaṟkaiyāl īśa-jīvargaḷ oru poruḷē āvar. upādhi-uṇarvē vēṟu.
English translation: By existing nature, God and soul are just one substance. Only adjunct-awareness is different.
Explanatory paraphrase: By [their] existing nature [that is, because the real nature of each of them is what actually exists (uḷḷadu), which is the pure and infinite awareness (uṇarvu) that shines eternally as ‘I am’, devoid of all adjuncts], īśa [God] and jīva [soul] are just one poruḷ [substance or vastu]. Only upādhi-uṇarvu [adjunct-awareness, namely ego or jīva, the adjunct-conflated awareness ‘I am this body’, which is what attributes adjuncts not only to itself but also to God] is [what makes them seem] different. [However, though the soul (jīva) is aware of itself as a certain set of adjuncts, namely the five sheaths that constitute whatever person it currently seems to be, and consequently attributes certain other adjuncts to God, God always remains just as pure awareness, in the clear view of which no adjuncts exist at all, so the differences between God and soul seem to exist only in the view of the soul and not in the view of God.]
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-05: We seem to be ego, which is what is also called ‘soul’ (jīva), only because we have imposed limitations on ourself by being aware of ourself as ‘I am this body’, but these limitations are not real but just illusory adjuncts (upādhi), so even when we seem to have imposed these unreal limitations upon ourself, what we essentially are is just infinite being, which is what is called ‘God’ (īśaṉ)
2023-12-07: ஒரு பொருள் (oru poruḷ), the one substance, is our very existence or being, because it alone is what we actually are, and it is also what God actually is, so in our ‘இருக்கும் இயற்கை’ (irukkum iyaṟkai), ‘existing nature’ or ‘being nature’, God and we are just this one substance, as he says in this verse
2022-11-09: Just as iron is the one substance that constitutes both a magnet and an ordinary piece of iron, sat-cit (pure being, which is pure awareness, ‘I am’) is the one substance (poruḷ or vastu) of both Arunachala and ourself, but just as the magnetic particles of iron in a magnet are all aligned to face in one direction, allowing its magnetic nature to manifest, whereas the magnetic particles in an ordinary piece of iron are scattered to face in many directions, thereby obscuring its magnetic nature, so Arunachala, being pure awareness, is always facing towards itself alone, whereas the attention of ourself as ego is always scattered outwards (away from ourself) under the sway of our viṣaya-vāsanās to face in many different directions, thereby obscuring our real nature as pure awareness
2022-08-24: What he refers to here both as ‘இருக்கும் இயற்கை’ (irukkum iyaṟkai), ‘existing nature’, and as ‘ஒரு பொருள்’ (oru poruḷ), ‘one substance’, is sat-cit, pure existence-awareness, which is what always shines in our heart as our fundamental awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’, so this alone is what both Arunachala (God or īśa) and we (ego, soul or jīva) actually are
2022-07-02: What he refers to here as ‘இருக்கும் இயற்கை’ (irukkum iyaṟkai), ‘existing nature’ or ‘being nature’, is the real nature of both Arunachala and ourself, which is pure being, so this is what we actually are, and hence it is the ‘ஒரு பொருள்’ (oru poruḷ), the ‘one substance’, that he says is both God (īśa) and soul (jīva)
2022-03-31: Though outwardly அழகு (aṙahu) and சுந்தரம் (sundaram) differ in their form and appearance, inwardly their பொருள் (poruḷ), their substance or meaning, namely beauty, is one, just as the பொருள் (poruḷ) or substance of God and soul is one even though they differ in their external form and appearance
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 24: God and soul are just one substance, but only their adjuncts differ
2021-02-18: Ego as ego is just an illusory appearance, so it has no existence of its own, but as pure awareness it does exist and is therefore real
2020-11-01: What Bhagavan refers to as ‘ஒரு பொருள்’ (oru poruḷ), ‘one substance’, is pure awareness, which is our ‘இருக்கும் இயற்கை’ (irukkum iyaṟkai), ‘existing nature’ or ‘being nature’, which means what we actually are
2020-02-24: Self-awareness + awareness of adjuncts = ego or jīva, whereas self-awareness without any awareness of adjuncts (and hence without any awareness of anything else whatsoever) = our real nature or God
2019-10-25: When we rise and stand as ego our fundamental awareness ‘I am’ seems to be mixed and conflated with awareness of adjuncts (upādhi-uṇarvu), so this is what creates a seeming separation between ourself as we actually are (the pure awareness ‘I am’), which is what is called ‘God’ (īśa), and ourself as ego (the false awareness ‘I am this body’), which is what is called ‘soul’ (jīva)
2018-01-04: This verse clearly illustrates Bhagavan’s use of பொருள் (poruḷ) in the sense of ‘substance’
2017-02-19: What is the difference between God and the ego?
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 24: what seemingly separates us from the reality that we actually are is only our awareness of adjuncts
2015-11-17: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 24 and 25: experiencing ourself without adjuncts is experiencing what we actually are
2015-07-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 24 and 25: the essential oneness of our ego and our real self
2015-06-25: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 24: our ego and God are only one substance
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 25:
தன்னை யுபாதிவிட் டோர்வது தானீசன்
றன்னை யுணர்வதா முந்தீபற
தானா யொளிர்வதா லுந்தீபற.
taṉṉai yupādhiviṭ ṭōrvadu tāṉīśaṉ
ḏṟaṉṉai yuṇarvadā mundīpaṟa
tāṉā yoḷirvadā lundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: தன்னை உபாதி விட்டு ஓர்வது தான் ஈசன் தன்னை உணர்வது ஆம், தானாய் ஒளிர்வதால்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): taṉṉai upādhi viṭṭu ōrvadu tāṉ īśaṉ taṉṉai uṇarvadu ām, tāṉ-āy oḷirvadāl.
அன்வயம்: தானாய் ஒளிர்வதால், தன்னை உபாதி விட்டு ஓர்வது தான் ஈசன் தன்னை உணர்வது ஆம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): tāṉ-āy oḷirvadāl, taṉṉai upādhi viṭṭu ōrvadu tāṉ īśaṉ taṉṉai uṇarvadu ām.
English translation: Knowing oneself leaving aside adjuncts is itself knowing God, because of shining as oneself.
Explanatory paraphrase: Knowing [or being aware of] oneself without adjuncts is itself knowing God, because [God is what is always] shining as oneself [one’s own real nature, namely pure awareness, which is oneself without any adjuncts].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-05: Though as ego or soul (jīva) we are aware of ourself as a certain set of adjuncts, namely the five sheaths that constitute whatever person we currently seem to be, and consequently attribute certain other adjuncts to God, God always remains just as pure being-awareness (sat-cit), in the clear view of which no adjuncts exist at all, so the differences between God and ourself seem to exist only in the view of ourself and not in the view of God. In order to know God as he actually is, therefore, all that is required is that we should know ourself without adjuncts
2023-05-16: What brahman actually is is only ‘I’ devoid of all adjuncts, so to know brahman we must know ‘I’ devoid of all adjuncts, and to know ‘I’ devoid of all adjuncts we must attend to nothing other than ‘I’
2022-07-02: Since we mistake ourself to be one set of adjuncts, we take Arunachala to be another set of adjuncts, but since he is never aware of himself as anything other than pure being-awareness (sat-cit), he is never aware of any adjuncts at all, so he never sees us as anything other than himself, and hence if we are to see him as he actually is, which is as he sees himself, all we need to do is to see ourself without adjuncts
2022-03-31: By virtue of our existing nature, ‘I am’, we and Arunachala (jīva and śiva) are always one substance (poruḷ), like aṙahu and sundaram, but to see ourself as such, we need to see ourself without adjuncts
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 25: seeing oneself without adjuncts is seeing God, because he is oneself
2021-02-18: Ego is just a false awareness of ourself, an awareness of ourself as if we were a body, but if we investigate it keenly enough, its adjuncts will slip off and we will see that it is nothing other than pure awareness, ‘I am’
2020-12-27: God is nothing other than our own real nature (ātma-svarūpa), but so long as we rise as ego and thereby limit ourself as a finite set of adjuncts (namely a body consisting of five sheaths) he seems to be something other than ourself, so we can know him as he actually is only by knowing ourself without adjuncts
2020-11-01: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 24-25: we already know ourself, so we do not need to know anything new, but just need to know ourself without adjuncts
2020-02-24: If we attend only to ‘I am’, thereby withdrawing our attention from everything else, including all our adjuncts, we will thereby leave aside all adjuncts, and what will then remain is only pure awareness, which is what we always actually are
2020-02-24: Self-awareness + awareness of adjuncts = ego or jīva, whereas self-awareness without any awareness of adjuncts (and hence without any awareness of anything else whatsoever) = our real nature or God
2019-12-10: We are aware of things other than ourself only when we are aware of ourself as a body, and so long as we are aware of ourself as a body we are not aware of ourself as we actually are, so we need to be aware of ourself without being aware of the body or any other adjuncts
2019-10-25: To see God as he actually is, namely as pure awareness, which is our real nature, all we need do is to see ourself without any adjuncts (upādhi), which means without any awareness of adjuncts (upādhi-uṇarvu)
2017-02-19: What is the difference between God and the ego?
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 25: being aware of ‘I am’ without adjuncts is being aware of the reality
2015-11-17: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 24 and 25: experiencing ourself without adjuncts is experiencing what we actually are
2015-07-31: Upadēśa Undiyār verses 24 and 25: the essential oneness of our ego and our real self
2015-06-25: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 25: knowing ourself without adjuncts is knowing God
2014-08-01: Self-awareness is the very nature of ‘I’
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 26:
தானா யிருத்தலே தன்னை யறிதலாந்
தானிரண் டற்றதா லுந்தீபற
தன்மய நிட்டையீ துந்தீபற.
tāṉā yiruttalē taṉṉai yaṟidalān
tāṉiraṇ ḍaṯṟadā lundīpaṟa
taṉmaya niṭṭhaiyī dundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: தான் ஆய் இருத்தலே தன்னை அறிதல் ஆம், தான் இரண்டு அற்றதால். தன்மய நிட்டை ஈது.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): tāṉ-āy iruttal-ē taṉṉai aṟidal ām, tāṉ iraṇḍu aṯṟadāl. taṉmaya niṭṭhai īdu.
அன்வயம்: தான் இரண்டு அற்றதால், தான் ஆய் இருத்தலே தன்னை அறிதல் ஆம். ஈது தன்மய நிட்டை.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): tāṉ iraṇḍu aṯṟadāl, tāṉ-āy iruttal-ē taṉṉai aṟidal ām. īdu taṉmaya niṭṭhai.
English translation: Being oneself alone is knowing oneself, because oneself is devoid of two. This is tanmaya-niṣṭhā.
Explanatory paraphrase: Being oneself [that is, being as one actually is without rising to know anything else] alone is knowing oneself, because oneself [one’s real nature] is devoid of two [that is, devoid of the fundamental duality of subject and object, knower and thing known, and also devoid of any possibility of being divided as two selves, one self as a subject to know the other self as an object]. This is tanmaya-niṣṭhā [‘steadfastness as that’: the state of being firmly fixed or established as ‘that’ (tat), the one infinite reality called brahman].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-12: Since consciousness can never be an object of awareness, we can know it as it is only by being as it is
2024-09-05: Being as we actually are without rising as ego is knowing ourself as we actually are
2023-11-08: Knowing (or being aware of) anything other than ourself is an action, because it entails a movement of our mind or attention away from ourself towards that other thing, whereas knowing ourself is not an action but just being, because it does not entail even the slightest movement of our attention away from ourself
2022-10-27: Being pure awareness, Arunachala alone is both what knows and what it knows, and it itself is also the means by which it knows itself, because it knows itself just by being itself, as Bhagavan points out in this verse: ‘தான் ஆய் இருத்தலே தன்னை அறிதல் ஆம், தான் இரண்டு அற்றதால்’ (tāṉ-āy iruttal-ē taṉṉai aṟidal ām, tāṉ iraṇḍu aṯṟadāl), ‘Being oneself alone is knowing oneself, because oneself is devoid of two’
2022-09-23: Though we as pure awareness always know ourself, our knowing ourself is not a knowing like any other kind of knowing, because knowing anything else is an act of knowing, whereas knowing ourself is not an act of knowing, since we know ourself just by being ourself
2022-07-02: The real nature of Arunachala cannot be seen or known as an object but only as the reality of ourself, the subject, and we can see it only being it, because it cannot be seen or known by anything other than itself
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 26: being oneself alone is seeing oneself, because oneself is not two
2022-03-24: When the mind looks deep enough within itself it will thereby be swallowed by its own cittva, and thus it will cease to be anything other than its own cittva, and since being cittva alone is seeing cittva, as he implies in this verse, it is only by being completely swallowed by its own cittva that the mind can see its own cittva
2021-03-22: We cannot be aware of ourself as we actually are so long as we remain as ego, so it is only by being as we actually are that we can be aware of ourself as we actually are
2021-01-30: What we actually are is pure awareness, and pure awareness can be known only by itself, so it is only by being pure awareness that we can know pure awareness
2020-11-01: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 26: since we are awareness and not an object, we know ourself just by being ourself
2020-11-01: What Bhagavan refers to here as ‘தன்னை அறிதல்’ (taṉṉai aṟidal), ‘knowing oneself’, is knowing ourself as we actually are (in other words, ‘தன்னை உபாதி விட்டு ஓர்வது’ (taṉṉai upādhi viṭṭu ōrvadu), ‘knowing ourself without adjuncts’), and what we actually are is just ‘I am’, our fundamental awareness of our own existence
2020-11-01: In this context ‘தான்’ (tāṉ), ‘oneself’, means ourself as we actually are, and since what we actually are is what is called ‘brahman’, which is often referred to as ‘that’ (tat), he concludes this verse by saying ‘தன்மய நிட்டை ஈது’ (taṉmaya niṭṭhai īdu), ‘This is tanmaya-niṣṭhā [the state of abiding or being firmly fixed as tat]’, in which ‘ஈது’ (īdu), ‘this’, refers to the state of being and knowing oneself, as described in the first sentence of this verse.
2019-12-16: Comment explaining that by being aware of ourself as we actually are we are thereby being as we actually are
2019-10-25: What knows pure awareness is only pure awareness, so in order to know our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is pure awareness, we must just be as we always actually are
2019-08-26: Comment explaining that what we actually are is pure awareness, which is always aware of itself as it actually is, so being as we actually are entails being aware of ourself as we actually are, and being aware of ourself as we actually are entails being as we actually are
2019-08-24: Only by being ātma-jñāna (pure self-awareness) can we know ātma-jñāna, because ātma-jñāna is not anything other than ourself, and therefore cannot be known as anything other than ourself
2018-01-01: What Bhagavan says in the third sentence of the first maṅgalam verse, namely ‘உள்ளத்தே உள்ளபடி உள்ளதே உள்ளல்’ (uḷḷattē uḷḷapaḍi uḷḷadē uḷḷal), ‘Being in the heart as it is alone is thinking [of the existing substance] [or meditating on it]’, echoes what he had earlier written in this verse, namely ‘தானாய் இருத்தலே தன்னை அறிதல் ஆம், தான் இரண்டு அற்றதால்’ (tāṉ-āy iruttal-ē taṉṉai aṟidal ām, tāṉ iraṇḍu aṯṟadāl), ‘Being oneself [or more literally, being as oneself] alone is knowing oneself, because oneself is not two’
2017-01-15: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 26: being oneself is knowing oneself
2016-04-17: Comment in which it is explained that self-attentiveness is not an action (karma) or mental activity but is simply an actionless state of just being (summā iruppadu), because it is a focusing of our awareness on ourself alone, and being aware of ourself alone is our real nature
2016-03-16: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 26: being aware what we are is not transitive awareness but just being the intransitive awareness that we actually are
2014-11-09: Why should we believe that ‘the Self’ is as we believe it to be?
2014-08-01: Self-awareness is the very nature of ‘I’
2014-04-11: Ātma-vicāra and nirvikalpa samādhi
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 27:
அறிவறி யாமையு மற்ற வறிவே
யறிவாகு முண்மையீ துந்தீபற
வறிவதற் கொன்றிலை யுந்தீபற.
aṟivaṟi yāmaiyu maṯṟa vaṟivē
yaṟivāhu muṇmaiyī dundīpaṟa
vaṟivadaṟ koṉḏṟilai yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: அறிவு அறியாமையும் அற்ற அறிவே அறிவு ஆகும். உண்மை ஈது. அறிவதற்கு ஒன்று இலை.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): aṟivu aṟiyāmai-y-um aṯṟa aṟivē aṟivu āhum. uṇmai īdu. aṟivadaṟku oṉḏṟu ilai.
அன்வயம்: அறிவு அறியாமையும் அற்ற அறிவே அறிவு ஆகும். ஈது உண்மை. அறிவதற்கு ஒன்று இலை.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): aṟivu aṟiyāmai-y-um aṯṟa aṟivē aṟivu āhum. īdu uṇmai. aṟivadaṟku oṉḏṟu ilai.
English translation: Only knowledge that is devoid of knowledge and ignorance is knowledge. This is real. There is not anything for knowing.
Explanatory paraphrase: Only knowledge [in the sense of awareness] that is devoid of knowledge and ignorance [of anything other than oneself] is [actual] knowledge [or awareness]. This [alone] is [what is] real [or true], [because in the clear view of oneself as pure awareness] there is not anything [other than oneself for one either] to know [or to not know].
Explanations and discussions:
2024-09-12: Only consciousness of what actually exists is real consciousness, and since what actually exists is only pure consciousness, it alone is real consciousness
2023-07-27: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 27: real awareness is devoid of both knowledge and ignorance of anything other than itself, because there is nothing other than itself for it either to know or to not know
2022-09-23: What he means in the first sentence by ‘அறிவு அறியாமையும்’ (aṟivu aṟiyāmaiyum), ‘knowledge and ignorance’, is knowledge and ignorance about anything other than oneself, so the awareness (aṟivu) that is devoid of such knowledge and ignorance (or knowing and not knowing) is pure awareness, and hence what he implies in this sentence is that pure awareness alone is real awareness
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 27: there is nothing to know, so real awareness is devoid of knowledge and ignorance
2021-03-22: The distinction between transitive and intransitive awareness is one of the fundamental principles of Bhagavan’s teachings, and it is explained by him, albeit without using these terms, in verse 27 of Upadēśa Undiyār and verses 10, 11, 12, 13 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu
2021-02-02: When it is said that ‘everything is one’, it does not mean that everything is real, but that what appears as everything is only one thing, namely ourself, so instead of trying to know anything else, we should turn within to face ourself alone and thereby know ourself as we actually are, namely as pure awareness: awareness that is never aware of anything other than itself, because nothing else exists for it to be aware of
2020-03-09: Real awareness is devoid of ignorance of anything else for the same reason that it is devoid of awareness or knowledge of anything else, namely that that nothing other than itself exists either for it to know or for it to be ignorant of
2020-02-02: What we actually are is only pure awareness, which means awareness that is not aware of anything other than itself, because in its clear view nothing other than itself exists for it to be aware of
2020-01-16: When we are aware of ourself as we actually are, nothing else will exist for us to know
2020-01-05: One of several comments explaining why Bhagavan says ‘Therefore when the world appears, svarūpa does not appear; when svarūpa appears (shines), the world does not appear’ in the fourth paragraph of Nāṉ Ār?
2019-10-25: Awareness of ourself mixed and conflated with adjuncts is what is called ‘ego’ or ‘mind’, which alone is what is aware of all other phenomena, so being aware of ourself without adjuncts means being aware of absolutely nothing other than ourself
2019-06-28: The reason why real awareness is completely devoid of knowledge and ignorance about other things is explained by Bhagavan in the final sentence of this verse: ‘அறிவதற்கு ஒன்று இலை’ (aṟiyum adu uṇmai aṟivu āhādu), ‘there is not anything for knowing’
2019-02-20: Since nothing other than oneself actually exists, being aware of other things is not real awareness, so real awareness is only awareness that is devoid of awareness or ignorance of anything else
2019-01-31: When we are aware of ourself as we actually are, there will be nothing else for us to know, as Bhagavan implied in the second sentence of verse 3 of Āṉma-Viddai and as he stated more explicitly in this verse
2018-11-08: The reason why real awareness is completely devoid of knowledge (or awareness) and ignorance of any other things is that it alone actually exists, so in its clear view there is absolutely nothing else for it be aware of, or for it to know or be ignorant of
2018-04-30: Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu verse 12 and Upadēśa Undiyār verse 27: real knowledge or awareness is that which is completely devoid of both knowing and not knowing
2018-04-18: Real awareness is devoid of awareness or ignorance of anything else, because there is nothing else for it to know
2017-05-28: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 27: what is real is only awareness devoid of knowledge and ignorance, because nothing at all exists for it to know
2015-09-22: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 27: we are devoid of knowledge and ignorance
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 28:
தனாதியல் யாதெனத் தான்றெரி கிற்பின்
னனாதி யனந்தசத் துந்தீபற
வகண்ட சிதானந்த முந்தீபற.
taṉādiyal yādeṉat tāṉḏṟeri hiṟpiṉ
ṉaṉādi yaṉantasat tundīpaṟa
vakhaṇḍa cidāṉanda mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: தனாது இயல் யாது என தான் தெரிகில், பின் அனாதி அனந்த சத்து அகண்ட சித் ஆனந்தம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): taṉādu iyal yādu eṉa tāṉ terihil, piṉ aṉādi aṉanta sattu akhaṇḍa cit āṉandam.
அன்வயம்: தான் தனாது இயல் யாது என தெரிகில், பின் அனாதி அனந்த அகண்ட சத்து சித் ஆனந்தம்.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): tāṉ taṉādu iyal yādu eṉa terihil, piṉ aṉādi aṉanta akhaṇḍa sattu cit āṉandam.
English translation: If one knows what the nature of oneself is, then beginningless, endless and unbroken existence-awareness-happiness.
Explanatory paraphrase: If one knows what the [real] nature of oneself is, then [what will remain existing and shining is only the real nature of oneself (ātma-svarūpa), which is] anādi [beginningless], ananta [endless, limitless or infinite] and akhaṇḍa [unbroken, undivided or unfragmented] sat-cit-ānanda [existence-awareness-happiness].
Explanations and discussions:
2023-05-16: Our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what shines eternally as ‘I am I’, is pure being-awareness-happiness (sat-cit-ānanda), which is beginningless (anādi), infinite (ananta) and undivided (akhaṇḍa)
2022-07-02: What we actually are is sat-cit-ānanda, pure being (sat), pure awareness (cit) and pure happiness (ānanda), which is infinite, eternal, indivisible and immutable
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 28: one’s real nature is imperishable unborn full awareness-happiness
2021-11-26: Our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is what shines eternally as ‘I am I’, is pure being-awareness-happiness (sat-cit-ānanda), which is beginningless (anādi), infinite (ananta) and undivided (akhaṇḍa)
2020-10-19: Being anādi (beginningless), ananta (endless, limitless or infinite) and akhaṇḍa (unbroken, undivided or unfragmented), this state is timeless, immutable and devoid of even the slightest division of subject and object, and hence devoid of even the subtlest of phenomena or changes
2020-05-28: What we actually are is eternal, infinite and immutable sat-cit-ānanda, so if we want to experience infinite happiness (ānanda), we need to be aware of ourself as we actually are, and in order to be aware of ourself as we actually are we need to investigate ourself and thereby surrender this erroneous self-awareness called ego
2019-10-25: Pure awareness, which is the real nature of ourself (ātma-svarūpa), is sat (being or existence in the sense of what actually exists), cit (awareness in the sense of what is actually aware) and ānanda (happiness in the sense of what is actually happy), so when we know what our real nature is, what will remain is only sat-cit-ānanda, which is beginningless, endless, infinite and indivisible
2019-06-28: When by means of self-investigation and self-surrender we manage to eradicate ego entirely, everything else will cease to exist along with it, so what will then remain as ‘one only without a second’ (ēkam ēva advitīyam) is just pure awareness, whose nature is beginningless, endless, infinite and indivisible sat-cit-ānanda
2018-11-08: What actually exists is only our real nature, which is pure awareness, so it alone is what seems to have been divided or separated into subject (ego) and objects (phenomena), but though it seems to have been divided, it has never actually been divided, because it is indivisible
2018-04-30: When Bhagavan looked at himself, the perceiver (the ego) disappeared, and along with it all perceptions (all phenomena or objects perceived) also disappeared, because he saw that what actually exists is only pure, infinite, indivisible, immutable and eternal self-awareness
2017-07-27: Liberation is eternal: beginningless, endless and unbroken
2017-06-27: Māyā is nothing but our own mind, so it seems to exist only when we seem to be this mind
2017-03-24: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: our real nature is infinite and undivided, so nothing else exists to know it
2017-03-08: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: when everything else ceases to exist, what remains is only beginningless, infinite and undivided sat-cit-ānanda
2016-12-14: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: the nature of ‘the Self’ is diametrically opposite to the nature of phenomena
2016-10-19: As we actually are, we do nothing and are aware of nothing other than ourself
2016-10-02: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: the pure self-awareness ‘I am I’ is beginningless, endless and indivisible
2016-07-13: Ātma-jñāna is the only real state and is immutable and indivisible, so there are no stages of it or states other than it
2015-09-22: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: the real nature of ourself
2015-06-25: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 28: sat-cit-ānanda is eternal, infinite and indivisible
2014-11-20: Is there any such thing as a ‘self-realised’ person?
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 29:
பந்தவீ டற்ற பரசுக முற்றவா
றிந்த நிலைநிற்ற லுந்தீபற
விறைபணி நிற்றலா முந்தீபற.
bandhavī ḍaṯṟa parasukha muṯṟavā
ṟinda nilainiṯṟa lundīpaṟa
viṟaipaṇi niṯṟalā mundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: பந்த வீடு அற்ற பரசுகம் உற்றவாறு இந்த நிலை நிற்றல் இறை பணி நிற்றல் ஆம்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): bandha vīḍu aṯṟa para-sukham uṯṟa-v-āṟu inda nilai niṯṟal iṟai-paṇi niṯṟal ām.
English translation: Standing in this state, thereby experiencing supreme bliss, which is devoid of bondage and liberation, is standing in the service of God.
Explanatory paraphrase: Standing [remaining, abiding or steadfastly being] in this state [of beginningless, infinite and indivisible sat-cit-ānanda], thereby experiencing supreme bliss, which is devoid of [the dyad or duality of] bondage and liberation, is standing in the service of God [or is standing as God directed].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 29: the divine soul experiences supreme happiness beyond bondage and liberation
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
Verse 30:
யானற் றியல்வது தேரி னெதுவது
தானற் றவமென்றா னுந்தீபற
தானாம் ரமணேச னுந்தீபற.
yāṉaṯ ṟiyalvadu tēri ṉeduvadu
dāṉaṯ ṟavameṉḏṟā ṉundīpaṟa
tāṉām ramaṇēśa ṉundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: ‘யான் அற்று இயல்வது தேரின் எது, அது தான் நல் தவம்’ என்றான் தான் ஆம் ரமணேசன்
Padacchēdam (word-separation): ‘yāṉ aṯṟu iyalvadu tēriṉ edu, adu-dāṉ nal tavam’ eṉḏṟāṉ tāṉ ām ramaṇēśaṉ.
English translation: ‘I ceasing, what if one knows what remains, that alone is good tapas’: thus said Lord Ramana, who is oneself.
Explanatory paraphrase: ‘What [exists and shines alone] if one knows what remains after I [ego] has ceased to exist, [just being] that [namely egoless pure awareness] alone is good tapas [spiritual austerity or asceticism]’: thus said Lord Ramana, who is oneself [one’s own real nature].
Explanations and discussions:
2022-03-24: Upadēśa Sāraḥ verse 30: one’s shining devoid of ‘I’ is great tapas
2015-08-22: Upadēśa Undiyār verse 30: experiencing what remains when the ego dissolves is tapas
2009-06-08: Upadēśa Undiyār: an explanatory paraphrase
வாழ்த்து (vāṙttu): Concluding Verses of Praise (composed by Sri Muruganar)
Vāṙttu verse 1:
இருடிக ளெல்லா மிறைவ னடியை
வருடி வணங்கின ருந்தீபற
வாழ்த்து முழங்கின ருந்தீபற.
iruḍiga ḷellā miṟaiva ṉaḍiyai
varuḍi vaṇaṅgiṉa rundīpaṟa
vāṙttu muṙaṅgiṉa rundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: இருடிகள் எல்லாம் இறைவன் அடியை வருடி வணங்கினர்; வாழ்த்து முழங்கினர்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): iruḍigaḷ ellām iṟaivaṉ aḍiyai varuḍi vaṇaṅgiṉar; vāṙttu muṙaṅgiṉar.
English translation: Touching the feet of God, all the ṛṣis paid obeisance; they sang aloud praise.
Explanatory paraphrase: Touching the feet of God [Lord Siva], all the ṛṣis [the ‘rishis’ or ascetics in the Daruka forest] paid obeisance [and] sang aloud praise [to him]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.133)
Vāṙttu verse 2:
உற்றார்க் குறுதி யுபதேச வுந்தியார்
சொற்ற குருபர னுந்தீபற
சுமங்கள வேங்கட னுந்தீபற.
uṯṟārk kuṟudi yupadēśa vundiyār
soṯṟa gurupara ṉundīpaṟa
sumaṅgaḷa vēṅkaṭa ṉundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: உற்றார்க்கு உறுதி உபதேச வுந்தியார் சொற்ற குருபரன் சுமங்கள வேங்கடன்.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): uṯṟārkku uṟudi upadēśa-v-undiyār soṯṟa guru-paraṉ sumaṅgaḷa vēṅkaṭaṉ.
English translation: The supreme guru who sang Upadēśa Undiyār, an assurance to devotees, is the auspicious Venkatan.
Explanatory paraphrase: The supreme guru who sang Upadēśa Undiyār [as] an assurance to devotees [friends or those close to him, implying those who came to him for salvation] is the auspicious Venkatan [Sri Ramana]. (Tiruvundiyār 1.134)
Vāṙttu verse 3:
பல்லாண்டு பல்லாண்டு பற்பன்னூ றாயிரம்
பல்லாண்டு பல்லாண்டு முந்தீபற
பார்மிசை வாழ்கவே யுந்தீபற.
pallāṇḍu pallāṇḍu paṯpaṉṉū ṟāyiram
pallāṇḍu pallāṇḍu mundīpaṟa
pārmisai vāṙgavē yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: பல் ஆண்டு, பல் ஆண்டு, பல் பல் நூறு ஆயிரம் பல் ஆண்டு, பல் ஆண்டும் பார்மிசை வாழ்கவே.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): pal āṇḍu, pal āṇḍu, pal pal nūṟu āyiram pal āṇḍu, pal āṇḍum pār-misai vāṙga-v-ē.
English translation: Many years, many years, many hundreds of thousands of years, many years may he shine gloriously on earth.
Explanatory paraphrase: [For] many years, many years, many hundreds of thousands of years, many years may he [Sri Ramana] shine gloriously on earth. (Tiruvundiyār 1.135)
Vāṙttu verse 4:
இசையெடுப் போருஞ் செவிமடுப் போரும்
வசையறத் தேர்வோரு முந்தீபற
வாழி பலவூழி யுந்தீபற.
isaiyeḍup pōruñ cevimaḍup pōrum
vasaiyaṟat tērvōru mundīpaṟa
vāṙi palavūṙi yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: இசை எடுப்போரும், செவிமடுப்போரும், வசை அற தேர்வோரும் வாழி பல ஊழி.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): isai eḍuppōr-um, sevimaḍuppōr-um, vasai aṟa tērvōr-um vāṙi pala ūṙi.
அன்வயம்: இசை எடுப்போரும், செவிமடுப்போரும், வசை அற தேர்வோரும் பல ஊழி வாழி.
Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): isai eḍuppōr-um, sevimaḍuppōr-um, vasai aṟa tērvōr-um pala ūṙi vāṙi.
English translation: May those who sing, those who hear and those who flawlessly understand shine gloriously for many aeons.
Explanatory paraphrase: May those who sing, those who hear [literally feed or fill their ears with] and those who flawlessly understand [this Upadēśa Undiyār] shine gloriously for many aeons. (Tiruvundiyār 1.136)
Vāṙttu verse 5:
கற்கு மவர்களுங் கற்றுணர்ந் தாங்குத்தா
நிற்கு மவர்களு முந்தீபற
நீடூழி வாழியே யுந்தீபற.
kaṟku mavargaḷuṅ kaṯṟuṇarn dāṅguttā
niṟku mavargaḷu mundīpaṟa
nīḍūṙi vāṙiyē yundīpaṟa.
பதச்சேதம்: கற்கும் அவர்களும் கற்று உணர்ந்து ஆங்கு தான் நிற்கும் அவர்களும் நீடு ஊழி வாழியே.
Padacchēdam (word-separation): kaṟkum avargaḷ-um kaṯṟu uṇarndu āṅgu tāṉ niṟkum avargaḷ-um nīḍu ūṙi vāṙi-y-ē.
English translation: May those who learn, and those who, learning and understanding, stand accordingly, shine gloriously for long aeons.
Explanatory paraphrase: May those who learn [this Upadēśa Undiyār], and those who, learning and understanding [it], stand [remain or abide] accordingly [as beginningless, infinite and indivisible sat-cit-ānanda], shine gloriously for long aeons. (Tiruvundiyār 1.137)
Posts
261 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 261 of 261Sanjay Lohia,
as you say silence is always there - uninterrupted. Let us become able to avoid all disturbances and disruptive factors of being nothing but that still ocean of undivided and eternal pure self-awareness, freed from the rising ego.
Consciousness does not comprise two - knower and known.
The truth of knowing consciousness is that one shines as consciousness, freed from the rising ego.
(Muruganar, The shining of my Lord, Selected Verses from Sri Ramana Jnana Bodham and other Muruganar Texts, edited by David Godman, 2017)
@ D Samarender Reddy
"Also, note that Bhagavan does not say how long you should search for the mind nor how many times you should search for the mind, so I wonder if Bhagavan means that if we search for the mind correctly, doing so once is enough because to see the absence of something you need to look only once carefully, right?..."
Sir: In my experience, seeing non existence of mind only once, does not work. It rises again. I would assume that Bhagavan's advice is to see its non existence repeatedly till this knowledge gets established.
Sanjay Srivastava and D Samarender Reddy,
I reckon this is not about seeing the absence of mind or its non-existence but seeing its real essential nature.
Sanjay Lohia, Agnostic and Sanjay Srivastava,
You guys may be right that it takes repeated attempts to get established in the Truth. Here is to perseverance, then.
The songs in Sri Arunachala Aksaramanamalai find a parallel in the mystic songs of Meera
India has a rich tradition of mystic saints. Among them I can recall the name of Kabir, Surdas, Rahim and Meera. The songs of these saints match or echo the verses of Sri Arunachala Aksaramanamalai. The following extract is taken from the book Mystic Songs of Meera by V. K. Subramanian, and it has been published by Abhinav Publications (2005 edition):
Extract from the Introduction of this book:
Among the mystic saints of India, the royal princess of Rajasthan, Meera, occupies a pride of place. Women mystics are only a few among the many mystics who lived in various regions in India.
All the mystics who have adopted bridal mysticism have used the imagery of human love between man and woman to express their love for God and the restless yearning for union. Meera is no exception. Hence, in all her songs we find the pain of the separated lover seeking to unite with the Beloved and the description of joy in union. The manifestation of God, which Meera chose to adore, is Krishna.
A sample poem from this book (song no. 28, page 75):
Now, since you have taken my hand in protection,
Beloved! I have sought refuge in you!
It is your duty to protect me.
I know you are competent enough to do that!
The currents of the ocean of Samsara are very strong!
But you are my ship!
You are the world teacher! The support of the supportless!
Without you nothing happens!
In eons after eons, you have given liberation to your devotees!
Meera has sought refuge at your feet!
Please protect her honour!
My note: Isn’t this as moving and as inspiring as the verses of Sri Arunachala Aksaramanamalai? Of course, we find more affinity with the songs sung by Bhagavan, because he is our sadguru.
If one attentively observes that from where what says ‘I, I’ goes out, there the mind will be dissolved; that alone is tapas
Michael writes in his article titled: ‘That alone is tapas’: the first teachings that Sri Ramana gave to Kavyakantha Ganapati Sastri as follows:
Though tapas literally means ‘scorching’ or ‘burning’ and is generally used to mean any type of severe religious austerity or spiritual practice, what any form of tapas essentially entails is self-denial. Therefore according to Bhagavan real tapas is only the practice of ātma-vicāra, because this is the only means by which we can dissolve our ego, and without the complete dissolution of our ego we cannot really deny ourself. Any other form of self-denial is only a denial of what seems to be ‘mine’ but not a denial of what now seems to be ‘I’, namely our ego.
Once Kavyakantha prostrated to Bhagavan and said something to the effect: ‘I have studied all the Vedas and numerous other books; I have done countless crores of mantra-japa; I have fasted and eaten very little; yet what is actually meant by ‘tapas’ is still not clear to me. Graciously explain to me what tapas really is’. Bhagavan replied:
If one attentively observes that from where what says ‘I, I’ goes out, there the mind will be dissolved; that alone is tapas.
However Kavyakantha was bewildered by the unfamiliarity of this teachings, so he asked, ‘Is it not possible to attain that state even by mantra-japa?’, to which Bhagavan replied:
If one does japa of a mantra, if one attentively observes from where that mantra-sound goes out, there the mind is dissolved; that itself is tapas.
(I will continue this in my next comment)
In continuation of my previous comment:
My note: Many spiritual aspirants perform severe religious austerity or spiritual practice, thinking that that is the way to see God or have atma-sakshatkara or whatever. Many people go to Himalayas or to forests or to spiritual centres like Varanasi, Vrindavan and so on, and try to do all sort of practices there. Some like to go to Varanasi in their last days so that they can die there, because they believe death at Varanasi will give them moksha (liberation). I think earlier all these happened in large numbers, but such practices are still prevalent now.
However do these things have any real benefit? It may have some, but usually Bhagavan never approved such practices. He would say to the effect: ‘Can you leave your mind and go to the forest? Even if you go up in the sky, your mind will go with you. You need to subdue your mind, and this can be done wherever you are’.
He used to also say, ‘Just lead a householder’s life but try to be unattached to your worldly duties. Your worldly life is preordained. Let your hand be in society, but keep your mind cool in solitude. Abiding in self is solitude’. Thus Bhagavan never allowed anyone to abandon their family. If somebody wanted to leave their family, he uses to say, ‘What harm has your family done? Remain a householder and practise whatever you want to practise’.
In sort, he advised people to find who they are, and this can be done wherever they are. According to Bhagavan, self-investigation is the greatest and most powerful tapas. If we are destined to go to a forest or to Himalayas, it will happen according to our destiny. However, we should not deliberately try and plan such retreats.
He also said about tapas:
• The realization of that, which subsists when all trace of ‘I’ is gone, is good tapas.
• To be unattached and at peace, resigning all burdens to God, the Almighty, is the highest tapas.
Sanjay Lohia,
you quote Bhagavan "If one attentively observes that from where what says ‘I, I’ goes out, there the mind will be dissolved; that alone is tapas."
Why is the place from where the ego arises so important ?
Can the mind/ego not be dissolved somewhere else ?
Sanjay Lohia,
you say "If we are destined to go to a forest or to Himalayas, it will happen according to our destiny. However, we should not deliberately try and plan such retreats."
I am attracted to Arunachala Hill because - coming from Europe - I like to visit that place every year for some weeks. Perhaps or obviously my prarabdha destines me to be there. Or would you rather think that my desire to stay on Arunachala is just an attachment which I should give up.
onlooker, the place from where the ego rises is important, because it has to go back the way it came. From where has the ego risen? It has risen from ourself, atma-svarupa. It cannot be from any other source, because nothing other than atma-svarupa actually exists. As Bhagavan says in paragraph 7 of Nan Yar?:
What actually exists is only ātma-svarūpa [our own essential self]. The world, soul and God are kalpanaigaḷ [imaginations, fabrications, mental creations or illusory superimpositions] in it, like [the imaginary] silver [seen] in a shell. These three appear simultaneously and disappear simultaneously.
Everything else - the world, soul and a separate God - is an imagination of our ego. Everything else comes into existence only when the ego or mind comes into existence. When a wave rises from the ocean, where can it subside? It can only subside back in the ocean. Likewise since our ego has arisen from ourself, it can only subside back in ourself. Bhagavan has confirmed this paragraph 4 of Nan Yar?:
When the mind comes out from ātma-svarūpa, the world appears.
Yes, it is only your destiny which takes you to Arunachala every year. You inquire, ‘Or would you rather think that my desire to stay on Arunachala is just an attachment which I should give up’. No, you should not give up such a desire or attachment. It is only because such visits to Arunachala are beneficial to you, that Bhagavan is making these possible. The power of Arunachala cannot be denied, and Bhagavan has himself said so in so many words.
We need to be attached to Bhagavan and/or Arunachala (they are one and the same). However, the real Bhagavan/ Arunachala is within us. He is ourself as we really are. So if for some reason destiny prevents you from being in the physical presence of Arunachala, you can definitely contact him within you. Fortunately, such inward contact is not part of our destiny, and therefore we can turn within whenever we want to.
We do need to be attached to Bhagavan and/or Arunachala. Such attachment works like an antidote to all our other attachments. Eventually all our attachments (worldly or to Arunachala) have to go, but as long as we are attached to the things of this utterly illusory world, we do need to be attached to Bhagavan and/or Arunachala.
So you need not try to give up your visits to Arunachala. If these visits are no more necessary for you, Bhagavan would somehow prevent you from going there.
A Doubt on Avasthatraya Prakriya
Michael and Anyone Else Inclined to Answer,
We experience happiness in deep sleep and we remember it upon waking up. Now, the entity that remembers the happiness of deep sleep in waking stage obviously has to be the mind because remembrance means memory and memory is part of the mind. But only an entity which has experienced a thing can remember it later. Entity A cannot experience a thing and later it be remembered by entity B. So, since mind is remembering in the waking state the happiness of deep sleep it must have experienced that happiness in deep sleep, and to have experienced the happiness in deep sleep it must have existed in deep sleep in some fashion.
Moreover, Bhagavan concedes the same point in Talk 314 when he says, "A
man says “I slept happily”. Happiness was his experience. If not, how
could he speak of what he had not experienced? How did he experience
happiness in sleep, if the Self was pure? Who is it that speaks of that
experience now? The speaker is the vijnanatma (ignorant self) and
he speaks of prajnanatma (pure self). How can that hold? Was this
vijnanatma present in sleep? His present statement of the experience
of happiness in sleep makes one infer his existence in sleep. How
then did he remain? Surely not as in the waking state. He was there
very subtle. Exceedingly subtle vijnanatma experiences the happy
prajnanatma by means of maya mode. It is like the rays of the moon
seen below the branches, twigs and leaves of a tree.
The subtle vijnanatma seems apparently a stranger to the obvious
vijnanatma of the present moment. Why should we infer his existence
in sleep? Should we not deny the experience of happiness and be
done with this inference? No. The fact of the experience of happiness
cannot be denied, for everyone courts sleep and prepares a nice bed
for the enjoyment of sound sleep.
This brings us to the conclusion that the cogniser, cognition and the
cognised are present in all the three states, though there are differences in
their subtleties."
So, if the mind exosted in deep sleep as subtle vijnanatma, then how can we say that we are not the mind but Consciousness because the mind is present in all the three states.
Sanjay Lohia,
thanks for replying.
You say "the place from where the ego rises is important, because it has to go back the way it came. From where has the ego risen? It has risen from ourself, atma-svarupa. It cannot be from any other source, because nothing other than atma-svarupa actually exists."
Therefore nothing but atma-svarupa really exists. So no "place" whatsoever can exist separated from atma-svarupa. So how can there be a special place or source from where the ego has seemingly arisen ?
Till now I did only sporadically get a glimmer that the "real Bhagavan Arunachala" is permanent within me. But when I sometimes happily sit on a rock of one of Arunachala's slopes with consciousness focused inwardly with greatest possible vigilance I do not at all have the impression that the hill could be only an "unreal reflection" of the original inner presence of Lord Arunachala-Siva.
All, greetings.
Nothing related to the current topics, but I was thinking that would be interesting to set up an experiment that will go like this:
In a room there will be a person reading from "Talks with Ramana Maharshi". Let's say several pages for at east 10 minutes (or it could also be one of Michael's videos!).
Sitting in front of him, three persons that cannot take notes of what is read.
At the end of the reading, and after one or two hours, they are prompted to write down what was read before (assuming they all acknowledge they were all paying attention).
Would be interesting to see what comes out of that.
A great proportion of the "Talks" with Bhagavan sound like that to me, even more when we think Him addressing different levels of questioners' understanding. But we keep quoting that book as Bhagavan's "bible".
Food for thought.
m
D Samarender Reddy,
is it not said that the mind/ego does only seemingly exist in its own deluded view ?
onlooker, Bhagavan teaches us in the fifth paragraph of Nan Yar?:
What rises in this body as ‘I’, that alone is the mind. If [one] investigates in what place the thought called ‘I’ rises at first in the body, [one] will come to know that [it rises] in the heart [the innermost core of oneself, which is what one essentially is]. That alone is the birthplace of the mind.
When Bhagavan says ‘If [one] investigates in what place the thought called ‘I’ rises at first in the body’, he is using ‘place’ metaphorically. As he later says, the thought called ‘I’ rises in the heart (the innermost core of ourself, which is what one essentially is).
Our heart is a spaceless and timeless reality. It is only when we rise as this ego that the concept of space and time come into existence. Therefore, our ego cannot rise from a particular place in the literal sense.
Mouna, the food for thought which you gave us is quite interesting. If we listen to Michael’s video and try to transcribe or translate it after one or two hours, I am sure we will make a lot of mistakes in such transcriptions or translations. Therefore, this is what has happened to Talks, DBD and other recordings. They have inaccuracies and this is expected in any recording which is not done immediately.
D Samarender Reddy, the passage which you quote from Talks (314) is another clear example of the misrepresentation of Bhagavan’s teachings. Munagala ends this passage by concluding:
This brings us to the conclusion that the cogniser, cognition and the
cognised are present in all the three states, though there are differences in their subtleties.
Munagala has clearly drawn a wrong conclusion here. There is no ego or mind in sleep, so how can there be a cogniser, cognition and congnised in sleep? Metaphorically we can say that the cogniser, cognition and cognised are one in sleep. However, the way Munagala has written is a complete distortion of Bhagavan’s teachings.
It is sometime said that our ego exists in sleep in a seed form – they call it karana sarira (causal body). But this is only for explanatory purpose. Some of us may argue that since the ego is not destroyed in sleep, it must exist in sleep in some subtle form. However, this is not true. Even now the ego does not actually exist (although it seems to exist), so why should we assume that it existed in a seed form while we were asleep?
Moreover, as Bhagavan says in verse 26 of Ulladu Narpadu, when the ego comes into seeming existence that everything else also comes into seeming existence. So the concept of karana sarira (causal body) also comes into existence when we rise as an ego.
Our ego or mind is not there in sleep, but we do experience happiness in sleep, and we can recall such happiness. However, this does not indicate that our ego or mind was present in sleep. We, ourself as we actually are, carry our own ‘memory’ with us. It may be difficult to put this in words, but our pure self-awareness itself is the ‘memory’ of that awareness.
(I will continue this reply in my next comment)
In continuation of my previous comment in reply to D Samarender Reddy:
In this regards, it would be useful if we read Michael’s article: What is aware of the absence of the ego and mind in sleep? (25th July 2017):
Pure self-awareness is not aware of anything other than itself, but in some way that our mind cannot adequately conceive it is clearly aware that it alone exists. This is why Bhagavan was confidently able to make statements such as the following:
What actually exists is only ātma-svarūpa [the ‘own form’ or real nature of oneself]. (Nāṉ Yār? paragraph 7, first sentence)
Ātma-sukha [the happiness that is oneself] alone exists; that alone is real. (Nāṉ Yār? paragraph 14)
Oneself, who is jñāna [awareness], alone is real. (Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu verse 13)
What always exists by its own light is only that ēkātma-vastu [one self-substance]. (Ēkāṉma Pañcakam, kaliveṇbā version, verse 5)
Since pure self-awareness is clearly aware that it alone exists, it is in that sense always aware of the absence or non-existence of the ego or of anything else. Therefore for it there is only one state and not three (as Bhagavan points out in verse 32 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu Anubandham).
My note: Therefore, Michael is fully justified when he says that books such as Talks should not be fully trusted. We can read such books only after we have fully grasped the main principles of Bhagavan’s teachings as laid out in Ulladu Narpadu, Nan Yar? and Upadesa Undiyar, because afterwards we will be in a better position to discern the correctness of what has been recorded in Talks and similar books.
There are some useful things in Talks, but there are a lot of inaccuracies also.
Sanjay Lohia,
as you say the heart as the birthplace of the ego/mind cannot be considered as a "place" in the literal sense.
"If one attentively observes that from where what says ‘I, I’ goes out, there the mind will be dissolved; that alone is tapas."
So because it is not put in concrete terms where I shall try to attentively observe/look from where the ego rises and has to be dissolved I do simply look inwards (to the inside) without any direction. I think this is a passable/feasible way. Isn't it ?
onlooker, we are not an object but are the subject who is aware of all objects – or to be more accurate, we are the essence of the subject ‘I’. So while practising self-investigation we should attend to the subject 'I', by ignoring all objects.
Some people believe that they should attend to two digits right of the middle of the chest in order to correctly practise self-investigation. They believe that Bhagavan has indicated this place. However, Bhagavan never asked us to meditate on this centre. He has unequivocally asked us to meditate on ‘I’, and this is not on the right or left but it is what we actually are.
Yes, we have to simply look inwards - inside ourself. Let us take it that at present we are looking in front of us and this is 0 degrees in mathematical terms. We need to try and turn a 180 degrees towards ourself, and once we manage to do so our ego will be destroyed never to reappear again.
To put it differently, we need to turn within and scrutinize our self-awareness, by going deeper and deeper within ourself. If we manage to go, metaphorically speaking, to the very bottom of ourself, we (the ego) will not come out again. This is atma-jnana.
Sanjay Lohia,
as you say, to go to the very bottom of ourself and thus preventing the ego from rising, that has indeed to be called "good tapas".
Because till now I became not entirely freed from the 'I am the body' - delusion I am still governed by the wicked ego-mind. Therefore I regrettably never was able to keep the mind peacefully on that very bottom deep down in the heart and so I am not blessed with the fortune of the blissful experience of profound self-abidance. So in the mean time I am looking forward eagerly to Siva's sannidhi (presence of the Lord) coming
by trying to be attuned to the inward accessibility of the Lord.
Mouna,
Your post about the experiment was much needed in my opinion.
Do we listen to what Bhagavan wrote himself or someone else's understanding of what he said written from memory later on. Plus who was the person and what was their level of understanding.
Bhagavan's own writings are very clear and all we need, why add confusion.
Great post.
Thank you.
Advik, greetings
"Bhagavan's own writings are very clear and all we need, why add confusion."
Fully agree with your last statement (and the precedent ones).
thank you, be well,
m
Salazar
Take a hike (to borrow your expression) and don't forget to take your dictionary with you along with your thesaurus for good measure. That was a beautifully constructed reply, you have a wonderful way with words.
You can't take your own medicine can you Salazar.
Lets just hope the self finds itself (lol)!!
Don't forget to keep watching your thoughts without being distracted by them.
Yes I have read your other comments.
Also please feel free to continue pointing out others apparent lack of understanding to affirm your own.
Have you thought about teaching and sharing your wisdom?
Please don't.
Mouna
Same to you.
(let’s continue with the smart (or bad) ass fun)
Advik,
”Mouna. Same to you.”
”Don't forget to keep watching your thoughts without being distracted by them.”
Good advice thank you!
”Also please feel free to continue pointing out others apparent lack of understanding to affirm your own.”
OK, since you ask I will!
”Have you thought about teaching and sharing your wisdom?”
No. Should I?
”Please don't.”
Oh… ok.
be well my friend, humor is the only thing to take seriously
m
Sanjay Lohia,
Sorry, but I do not buy your explanation. I did not just quote Bhagavan; I also wrote my own reasoning before that as to why the mind must exist "in some fashion" in deep sleep. You have not countered my reasoning but merely said that we cannot trust the Talks as being authentic teaching of Bhagavan because of the possibility of errors in recording.
D Samarender Reddy, we could read Michael’s article: There is absolutely no difference between sleep and pure self-awareness (atma-jnana) in order to understand that our mind doesn’t exist in any form in sleep. However, it is up to us to draw our own inferences and conclusions. The following are some extracts from the aforesaid article:
1) In one sense ‘realisation’ (ātma-jñāna: self-knowledge or true self-awareness) is exactly the same as sleep, and in another sense it is not. From the perspective of ourself as this mind, sleep seems to be an imperfect state, firstly because we come out of it sooner or later, and secondly because it seems to be a state of darkness or nescience, so from this perspective sleep seems to be quite unlike ātma-jñāna.
2) However, according to Bhagavan sleep is not what it seems to be when viewed from the perspective of the mind or ego, because the mind was not present in sleep, so in waking and dream it cannot recall what was actually experienced in sleep. However, though we were not present in sleep as the mind, we were present as we actually are, which is just pure self-awareness, so we can clearly recall that we slept, but we cannot clearly recall what sleep was like.
(I will continue this reply in my next comment)
In continuation of my previous comment in reply to D Samarender Reddy:
3) Therefore according to Bhagavan sleep is not a state of self-ignorance but of pure self-awareness, as he pointed out, for example, in an answer recorded in the first chapter of Maharshi’s Gospel (2002 edition, page 9):
Sleep is not ignorance, it is one’s pure state; wakefulness is not knowledge, it is ignorance. There is full awareness in sleep and total ignorance in waking.
Since they are both states of pure self-awareness, there is absolutely no difference between sleep and ātma-jñāna, and they are not actually two states but just one — the only state that actually exists (which is what is sometimes called jāgrat-suṣupti, ‘wakeful sleep’, turīya, ‘the fourth’, or turīyātīta, ‘beyond the fourth’), as Bhagavan says in verse 460 of Guru Vācaka Kōvai:
If the beginningless filthy vāsanās [propensities or inclinations to be aware of anything other than oneself], which stood as the cause for dream and waking, are completely eradicated, the [seemingly] dull [or nescient] state of sleep, [which was considered to be] a void that leads one to suffer in a state of misery, will [turn out to] be atīta turya avasthā [the transcendent ‘fourth’ state].
4) Since no mind (or ego) actually exists, it never comes out of sleep, so sleep, which is the state in which we are completely free from the mind, is actually our real state, and hence it is exactly the same as ātma-jñāna. We seem to have come out of sleep now only because we are looking at things other than ourself, but if we turn back to look at ourself keenly enough, we will see what we actually are, which is just pure, eternal, infinite and immutable self-awareness, and thus we will find that we have never come out of sleep.
Even now we are happily immersed in eternal sleep, as we would see if we were to look at ourself keenly enough, and this sleep in which we are eternally immersed is the sleep of pure and absolutely clear self-awareness or ātma-jñāna.
Sanjay Lohia,
Ok, I see what you are saying and what Michael seems to be saying. And that is not an uncommon view, and even Shree Atmananda in his Direct Path teaching subscribes to that view. But, somehow I find the theory that there is ignorance or avidya (causal body) left over in Deep Sleep as a more plausible explanation that tallies with my own experience of deep sleep.
D Samarender Reddy,
mentally dividing our pure self-awareness in different entities like entity A and B
does not make a contribution to get clarity about the point.
There is only one subject albeit it appears in different fashions.
D Samarender Reddy, it is interesting, you say, ‘somehow I find the theory that there is ignorance or avidya (causal body) left over in Deep Sleep as a more plausible explanation that tallies with my own experience of deep sleep’.
But how do you remember your experience in deep sleep? Also what do you experience in your deep sleep which has convinced you that ‘there is ignorance or avidya (causal body) left over in Deep Sleep’? Did you experience any ignorance or causal body while you were asleep?
It could be your present mind which could be telling you that it had existed as a causal body in sleep. But should we trust our mind, because it is after all maya (that which is not)?
D. Samarender Reddy, since you ask the opinions of others and not only Michael (whom already treated this topic extensively in past postings), here my two cents. This is how I process the paradox of deep sleep.
Mind apparently projects or experience three modus operandi (operational modes), waking, dream and sleep.
In waking and dream the content of mind, phenomena (outer and inner worlds or in other words sensations perceptions thoughts and feelings), is its own projection and food, without which mind doesn’t exist. But the mind “knows” there is a third mode, sleep, where itself is absent, but how could that be, how could that happen to experience its own absence? Or in other words to experience nothing or not knowing anything? Presumably there should be someone to experience that “blank state”!
Let’s assume your are in perfect dental health, if I ask you how does it feel the experience of not having a toothache? What would you say?
Clearly you ARE experiencing not having a toothache, but what kind of experience is that if not the experience of absence, which in turn demonstrates the absence of the object (in this case the toothache)?
In the same way, the mind cannot fathom its own absence (as it can’t feel the “absence” of a toothache) so the rational and logical inference is that it (the mind) existed in some kind of potentiality or latency, which in turn explains the undeniable “experience” of “pure existence” that pervades and is the essence of deep sleep.
That is why, it has more pragmatic value to consider that sleep is the state that is permanent while dream and waking appear as superimpositions on it. It’s a complete turn upside down of our beliefs about what is real and what is illusory.
This is solely my own subjective deductions based on how I understand Bhagavan’s teachings and on my own experience practicing and reflecting on them, others may disagree, even prove me wrong, I am always open to that possibility also.
Be well,
m
Sanjay Lohia,
All I can say at this point is that Deep Sleep is a bit of a mystery to me. There seem to be different explanations (pointers?) of it, Bhagavan's being one of them. I do not know how to judge among these competing schools of views because my own experience of deep sleep, no doubt with reference to my mind, is one of ignorance and happiness. Beyond the ignorance and happiness, I have no other reference point on which to base my judgement. But, of course, it has been pointed out that the not-knowingness of deep sleep is not exactly an ignorance but a lighting up of the nothingness in the absence of any worldly object to be cognized. So, yes I am willing to concede that there is consciousness in sleep lighting up the absence of objects and in that sense it is not exactly ignorance but full knowledge of absence of any object apart from oneself. And the happy experience of deep sleep seems to go along with it. To have experienced happiness (ananda) and to have had knowledge of the absence of a second entity (chit) one obviously existed (sat) during deep sleep, so deep sleep seems to be a state of sat-chit-ananda. My only objection or feeling is that there seems to be an overlay of ignorance, which prevents the full realization of sat-chit-ananda. Perhaps that is why in places like Mandukya Upanishad, a fourth state called Turiya (not exactly fourth state but one which underlies the other three states of waking, sleep and deep sleep) is spoken of and Turiya is distinguished from the state of deep sleep.
Mouna,
My above reply to Sanjay Lohia was made before I saw your comment above. Upon reading your comment above, I do not find much wrong in it and I more or less seem to agree with what you are saying and to some extent that is what I seem to have said in a different way in my above comment. Your understanding seems to be rational and crystal clear. Kudos.
Mouna,
why do you call deep sleep a paradox ?
You say "Mind apparently projects or experience three modus operandi (operational modes), waking, dream and sleep."
The mind does not actually experience sleep, it only concludes from seeing a gap between successive waking and dream states that there must have been a period of its own absence. Therefore the mind does not actually experience and even testify its own absence. Hence you correctly state that "the mind cannot fathom its own absence."
D Samarender Reddy,
the idea/concept of a fourth state is given only in conceding to our limited understanding. According to Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi there is only one turiya.
D Samarender Reddy, you say, ‘Deep Sleep is a bit of a mystery to me’. Who is this ‘me’ to whom deep sleep is a mystery? This ‘me’ is our mind. This is understandable, because how can our mind know a state which existed prior to its coming into existence. As the state of atma-jnana is mystery to us, so also is our deep sleep.
As long as we experience waking and dream we consider sleep to be our third state, and from this perspective there appears to be a forth state – a state which is the adhara (base) of the other three states. However, Bhagavan says in verse 460 of Guru Vācaka Kōvai:
If the beginningless filthy vāsanās [propensities or inclinations to be aware of anything other than oneself], which stood as the cause for dream and waking, are completely eradicated, the [seemingly] dull [or nescient] state of sleep, [which was considered to be] a void that leads one to suffer in a state of misery, will [turn out to] be atīta turya avasthā [the transcendent ‘fourth’ state].
So eventually the state of sleep itself will turn out to be atīta turya avasthā [the transcendent ‘fourth’ state]. In other words, sleep is our original state of pure self-awareness, and waking and dream are just temporary superimposition on the state of sleep.
However, once our ego is destroyed, we will no longer experience any waking or dream states, and therefore will remain in eternal sleep or eternal waking, whatever we may choose to call it. As Michael says, the only state that actually exists (which is what is sometimes called jāgrat-suṣupti, ‘wakeful sleep’, turīya, ‘the fourth’, or turīyātīta, ‘beyond the fourth’) is our primal sleep That is, in this state we are asleep to the appearance of any phenomena.
Even when it is hardly imaginable to be without the mind, let us be "immersed in the flood of bliss in which there are no afflictions, not even of the size of a sesame seed." (Muruganar, The Shining of my Lord, chapter 'Experiencing the presence of my Lord')
Sanjay Lohia,
Ok, I will ponder a bit more on Bhagavan's teachings on deep sleep to come at some clarity on this rather abstruse topic.
Salazar,
[Advik, it is funny how people like you get so exasperated about certain things looking into a mirror; like that YOU are not taking your own medicine .... ;-)]
Well done Salazar we are making progress as you would say.
Yes everything is a projection of the mind. Well spotted.
[Why do you think you have the need to criticize my comments?]
I don't have the need, everything just happens does it not? What choice do I have? I thought you would understand this from your previous comments about free will and destiny. Have you changed your mind.
[Because you think you have understood better and as such pointing out others APPARENT [LOL] lack of understanding to affirm your own. [Since you said ‘apparent’ in your last comment that must mean that you are quite convinced of your “understanding” ;-)]
Salazar you are seeing your own shortcomings in me. Please understand this.
[When I point out a lack of understanding then that is an invitation to have a mature discussion and not to encounter just a brush and inane dismissal as you did on the other thread. Sorry, but your comment revealed quite clearly your ignorance and instead to possibly question me how I could come up with something like that, you arrogantly and also quite inanely just brushed away my points since they seem to be so outlandish for you that you could not give them any consideration.]
Gosh guy, how f.en blind are you?]
How can we have a mature conversation when you swear at me?
Plus going from previous reference is having a mature discussion with you even possible?
[To tell you to take a hike was quite right because it is a waste of time to have a dialog with ignorance and rigidity.]
You sound like a broken record. Of course I am ignorant what do you expect?
Are you experiencing yourself as you really are? Are you free from ignorance.
Don't take yourself to seriously Salazar.
I don't.
Mouna,
Very well said (lol)!!
How can we not laugh?
Don't worry I don't take myself too serioulsy, how can I?
Be well to my friend.
Your posts are very helpful.
Advik, you claim that you don't take yourself too serioulsy.
We should not overlook that rising as an ego is a very serious disease which we should not take casually.
Advik, I don't believe at all that you take yourself not seriously. If so, why this additional comment directed at me? Mouna's example was funny and helpful because he was impartial, you just picked up on the same BS I was doing with my last comment directed at you. So you have not learned anything but just succumbed to your egos petty arguing.
'Here and now' exactly picked up on that. And yes, my ego rises every morning too and it has its moments too.
As I said before, humility is a very rare commodity on this blog (myself included).
turiya swarupa, greetings
”why do you call deep sleep a paradox ?”
I did call deep sleep a paradox from the point of view of the ego (mind) because it is a contradictory statement, since the ego assumes is experiencing something that actually cannot be experienced neither objectify.
I do agree with you that the mind cannot experience deep sleep, that is why I added the word “apparently” at the beginning of that sentence.
Thank you
m
Since Bhagavan is nothing other than what we really are, ‘Bhagavan willing’ means if we are willing
Yes, this is what Michael wrote to me in one of his emails. He wrote this in a particular context, and therefore we cannot say “‘Bhagavan willing’ meaning if we are willing” in all contexts. Since our outward life is decided by Ishvara (the supreme ruling power or God), and therefore we cannot change anything in our outward life by our will. We may use our will to try and change our destiny, but we will invariably fail in such endeavors. So we cannot will anything opposed to God’s ordainment and succeed.
However, if we say that God willing our ego will be destroyed or if we say it is God’s grace which will destroy the ego, it may not be entirely correct. We can only destroy our ego only if we desire such destruction. Of course, grace or God is always assisting us in this task, but without our love and effort at self-investigation we cannot annihilate our ego. It was in this context that Michael wrote to me, ‘Since Bhagavan is nothing other than what we really are, “‘Bhagavan willing’ means if we are willing”.
I will now reproduce below the exact copy of my exchange of e-mails with Michael. This was sometime in March 2014. I wrote:
Revered Sir,
Bhagavan willing we will become true sannyasis by destroying our egos. Bhagavan has shown us the direct means to such sannyasa. It is up to us to practise and practise and reach our goal.
Thanking you and pranams,
Sanjay Lohia
Michael replied:
Dear Sanjay,
Yes, Bhagavan willing it will be so. But since Bhagavan is nothing other than what we really are, ‘Bhagavan willing’ means if we are willing.
To decide to wear ochre robes and to live the lifestyle that goes with them is so much easier than to decide to give us our ego, because the price to be paid for the former is the one that the ego can easily afford, whereas the price for the latter is one that the ego is naturally very reluctant to pay. To become willing to pay it requires great purity of heart, and the only way we can achieve such purity is by practising self-investigation.
With love and namaskarams,
Michael
Happy Diwali to all ...
Happy Diwali Sanjay! (And all!)
Mouna,greetings
sorry I overlooked the word "apparently".
What is the meaning and significance of "Diwali" ?
Mouna,
according Wikipedia:
"Spiritual significance
Diwali is celebrated by Hindus, Jains, and Sikhs and Newar Buddhists[19] to mark different historical events and stories, but they all symbolise the victory of light over darkness, knowledge over ignorance, good over evil, hope over despair.[7][8][32]
The mythical stories told for Diwali vary regionally and within the traditions of Hinduism.[33] Yet, they all point to joy and the celebration of Diwali with lights to be a reminder of the importance of knowledge, self inquiry, self-improvement, knowing and seeking the good and the right path. It is a metaphor for resisting evil, for dispelling darkness and for compassion to others.[34] Diwali is the celebration of this inner light over spiritual darkness,[35] of knowledge over ignorance and right over wrong.[36][37] It is a festive restatement of the Hindu belief that the good ultimately triumphs over evil.[38]"
So let us cherish the divine presence of Bhagavan who abides in consciousness-the -supreme, the mauna that radiates the light of jnana which destroys the 'I am the body' limitation. (Muruganar)
Thank you Turiya Swarupa for this important reminder.
Happy Diwali to you.
Bhagavan composed two verses about its significance also:
"The demon Naraka (ego) who rules hell,
(has) The notion ‘I am this body’,
‘Where is this demon?’ enquiring thus
With the discus of jnana, Narayana
Destroys the demon. And this day
Is Naraka-Chaturdasi.
Shining as the Self in glory
After slaying Naraka,
The sinner vile who suffered much
Because he deemed as “I” the wretched
Home of pains, the body of flesh —
this is the festival of light,
Dipavali.
(Translated by Prof. K. Swaminathan)"
Mouna,
thank you for quoting Bhagavan's verses.
Happy Diwali(Dipavali) to you.
Vishaya-vasanas are what gives the ego its strength, so to the extent they are weakened, the ego is weakened
Our ego along with its vishaya-vasanas and karma-vasanas are our only enemy. In any war we need to clearly understand the strengths and weaknesses of our enemy, before we can engage with them in any battle. Likewise, we need to understand all about our spiritual enemy – our ego and its vasanas. In this regard, I once asked Michael (in April 2014):
Our desires in its latent form are just vasanas. Can we not say that both our ego and vasana manifest together, that is, both rise and subside together as ‘I am the body’ thought and our other thought?
Michael replied:
Yes, the ego and the vasanas do manifest together (respectively as the primal thought ‘I am the body’ and as all other thoughts), but what is the relationship between them? Obviously the vasanas are the ego’s, so the ego is the root of the vasanas.
However, though the vasanas are the ego’s, the ego cannot dispose of them without disposing of itself. They are, so to speak, its lifeblood, and without them it cannot survive. They are what gives it strength, so to the extent they are weakened, the ego is also weakened.
The thought or experience ‘I am the body’ is the ego, so the tendency to project and experience a body as ‘I’ is the most basic of all the ego’s vasanas: in fact it is the ego itself, and thus it is the root of all vasanas, which cling to it like blood clings to the body, for the mutual sustenance of both.
Without the ego there would be no vasanas, and without vasanas there would be no ego, but it is not a relationship of equals, because the ego is what experiences the vasanas and their effects, whereas the vasanas experience nothing, and hence they seem to exist only when the ego experiences them and their effects.
Moreover, and most importantly, when the ego attends to its vasanas and their effects, it thereby gives them strength, whereas when it attends to itself, it undermines its seeming existence (and hence the seeming of its vasanas), because it seems to exist only so long as it attends to and experiences anything other than itself. Thus self-attentiveness is like an axe that cuts the root of a dense bush, thereby killing both the root (the ego) and all the branches (the vasanas) that spring from it.
Sanjay Lohia,
regarding your yesterday comment,
"To decide to wear ochre robes and to live the lifestyle that goes with them is so much easier than to decide to give us our ego,...".
Obviously we should read ...decide to give up our ego,...
Sanjay Lohia,
"Without the ego there would be no vasanas, and without vasanas there would be no ego, but it is not a relationship of equals, because the ego is what experiences the vasanas and their effects, whereas the vasanas experience nothing, and hence they seem to exist only when the ego experiences them and their effects."
The stupid thing is that the ego literally shudders at the thought of the shattering blow by the axe of self-investigation and more or less for its self-protection it
insists to attend to and wallow in its vasanas.
turiya swarupa, I thank you for pointing out my typo. Yes, it should have been ‘up’ and not ‘us’.
Salazar
[Advik, I don't believe at all that you take yourself not seriously. If so, why this additional comment directed at me?]
I was merely replying to you Salazar as you have just done to me? No harm done.
[So you have not learned anything but just succumbed to your egos petty arguing.]
Salazar is it my ego? Or is the person Advik the Ego's? There is a subtle difference is there not?
['Here and now' exactly picked up on that. And yes, my ego rises every morning too and it has its moments too.
As I said before, humility is a very rare commodity on this blog (myself included).]
Yes I agree with you Salazar I lack humility also in abundance so let us agree on our lack of humility and look carefully to see who lacks it.
Here and now,
I take your point.
But does the disease exist? Before we accept there is a disease we must first look carefully to see if it actually exists and needs to be cured. This investigation is the solution to this phantom disease.
Let us toast to our investigation.
Advik,
you seem to imply that only atma-svarupa actually exists.
From that viewpoint of course never any ego can actually exist.
But if we might concede that the ego at least seemingly exists you surely agree that then we would be well advised to cure that "phantom disease".
Otherwise we consequently would not even have to apply self-investigation or as you recommend to "toast" to it.
Here and now,
Apologies I have just realised I haven't replied to you. You are not missing out (lol)!!
Look at the work Michael James has recently posted on his blog and also his previous upload!
I cannot write with such beautiful clarity Here And Now. Rather than answer your questions I would rather point to those instead. I believe it is the right thing to do, why should I stand in between.
If you are blessed and can read Bhagavan's original writings like me without the need of an English translation we have two wonderful ways to experience Bhagavan's writings. One is through our own understanding in terms of the actual language and words he used. But we also have the fortune to experience them through Michael James. Michael is not only an extremely gifted and experienced translator but his heart is in his work as you know. His love for Bhagavan and his teaching is apparent and the deep clarity of his understanding is clear to see. He truly is a gift.
If I did not have access to his work my own understanding would pale into insignificance even though I can still read Bhagavan's words like him.
So regardless whether you have one or both options to experience Bhagavan's work at your disposal you are just as blessed as me.
I was reflecting on something that was said to me recently and I have decided to not comment anymore on this blog. But I won't go away completely but instead I will visit daily and just read like I did before.
But this is my last post on this bog.
Goodbye Here And Now.
I wish you all the very best along with everyone on this blog.
Advik,
as you correctly recognize : to put Michael James in the category of just a translator is somehow being in a complete daze.
Goodbye and all the very best to you too !
Post a Comment