Ulladu Narpadu – Kalivenba

பாயிரம் 1
மெய்யி னியல்புமதை மேவுந் திறனுமெமக்
குய்யும் படிமுருக னோதுகெனப் — பொய்யுலகின்
கள்ளமறு மாற்றாற் கனரமணன் கட்டுரைத்தா
னுள்ளது நாற்ப துவந்து.

Payiram – Introductory Verse 1
meyyi ṉiyalbumadai mēvun tiṟaṉumemak
kuyyum paḍimuruga ṉōdukeṉap — poyyulahiṉ
kaḷḷamaṟu māṯṟāṯ gaṉaramaṇaṉ kaṭṭuraittā
ṉuḷḷadu nāṟpa duvandu.

When Muruganar asked, ‘So that we may be saved, reveal to us the nature of reality and the means by which to reach [attain or join] it’, the noble Ramana, because he is free from the delusion of the unreal world, joyfully and with certainty composed Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu.

பாயிரம் 2
உள்ளதொன் றன்றுபல வென்பார்க ளுட்கொளுமா
றுள்ளதொன் றென்றேதா னோதியவவ் — வுள்ளது
நாற்பதுவெண் பாக்களையோர் நற்கலிவெண் பாவாக்கி
யேற்பவளித் தான்ரமண னெண்.

Payiram – Introductory Verse 2
uḷḷadoṉ ḏṟaṉḏṟupala veṉbārga ḷuṭkoḷumā
ṟuḷḷadoṉ ḏṟeṉḏṟētā ṉōdiyavav — vuḷḷadu
nāṟpaduveṇ bākkaḷaiyōr naṯkaliveṇ bāvākki
yēṟpavaḷit tāṉramaṇa ṉeṇ.

To say that what exists is one so that those who say that what exists is not one but many may understand, consider that Ramana aptly gave [this Upadēśa Kaliveṇbā by] making those forty veṇbās on what exists into one fine kaliveṇbā.

நூல்
உள்ளதல துள்ளவுணர் வுளளதோ வுள்ளபொரு
ளுள்ளலற வுள்ளத்தே யுள்ளதா — லுள்ளமெனு
முள்ளபொரு ளுள்ளலெவ னுள்ளத்தே யுள்ளபடி
யுள்ளதே யுள்ள லுணர்வாயே — உள்ளே 4மரணபய மிக்குளவம் மக்களர ணாக
மரணபவ மில்லா மகேசன் — சரணமே
சார்வர்தஞ் சார்வொடுதாஞ் சாவுற்றார் சாவெண்ணஞ்
சார்வரோ சாவா தவர்நித்தர் — பார்வைசேர் 8

நாமுலகங் காண்டலா னானாவாஞ் சத்தியுள
வோர்முதலை யொப்ப லொருதலையே — நாமவுருச்
சித்திரமும் பார்ப்பானுஞ் சேர்படமு மாரொளியு
மத்தனையுந் தானா மவனுலகு — கர்த்தனுயிர் 12

மும்முதலை யெம்மதமு முற்கொள்ளு மோர்முதலே
மும்முதலாய் நிற்குமென்று மும்முதலு — மும்முதலே
யென்னலகங் கார மிருக்குமட்டே யான்கெட்டுத்
தன்னிலையி னிற்ற றலையாகுங் — கொன்னே 16

யுலகுமெய்பொய்த் தோற்ற முலகறிவா மன்றென்
றுலகுசுக மன்றென் றுரைத்தெ — னுலகுவிட்டுத்
தன்னையோர்ந் தொன்றிரண்டு தானற்று நானற்ற
வந்நிலையெல் லார்க்குமொப் பாமூனே — துன்னு 20

முருவந்தா னாயி னுலகுபர மற்றா
முருவந்தா னன்றே லுவற்றி — னுருவத்தைக்
கண்ணுறுதல் யாவனெவன் கண்ணலாற் காட்சியுண்டோ
கண்ணதுதா னந்தமிலாக் கண்ணாமே — யெண்ணி 24

லுடல்பஞ்ச கோச வுருவதனா லைந்து
முடலென்னுஞ் சொல்லி லொடுங்கு — முடலன்றி
யுண்டோ வுலக முடல்விட் டுலகத்தைக்
கண்டா ருளரோ கழறுவாய் — கண்ட 28

வுலகைம் புலன்க ளுருவேறன் றவ்வைம்
புலனைம் பொறிக்குப் புலனா — முலகைமன
மொன்றைம் பொறிவாயா லோர்ந்திடுத லான்மனத்தை
யன்றியுல குண்டோ வறைநேரே — நின்ற 32

வுலகறிவு மொன்றா யுதித்தொடுங்கு மேனு
முலகறிவு தன்னா லொளிரு — முலகறிவு
தோன்றிமறை தற்கிடனாய்த் தோன்றிமறை யாதொளிரும்
பூன்றமா மஃதே பொருளாமா — லேன்றதா 36

மெப்பெயரிட் டெவ்வுருவி லேத்தினுமார் பேருருவி
லப்பொருளைக் காண்வழிய தாயினுமம் — மெய்ப்பொருளி
னுண்மையிற்ற னுண்மையினை யோர்ந்தொடுங்கி யொன்றுதலே
யுண்மையிற் காண லுணர்ந்திடுக — விண்மை 40

யிரட்டைகண் முப்புடிக ளென்றுமொன்று பற்றி
யிருப்பவா மவ்வொன்றே தென்று — கருத்தினுட்
கண்டாற் கழலுமவை கண்டவ ரேயுண்மை
கண்டார் கலங்காரே காணிருள்போன் — மண்டு 44

மறியாமை விட்டறிவின் றாமறிவு விட்டவ்
வறியாமை யின்றாகு மந்த — வறிவு
மறியா மையுமார்க்கென் றம்முதலாந் தன்னை
யறியு மறிவே யறிவா — மறிப 48

வறிவுறுந் தன்னை யறியா தயலை
யறிவ தறியாமை யன்றி — யறிவோ
வறிவயற் காதாரத் தன்னை யறிய
வறிவறி யாமை யறுமே — யறவே 52

யறிவறி யாமையு மற்றதறி வாமே
யறியும துண்மையறி வாகா — தறிதற்
கறிவித்தற் கன்னியமின் றாயவிர்வ தாற்றா
னறிவாகும் பாழன் றறிவாய் — செறிவாய 56

ஞானமாந் தானேமெய் நானாவா ஞானமஞ்
ஞானமாம் பொய்யாமஞ் ஞானமுமே — ஞானமாந்
தன்னையன்றி யின்றணிக டாம்பலவும் பொய்மெய்யாம்
பொன்னையன்றி யுண்டோ புகலுடனா — னென்னுமத் 60

தன்மையுண்டேன் முன்னிலைப டர்க்கைக டாமுளவாந்
தன்மையி னுண்மையைத் தானாய்ந்து — தன்மையறின்
முன்னிலைப டர்க்கை முடிவுற்றொன் றாயொளிருந்
தன்மையே தன்னிலைமை தானிதமு — மன்னு 64

நிகழ்வினைப் பற்றி யிறப்பெதிர்வு நிற்ப
நிகழ்கா லவையு நிகழ்வே — நிகழ்வொன்றே
யின்றுண்மை தேரா திறப்பெதிர்வு தேரவுன
லொன்றின்றி யெண்ண வுனலுணர — நின்றபொரு 68

ணாமன்றி நாளேது நாடேது நாடுங்கா
னாமுடம்பே னாணாட்டு ணாம்படுவ — நாமுடம்போ
நாமின்றன் றென்றுமொன்று நாடிங்கங் கெங்குமொன்றா
னாமுண்டு நாணாடி னாமூன — மாமிவ் 72

வுடனானே தன்னை யுணரார்க் குணர்ந்தார்க்
குடலளவே நான்ற னுணரார்க் — குடலுள்ளே
தன்னுணர்ந்தார்க் கெல்லையறத் தானொளிரு நானிதுவே
யின்னவர்தம் பேதமென வெண்ணுவாய் — முன்னா 76

முலகுண்மை யாகு முணர்வில்லார்க் குள்ளார்க்
குலகளவா முண்மை யுணரார்க் — குலகினுக்
காதார மாயுருவற் றாருமுணர்ந் தாருண்மை
யீதாகும் பேதமிவர்க் கெண்ணுக — பேத 80

விதிமதி மூல விவேக மிலார்க்கே
விதிமதி வெல்லும் விவாதம் — விதிமதிகட்
கோர்முதலாந் தன்னை யுணர்ந்தா ரவைதணந்தார்
சார்வரோ பின்னுமவை சாற்றுவாய் — சார்பவை 84

காணுந் தனைவிட்டுத் தான்கடவு ளைக்காணல்
காணு மனோமயமாங் காட்சிதனைக் — காணுமவன்
றான்கடவுள் கண்டானாந் தன்முதலைத் தான்முதல்போய்த்
தான்கடவு ளன்றியில தாலுயிராத் — தான்கருதுந் 88

தன்னைத்தான் காண றலைவன் றனைக்காண
லென்னும்பன் னூலுண்மை யென்னையெனின் — றன்னைத்தான்
காணலெவன் றானொன்றாற் காணவொணா தேற்றலைவற்
காணலெவ னூணாதல் காணெவையுங் — காணு 92

மதிக்கொளி தந்தம் மதிக்கு ளொளிரு
மதியினை யுள்ளே மடக்கிப் — பதியிற்
பதித்திடுத லன்றிப் பதியை மதியான்
மதித்திடுத லெங்ஙன் மதியாய் — மதியிலதா 96

னானென்றித் தேக நவிலா துறக்கத்து
நானின்றென் றாரு நவில்வதிலை — நானொன்
றெழுந்தபி னெல்லா மெழுமிந்த நானெங்
கெழுமென்று நுண்மதியா லெண்ண — நழுவுஞ் 100

சடவுடனா னென்னாது சச்சித் துதியா
துடலளவா நானொன் றுதிக்கு — மிடையிலிது
சிச்சடக்கி ரந்திபந்தஞ் சீவனுட்ப மெய்யகந்தை
யிச்சமு சாரமன மெண்ணென்னே — விச்சை 104

யுருப்பற்றி யுண்டா முருப்பற்றி நிற்கு
முருப்பற்றி யுண்டுமிக வோங்கு — முருவிட்
டுருப்பற்றுந் தேடினா லோட்டம் பிடிக்கு
முருவற்ற பேயகந்தை யோர்வாய் — கருவா 108

மகந்தையுண் டாயி னனைத்துமுண் டாகு
மகந்தையின் றேலின் றனைத்து — மகந்தையே
யாவுமா மாதலால் யாதிதென்று நாடலே
யோவுதல் யாவுமென வோர்முதல்போன் — மேவுமிந்த 112

நானுதியா துள்ளநிலை நாமதுவா யுள்ளநிலை
நானுதிக்குந் தானமதை நாடாம — னானுதியாத்
தன்னிழப்பைச் சார்வதெவன் சாராமற் றானதுவாந்
தன்னிலையி னிற்பதெவன் சாற்றுதி — முன்ன 116

ரெழும்பு மகந்தை யெழுமிடத்தை நீரில்
விழுந்த பொருள்காண வேண்டி — முழுகுதல்போற்
கூர்ந்தமதி யாற்பேச்சு மூச்சடக்கிக் கொண்டுள்ளே
யாழ்ந்தறிய வேண்டு மறிபிணம்போற் — றீர்ந்துடல 120

நானென்று வாயா னவிலாதுள் ளாழ்மனத்தா
னானென்றெங் குந்துமென நாடுதலே — ஞான நெறி
யாமன்றி யன்றிதுநா னாமதுவென் றுன்னறுணை
யாமதுவி சாரமா மாவதனான் — மீமுறையே 124

நானா ரெனமனமுண் ணாடியுள நண்ணவே
நானா மவன்றலை நாணமுற — நானானாத்
தோன்றுமொன்று தானாகத் தோன்றினுநா னன்றுபொருள்
பூன்றமது தானாம் பொருள்பொங்கித் — தோன்றவே 128

தன்னை யழித்தெழுந்த தன்மயா னந்தருக்
கென்னை யுளதொன் றியற்றுதற்குத் — தன்னையலா
தன்னிய மொன்று மறியா ரவர்நிலைமை
யின்னதென் றுன்ன லெவன்பரமாப் — பன்னு 132

மதுநீயென் றம்மறைக ளார்த்திடவுந் தன்னை
யெதுவென்று தான்றேர்ந் திராஅ — ததுநா
னிதுவன்றென் றெண்ணலுர னின்மையினா லென்று
மதுவேதா னாயமர்வ தாலே — யதுவுமலா 136

தென்னை யறியேனா னென்னை யறிந்தேனா
னென்ன னகைப்புக் கிடனாகு — மென்னை
தனைவிடய மாக்கவிரு தானுண்டோ வொன்றா
யனைவரனு பூதியுண்மை யாலோர் — நினைவறவே 140

யென்று மெவர்க்கு மியல்பா யுளபொருளை
யொன்று முளத்து ளுணர்ந்துநிலை — நின்றிடா
துண்டின் றுருவருவென் றொன்றிரண் டன்றென்றே
சண்டையிடன் மாயைச் சழக்கொழிக — வொண்டியுளஞ் 144

சித்தமா யுள்பொருளைத் தேர்ந்திருத்தல் சித்திபிற
சித்தியெலாஞ் சொப்பனமார் சித்திகளே — நித்திரைவிட்
டோர்ந்தா லவைமெய்யோ வுண்மைநிலை நின்றுபொய்ம்மை
தீர்ந்தார் தியங்குவரோ தேர்ந்திருநீ — கூர்ந்துமய 148

னாமுடலென் றெண்ணினல நாமதுவென் றெண்ணுமது
நாமதுவா நிற்பதற்கு நற்றுணையே — யாமென்று
நாமதுவென் றெண்ணுவதே னான்மனித னென்றெணுமோ
நாமதுவா நிற்குமத னாலறியா — தேமுயலுஞ் 152

சாதகத்தி லேதுவிதஞ் சாத்தியத்தி லத்துவித
மோதுகின்ற வாதமது முண்மையல — வாதரவாய்த்
தான்றேடுங் காலுந் தனையடைந்த காலத்துந்
தான்றசம னன்றியார் தான்வித்துப் — போன்ற 156

வினைமுதனா மாயின் விளைபயன் றுய்ப்போம்
வினைமுதலா ரென்று வினவித் — தனையறியக்
கர்த்தத் துவம்போய்க் கருமமூன் றுங்கழலு
நித்தமா முத்தி நிலையீதே — மத்தனாய்ப் 160

பத்தனா னென்னுமட்டே பந்தமுத்தி சிந்தனைகள்
பத்தனா ரென்றுதன்னைப் பார்க்குங்காற் — சித்தமாய்
நித்தமுத்தன் றானிற்க நிற்காதேற் பந்தசிந்தை
முத்திசிந்தை முன்னிற்கு மோமனத்துக் — கொத்தாங் 164

குருவ மருவ முருவருவ மூன்றா
முறுமுத்தி யென்னி லுரைப்ப — னுருவ
மருவ முருவருவ மாயு மகந்தை
யுருவழிதன் முத்தி யுணரீ — தருள்ரமண 168
னுள்ளது நாற்பது மொன்றுகலி வெண்பாவா
முள்ளது காட்டு மொளி. 170

Nūl
uḷḷadala duḷḷavuṇar vuḷḷadō vuḷḷaporu
ḷuḷḷalaṟa vuḷḷattē yuḷḷadā — luḷḷameṉu
muḷḷaporu ḷuḷḷaleva ṉuḷḷattē yuḷḷapaḍi
yuḷḷadē yuḷḷa luṇarvāyē. […]
[…] — uḷḷē
maraṇabhaya mikkuḷavam makkaḷara ṇāha
maraṇabhava millā mahēśaṉ — caraṇamē
sārvartañ cārvoḍutāñ cāvuṯṟār sāveṇṇañ
cārvarō sāvā davarnittar. […]
[…] — pārvaisēr
nāmulahaṅ kāṇḍalā ṉāṉāvāñ cattiyuḷa
vōrmudalai yoppa lorutalaiyē — nāmavuruc
cittiramum pārppāṉuñ cērpaḍamu māroḷiyu
mattaṉaiyun tāṉā mavaṉ. […]
[…] ulahu — karttaṉuyir
mummudalai yemmatamu muṟkoḷḷu mōrmudalē
mummudalāy niṟkumeṉḏṟu mummudalu — mummudalē
yeṉṉalahaṅ kāra mirukkumaṭṭē yāṉkeṭṭut
taṉṉilaiyi ṉiṯṟa ṯalaiyāhum. […]
[…] — koṉṉē
yulahumeypoyt tōṯṟa mulahaṟivā maṉḏṟeṉ
ḏṟulahusukha maṉḏṟeṉ ḏṟuraitte — ṉulahuviṭṭut
taṉṉaiyōrn doṉḏṟiraṇḍu tāṉaṯṟu nāṉaṯṟa
vannilaiyel lārkkumop pām. […]
[…] ūṉē — tuṉṉu
muruvantā ṉāyi ṉulahupara maṯṟā
muruvantā ṉaṉḏṟē luvaṯṟi — ṉuruvattaik
kaṇṇuṟudal yāvaṉevaṉ kaṇṇalāṯ kāṭciyuṇḍō
kaṇṇadutā ṉantamilāk kaṇṇāmē. […]
[…] — eṇṇi
luḍalpañca kōśa vuruvadaṉā laindu
muḍaleṉṉuñ colli loḍuṅgu — muḍalaṉḏṟi
yuṇḍō vulaha muḍalviṭ ṭulahattaik
kaṇḍā ruḷarō kaṙaṟuvāy. […]
[…] — kaṇḍa
vulahaim pulaṉga ḷuruvēṟaṉ ḏṟavvaim
pulaṉaim poṟikkup pulaṉā — mulahaimaṉa
moṉḏṟaim poṟivāyā lōrndiḍuda lāṉmaṉattai
yaṉḏṟiyula kuṇḍō vaṟai. […]
[…] nērē — niṉḏṟa
vulahaṟivu moṉḏṟā yudittoḍuṅgu mēṉu
mulahaṟivu taṉṉā loḷiru — mulahaṟivu
tōṉḏṟimaṟai daṟkiḍaṉāyt tōṉḏṟimaṟai yādoḷirum
pūṉḏṟamā maḵdē poruḷāmāl. […]
[…] — ēṉḏṟadā
meppeyariṭ ṭevvuruvi lēttiṉumār pēruruvi
lapporuḷaik kāṇvaṙiya dāyiṉumam — meypporuḷi
ṉuṇmaiyiṯṟa ṉuṇmaiyiṉai yōrndoḍuṅgi yoṉḏṟudalē
yuṇmaiyiṯ kāṇa luṇarndiḍuka. […]
[…] — viṇmai
yiraṭṭaigaṇ muppuḍiga ḷeṉḏṟumoṉḏṟu paṯṟi
yiruppavā mavvoṉḏṟē teṉḏṟu — karuttiṉuṭ
kaṇḍāṯ kaṙalumavai kaṇḍava rēyuṇmai
kaṇḍār kalaṅgārē kāṇ. […]
[…] iruḷpōṉ — maṇḍu
maṟiyāmai viṭṭaṟiviṉ ḏṟāmaṟivu viṭṭav
vaṟiyāmai yiṉḏṟāhu manda — vaṟivu
maṟiyā maiyumārkkeṉ ḏṟammudalān taṉṉai
yaṟiyu maṟivē yaṟivām. […]
[…] — aṟiba
vaṟivuṟun taṉṉai yaṟiyā dayalai
yaṟiva daṟiyāmai yaṉḏṟi — yaṟivō
vaṟivayaṟ kādhārat taṉṉai yaṟiya
vaṟivaṟi yāmai yaṟumē. […]
[…] — aṟavē
yaṟivaṟi yāmaiyu maṯṟadaṟi vāmē
yaṟiyuma duṇmaiyaṟi vāhā — daṟitaṟ
kaṟivittaṟ kaṉṉiyamiṉ ḏṟāyavirva dāṯṟā
ṉaṟivāhum pāṙaṉ ḏṟaṟivāy. […]
[…] — seṟivāya
ñāṉamān tāṉēmey nāṉāvā ñāṉamañ
ñāṉamām poyyāmañ ñāṉamumē — ñāṉamān
taṉṉaiyaṉḏṟi yiṉḏṟaṇiga ḍāmpalavum poymeyyām
poṉṉaiyaṉḏṟi yuṇḍō puhal. […]
[…] uḍaṉā — ṉeṉṉumat
taṉmaiyuṇḍēṉ muṉṉilaipa ḍarkkaiga ḍāmuḷavān
taṉmaiyi ṉuṇmaiyait tāṉāyndu — taṉmaiyaṟiṉ
muṉṉilaipa ḍarkkai muḍivuṯṟoṉ ḏṟāyoḷirun
taṉmaiyē taṉṉilaimai tāṉ. […]
[…] nitamu — maṉṉu
nihaṙviṉaip paṯṟi yiṟappedirvu niṟpa
nihaṙkā lavaiyu nihaṙvē — nihaṙvoṉḏṟē
yiṉḏṟuṇmai tērā tiṟappedirvu tēravuṉa
loṉḏṟiṉṟi yeṇṇa vuṉal. […]
[…] uṇara — niṉḏṟaporu
ṇāmaṉḏṟi nāḷēdu nāḍēdu nāḍuṅgā
ṉāmuḍambē ṉāṇāṭṭu ṇāmpaḍuva — nāmuḍambō
nāmiṉḏṟaṉ ḏṟeṉḏṟumoṉḏṟu nāḍiṅgaṅ geṅgumoṉḏṟā
ṉāmuṇḍu nāṇāḍi ṉām. […]
[…] ūṉa — māmiv
vuḍaṉāṉē taṉṉai yuṇarārk kuṇarndārk
kuḍalaḷavē nāṉḏṟa ṉuṇarārk — kuḍaluḷḷē
taṉṉuṇarndārk kellaiyaṟat tāṉoḷiru nāṉiduvē
yiṉṉavartam bhēdameṉa veṇṇuvāy. […]
[…] — muṉṉā
mulahuṇmai yāhu muṇarvillārk kuḷḷārk
kulahaḷavā muṇmai yuṇarārk — kulahiṉuk
kādhāra māyuruvaṯ ṟārumuṇarn dāruṇmai
yīdāhum bhēdamivark keṇṇuha. […]
[…] — bhēda
vidhimati mūla vivēka milārkkē
vidhimati vellum vivādam — vidhimatigaṭ
kōrmudalān taṉṉai yuṇarndā ravaitaṇandār
sārvarō piṉṉumavai sāṯṟuvāy. […]
[…] — sārbavai
kāṇun taṉaiviṭṭut tāṉkaḍavu ḷaikkāṇal
kāṇu maṉōmayamāṅ kāṭcitaṉaik — kāṇumavaṉ
ḏṟāṉkaḍavuḷ kaṇḍāṉān taṉmudalait tāṉmudalpōyt
tāṉkaḍavu ḷaṉḏṟiyila dāl. […]
[…] uyirāt — tāṉkarutun
taṉṉaittāṉ kāṇa ṯalaivaṉ ḏṟaṉaikkāṇa
leṉṉumpaṉ ṉūluṇmai yeṉṉaiyeṉiṉ — ḏṟaṉṉaittāṉ
kāṇalevaṉ ḏṟāṉoṉḏṟāṯ kāṇavoṇā dēṯṟalaivaṯ
kāṇaleva ṉūṇādal kāṇ. […]
[…] evaiyuṅ — kāṇu
matikkoḷi tandam matikku ḷoḷiru
matiyiṉai yuḷḷē maḍakkip — patiyiṯ
padittiḍuda laṉḏṟip patiyai matiyāṉ
madittiḍuda leṅṅaṉ madiyāy. […]
[…] — matiyiladā
ṉāṉeṉḏṟid dēha navilā duṟakkattu
nāṉiṉḏṟeṉ ḏṟāru navilvadilai — nāṉoṉ
ḏṟeṙundapi ṉellā meṙuminda nāṉeṅ
geṙumeṉḏṟu nuṇmatiyā leṇṇa — naṙuvum.[…]
[…]
jaḍavuḍaṉā ṉeṉṉādu saccit tudiyā
duḍalaḷavā nāṉoṉ ḏṟudikku — miḍaiyilidu
ciccaḍakki ranthibandhañ jīvaṉuṭpa meyyahandai
yiccamu sāramaṉa meṇ. […]
[…] eṉṉē — viccai
yuruppaṯṟi yuṇḍā muruppaṯṟi niṟku
muruppaṯṟi yuṇḍumiha vōṅgu — muruviṭ
ṭuruppaṯṟun tēḍiṉā lōṭṭam piḍikku
muruvaṯṟa pēyahandai yōrvāy. […]
[…] — karuvā
mahandaiyuṇ ḍāyi ṉaṉaittumuṇ ḍāhu
mahandaiyiṉ ḏṟēliṉ ḏṟaṉaittu — mahandaiyē
yāvumā mādalāl yādideṉḏṟu nāḍalē
yōvudal yāvumeṉa vōr. […]
[…] mudalpōṉ — mēvuminda
nāṉudiyā duḷḷanilai nāmaduvā yuḷḷanilai
nāṉudikkun thāṉamadai nāḍāma — ṉāṉudiyāt
taṉṉiṙappaic cārvadevaṉ sārāmaṯ ṟāṉaduvān
taṉṉilaiyi ṉiṟpadevaṉ sāṯṟudi. […]
[…] — muṉṉa
reṙumbu mahandai yeṙumiḍattai nīril
viṙunda poruḷkāṇa vēṇḍi — muṙuhudalpōṯ
kūrndamati yāṯpēccu mūccaḍakkik koṇḍuḷḷē
yāṙndaṟiya vēṇḍu maṟi. […]
[…] piṇampōṯ — ṟīrnduḍala
nāṉeṉḏṟu vāyā ṉavilāduḷ ḷāṙmaṉattā
ṉāṉeṉḏṟeṅ gundumeṉa nāḍudalē — ñāṉaneṟi
yāmaṉḏṟi yaṉḏṟidunā ṉāmaduveṉ ḏṟuṉṉaṯuṇai
yāmaduvi cāramā mā. […]
[…] adaṉāṉ — mīmuṟaiyē
nāṉā reṉamaṉamuṇ ṇāḍiyuḷa naṇṇavē
nāṉā mavaṉḏṟalai nāṇamuṟa — nāṉāṉāt
tōṉḏṟumoṉḏṟu tāṉāhat tōṉḏṟiṉunā ṉaṉḏṟuporuḷ
pūṉḏṟamadu tāṉām poruḷ. […]
[…] poṅgit — tōṉḏṟavē
taṉṉai yaṙitteṙunda taṉmayā ṉandaruk
keṉṉai yuḷadoṉ ḏṟiyaṯṟudaṟkut — taṉṉaiyalā
taṉṉiya moṉḏṟu maṟiyā ravarnilaimai
yiṉṉadeṉ ḏṟuṉṉa levaṉ. […]
[…] paramāp — paṉṉu
madunīyeṉ ḏṟammaṟaika ḷārttiḍavun taṉṉai
yeduveṉḏṟu tāṉḏṟērn dirāa — dadunā
ṉiduvaṉḏṟeṉ ḏṟeṇṇalura ṉiṉmaiyiṉā leṉḏṟu
maduvētā ṉāyamarva dālē. […]
[…] — aduvumalā
deṉṉai yaṟiyēṉā ṉeṉṉai yaṟindēṉā
ṉeṉṉa ṉahaippuk kiḍaṉāhu — meṉṉai
taṉaiviḍaya mākkaviru tāṉuṇḍō voṉḏṟā
yaṉaivaraṉu bhūtiyuṇmai yāl. […]
[…] ōr — niṉaivaṟavē
yeṉḏṟu mevarkku miyalbā yuḷaporuḷai
yoṉḏṟu muḷattu ḷuṇarndunilai — niṉḏṟiḍā
duṇḍiṉ ḏṟuruvaruveṉ ḏṟoṉḏṟiraṇ ḍaṉḏṟeṉḏṟē
caṇḍaiyiḍaṉ māyaic caṙakkoṙiha. […]
[…] — oṇḍiyuḷañ
siddhamā yuḷporuḷait tērndiruttal siddhipiṟa
siddhiyelāñ soppaṉamār siddhikaḷē — niddiraiviṭ
ṭōrndā lavaimeyyō vuṇmainilai niṉḏṟupoymmai
tīrndār tiyaṅguvarō tērndirunī. […]
[…] — kūrndumaya
ṉāmuḍaleṉ ḏṟeṇṇiṉala nāmaduveṉ ḏṟeṇṇumadu
nāmaduvā niṟpadaṟku naṯṟuṇaiyē — yāmeṉḏṟu
nāmaduveṉ ḏṟeṇṇuvadē ṉāṉmaṉida ṉeṉḏṟeṇumō
nāmaduvā niṟkumada ṉāl. […]
[…] aṟiyā — dēmuyaluñ
sādhakatti lēduvitañ sāddhiyatti ladduvita
mōdugiṉḏṟa vādamadu muṇmaiyala — vādaravāyt
tāṉḏṟēḍuṅ kālun taṉaiyaḍainda kālattun
tāṉḏṟaśama ṉaṉḏṟiyār tāṉ. […]
[…] vittup — pōṉḏṟa
viṉaimudaṉā māyiṉ viḷaipayaṉ ḏṟuyppōm
viṉaimudalā reṉḏṟu viṉavit — taṉaiyaṟiyak
karttat tuvampōyk karumamūṉ ḏṟuṅkaṙalu
nittamā mutti nilaiyīdē. […]
[…] — mattaṉāyp
baddhaṉā ṉeṉṉumaṭṭē bandhamutti cintaṉaigaḷ
baddhaṉā reṉḏṟutaṉṉaip pārkkuṅgāṯ — siddhamāy
nittamuttaṉ ḏṟāṉiṟka niṯkādēṯ bandacintai
mutticintai muṉṉiṟku mō. […]
[…] maṉattuk — kottāṅ
guruva maruva muruvaruva mūṉḏṟā
muṟumutti yeṉṉi luraippa — ṉuruva
maruva muruvaruva māyu mahandai
yuruvaṙitaṉ mutti yuṇar. […]
[…] ī — daruḷramaṇa
ṉuḷḷadu nāṟpadu moṉḏṟukali veṇbāvā
muḷḷadu kāṭṭu moḷi.

Text
1
Could there be the consciousness ‘am’ [chit] if there did not exist the reality [‘I’, sat]? Since that Reality exists in the heart, beyond thought, who can and how to meditate upon that Reality, which is called the Heart? To abide in the Heart, as it is [that is, without thought, as ‘I am’] is truly meditating [upon it]. Know thus.
Alternatively: ‘Can there be a consciousness [chit] other than existence [sat] to meditate [upon existence]?’ Refer also to verse 23 of Upadesa Undiyar.2
Mature souls who have an intense inner fear of death reach the Feet of the birthless and deathless Supreme Lord as their refuge. Through this surrender of theirs, they [the ego] are dead. Being now deathless, the Eternal, can they again have the thought of death?

1
Because we [the ego], whose nature is to see [objects other than ourself], see the world, the acceptance of a first principle having a power [sakti] which can make it appear as many, is unanimous. The picture of names and forms [the world which is seen], the seer, the screen and the light – all these are He [that first principle], who is Self.

2
All religions first postulate three principles, the world, soul and God. To say that one principle alone appears as the three principles, or that the three principles are always three principles is possible only so long as the ego [ahankara] exists. To abide in one’s own state, ‘I’ [the ego] having been annihilated, is the highest.

3
‘The world is real’, ‘No, it is an unreal appearance’; ‘The world is sentient’, ‘It is not’; ‘The world is happiness’, ‘It is not’ [in other words, ‘The world is sat-chit-ananda’, ‘No, it is not’] – what is the use of arguing thus in vain? That state in which, by giving up [knowing] the world and by knowing oneself, ‘I’ [the ego] is lost and thereby [the notions of] oneness and duality themselves are lost, is loved by all.

4
If oneself is a form of flesh [a body], the world and God will also be likewise [i.e. will also be forms]; if oneself is not a form, who can see their forms, and how? Can the sight [the seen] be otherwise than the eye [the seer]? Verily, Self is the Eye, the unlimited [and therefore formless] Eye.

Hence, being formless, Self can never see forms. On the other hand, since the ego or mind can come into existence only by identifying itself as form (a body), it can only see forms and can never see Self, the formless Reality.

5
If we scrutinise, the body is a form composed of five sheaths. Therefore, the five sheaths are all included in the term ‘body’ [that is, any of the five sheaths may be denoted when we use the term ‘body’]. Does the world exist apart from the body? Say, is there anyone who without a body has seen a world?

6
The world we see is nothing other than the form of the five sense-knowledges [sight, sound, smell, taste and touch]. Those five sense-knowledges are known through the five sense-organs. Since the one mind perceives the world through the five sense-organs, say, can there be a world apart from the mind?

7
Although the world [the seen] which is in front of us and the mind [the seer] rise and set together, it is by the mind alone that the world shines. The whole [purnam] which is the base for the world and the mind to rise from and set in, but which Itself shines without rising or setting – that alone is the Reality.

8
Whoever worships [the Supreme Reality] in whatever form, giving it whatever name, that is the way to see that Reality in [that] name and form, since it is possible [to see it thus]. Yet knowing one’s own truth in the truth of that Supreme Reality, subsiding [into It] and being one [with It], is the true seeing. Know thus.

9
The dyads [the pairs of opposites such as knowledge and ignorance, pleasure and pain, etc.] and the triads [the three factors of objective knowledge such as the knower, the knowing and the object known, the seer, the seeing and the object seen, etc.] – [which are unreal appearances like] the blueness of the sky – always depend for their existence upon the one [the ego or mind, the thought ‘I am the body’]. If one looks within the mind, ‘What is that one?’ [in other words, ‘Who am I, that ego?’], the dyads and triads will disappear [since their base, the ego, will be found to be non-existent]. Only those who have thus seen [the non-existence of the ego] are the Seers of Truth. Hence they will not be deluded [by the unreal appearance of the dyads and triads]. See thus.

10
Without ignorance [about objects], which is dense and abundant like darkness, knowledge [about objects] cannot exist, and without knowledge [about objects] that ignorance cannot exist. Only the knowledge which knows [the non-existence of] that self [the ego-self] which is the base [of knowledge and ignorance], [by enquiring] ‘To whom are that knowledge and ignorance?’ is [true] knowledge.
11
Knowing all else without knowing oneself [the ego], the knower of the objects known is nothing but ignorance; how instead can it be knowledge? When [the non-existence of] oneself [the knowing ego], who is the base of knowledge and ignorance, is known [through enquiry], both knowledge and ignorance will cease to exist.

12
That which is completely devoid of knowledge and ignorance [about objects] is [true] knowledge. That which knows [objects] cannot be true knowledge. Since Self shines without another to know or to be known by, It is the [true] knowledge; It is not a void [though devoid of both objective knowledge and ignorance]. Know thus.

13
Self [‘I am’], which is clear knowledge [jnana], alone is real. Knowledge of multiplicity is ignorance [ajnana]. Even this ignorance, which is unreal, cannot exist apart from Self, which is knowledge. The numerous ornaments are unreal; say, do they exist from the gold, which is real?

14
Only if that first person [the ego or subject, ‘I’] in the form ‘I am the body’ exists, will the second and third persons, ‘you’, ‘he’, ‘she’, ‘this’, ‘that’, etc.] exist. If, by one’s scrutinising the truth of the first person, the first person is destroyed, the second and third persons will cease to exist and one’s own nature which will then shine as one [and not as the three persons] will verily be the state of Self.

Alternatively: ‘ … the second and third persons will cease to exist and the [real] first person which will then shine as the only one will indeed be Self, one’s own state.’
15
The past and future exist depending upon the present, which one daily experiences; they too, while occurring, were and will be the present. Therefore, [among the three times] the present alone exists. Trying to know the past and future without knowing the truth of the present [i.e. its non-existence] is like trying to count without [knowing the value of the unit] one.

16
On scrutiny, where is time and where is space, [where is anything] except ‘we’ [Self], the clearly known existing Reality? If we are the body, we shall be involved in time and space; but are we the body? Since we are [the same] one now, then and ever, [the same] one in space here, there and everywhere, we, the timeless and spaceless ‘we’ [Self], alone are.

17
To those who have not known Self and to those who have known [Self], this body of flesh is ‘I’; but to those who have not known Self, ‘I’ is limited to the measure of the body, whereas to those who have known Self within the body [i.e., in the lifetime of the body], ‘I’ shines as the limitless Self. Know that this indeed is the difference between these two.

18
To those who have not known [Self] and to those who have known [Self], the world in front of us is real; but to those who have not known [Self], the reality is limited to the measure of the world [i.e. to its names and forms], whereas to those who have known [Self], the reality shines devoid of [name and] form as the substratum of the world. Know that this is the difference between these two.

19
The argument as to which wins, fate or free-will, which are different from each other, is only for those who do not have knowledge of the root of fate and free-will [namely the ego, which is itself unreal]. Those who have known [the non-existence of] the self [the ego self], which is the one base of fate and free-will, have given them up [i.e. have given up both fate and free-will, and also the argument about them]. Say, will they get entangled in them again?

20
One’s seeing God without seeing oneself, the seer of the objects seen, is but seeing a mental image. He who, by losing the base [the ego], sees Self, the source of himself, alone truly sees God, because Self is not other than God.

21
If it be asked, ‘What is the truth behind the many scriptures which speak of “oneself seeing oneself, whom one thinks to be an individual soul” and “seeing God”?’ [the reply will be] ‘Since oneself is one [and not two] and hence impossible to be seen, how is oneself to see oneself? And how to see God? To become a prey [to Him] is seeing [Him].’

Many scriptures speak of ‘Self-realisation’ and ‘God-realisation’ as the goals to be attained. However, those who comment upon such scriptures often misunderstand and misinterpret these terms, thereby creating confusion in the minds of aspirants. For instance, those who comment upon Kaivalya Navanitam generally misinterpret verse thirteen of chapter one by saying that one must first realise oneself (the individual soul) and then after that one must realise God. Therefore, in order to remove all the confusion that is created, when the terms ‘Self-realisation’ and ‘God-realisation’ are thus misunderstood, Sri Bhagavan explains their true import in this verse by saying that the ego cannot realise itself, nor can it realise God, all that it can do is to become a prey to God, in other words, to be destroyed. Hence, what is called ‘realisation’ or ‘seeing’ is in fact nothing but the destruction of the ego, and this alone is the real goal that aspirants should seek. Then in the next verse Sri Bhagavan teaches that the sole means to attain such realisation is to turn the mind inwards (through the enquiry ‘Who am I?’) and thus drown it in God, who shines within the mind as the light of consciousness.

22
Except by turning the mind inwards and drowning it in the Lord, who shines within that mind [as its substratum] lending light to the mind, which sees everything, how is it possible for the mind to know [or to meditate upon] the Lord? Consider thus.

23
Since it is insentient, this body cannot [of its own accord] say ‘I’. No one will say, ‘In sleep [where the body does not exist] I do not exist’. After an ‘I’ rises [as ‘I am the body’], all rises. Enquire with a keen mind ‘Whence does this “I” rise?’ When enquired thus, it will disappear [being found to be non-existent].

In this verse Sri Bhagavan speaks about three distinct things, namely [1] the body, which, being insentient, has no ‘I’-consciousness, [2] the consciousness ‘I’ (Self) which exists even in sleep, where the body and all else do not exist, and [3] another ‘I’, after whose rising all else rises. Since this rising ‘I’ is clearly distinct from the body and from the ‘I’ which exists in sleep, Sri Bhagavan instructs us to enquire whence it rises, and in the link words he explains what will happen when we enquire thus. Then in the next two verses he reveals more about the nature of this rising ‘I’ and explains how it is distinct from the body and from Self, and yet at the same time assumes the properties of both. Being ‘I’-consciousness, it is distinct from the body, which is insentient, and having the nature of rising and setting, it is distinct from Self, which neither rises nor sets. Nevertheless, it assumes the properties both of the body (namely rising and setting, being limited by time and space, etc.) and the Self (namely shining as ‘I’). Thus this rising ‘I’, whose form is the feeling ‘I am the body’, is described as a knot (granthi) between Self, which is consciousness (chit) and the body, which is insentient (jada). This knot, which is known by various names such as mind, ego, individual soul and so on, can rise and endure only by grasping a body as ‘I’, and having grasped a body as ‘I’ it will wax more by feeding upon other forms, that is, by attending to second- and third-person objects. However, if it is sought for (attended to), it will take to flight, that is, it will be found to be non-existent. These properties of the ego are illustrated by the analogy given by Sri Bhagavan of the wayfarer who played a prominent part in a marriage celebration. Though he belonged neither to the bride’s party nor to the bridegroom’s, he pretended to each party that he was an important member of the other. Thus for several days he feasted well, until finally both the parties began to make enquiries about him, whereupon he took to flight.

24
[Though] this insentient body cannot say ‘I’, [and though] existence-consciousness [sat-chit, Self] does not rise [or set], between these two rises an ‘I’ limited to the measure of the body [the ‘I am the body’-consciousness]. Know that this is the knot between consciousness and the insentient [chit-jada-granthi], and also bondage [bandha], the individual soul [jiva], subtle body [sukshma sarira], ego [ahankara] this mundane state of activity [samsara] and mind [manas].

25
What a wonder it is! This ghostly ego which is devoid of form [i.e. which has no form of its own] comes into existence by grasping a form [a body]; grasping a form, it endures; feeding upon forms [second and third person objects] which it grasps [through the five senses], it waxes more; leaving one form, it grasps another form; [but] when sought for, it take to flight [i.e. it disappears, being found to be non-existent!] Know thus.

26
If the ego, the root, comes into existence, all else [the world, God, bondage and liberation, pain and pleasure, etc.] will come into existence. If the ego does not exist, all else will not exist. Verily, the ego is all! Hence, scrutinising ‘What is it?’ [in other words, ‘Who am I, this ego?’] is indeed giving up all. Know thus.

In the previous verse Sri Bhagavan said that the ego will take to flight (cease to exist) when it is enquired into, and in this verse he says that the ego is all. Hence, enquiring into the ego is truly renouncing all.

27
The state in which this ‘I’ [the ego], which rises as if the first, does not rise, is the state [indicated by the mahavakya]. ‘We are That’. Unless one scrutinises the source [Self] whence ‘I’ rises, how to attain the loss of oneself, [the state] in which ‘I’ does not rise? And unless one attains [that non-rising of ‘I’], say, how to abide in one’s own state, in which one is That?

In this verse Sri Bhagavan emphatically asserts the truth that scrutinising the source of the ego (in other words, attending to Self) is the sole means by which one can destroy the ego and thereby abide as Self, the Reality.

28
Just as one should dive in order to find something that has fallen into the water, so one should dive within with a keen [introverted] mind, [thus] controlling breath and speech, and know the rising-place of the ego, which rises first. Know this.

29
Discarding the body as if a corpse, not uttering the word ‘I’ by mouth, but scrutinising with the mind diving inwards, ‘Whence does this ‘I’ rise?’ alone is the path of knowledge [jnana marga]. Other than this, meditating ‘I am not this [body], I am That [Brahman]’ may be [in some way] an aid, but can it itself be the enquiry [vichara]?

30
Therefore, when the mind reaches the Heart by scrutinising within in this manner, ‘Who am I?’ he, ‘I’ [the ego or mind], bows its head in shame [i.e. it dies] and the One [the Reality] appears of its own accord as ‘I-I’ [I am I]. Although it appears, it is not ‘I’ [the ego]; it is the perfect Reality [purna vastu], the Reality which is Self.

31
[After that Reality] has surged up and appeared [as ‘I-I’], what single thing remains for him who thus enjoys the bliss of Self, which has risen on the destruction of himself [the ego], to do? Since he does not know anything other than Self, how to [or who can] conceive what His state is?

32
When the holy scriptures proclaim, ‘Thou art That, which is declared to be the Supreme’, instead of one’s knowing and being oneself [through the enquiry] ‘What am I?’, to meditate ‘I am That [the Supreme] and not this [the body, etc.]’ is due to lack of strength [i.e. due to lack of maturity of mind]. For That indeed always shines as oneself.

33
Besides that, it is a matter of ridicule to say either, ‘I have not realised myself’, or, ‘I have realised myself’. Why? Are there two selves, one self to become an object known [by the other]? For ‘I am one’ is the truth which is the experience of everyone.

34
Instead of knowing – with the mind merging within – the Reality, which ever exists as the nature of everyone and which is devoid of even a single thought, and instead of firmly abiding [as that Reality], to dispute thus, ‘It exists’, ‘It does not exist’, ‘It has form’, ‘It is formless’, ‘It is one’, ‘It is two’, ‘It is neither [one nor two]’, is ignorance born of illusion [maya]. Give up [all such disputes]!

35
To know and to be – with the mind subsided – the Reality which is ever-attained, is the [true] attainment [siddhi]. All other siddhis are siddhis that are acquired in a dream; when one wakes up from sleep, will they be real? Will they who, by abiding in the true state, are rid of the false [state], be deluded [by siddhis]? Know and be you [the Reality].

Our present life in this world, our so-called waking state, is truly nothing but a dream occurring in the long sleep of Self-forgetfulness. Therefore, any occult powers [siddhis] that we may acquire in this dream will be found to be unreal when, by abiding in the true state of Self-knowledge, we wake up from the false state, the sleep of Self-forgetfulness.

36
It is only if we think, having illusion, that we are the body, that meditating ‘No [we are not the body], we are That [the Supreme]’ may be a good aid for [reminding] us to abide as That. [However] since we are That, why should we for ever be meditating that we are That? Does [a man need to] meditate ‘I am a man?’

37
Even the contention held that there is duality [dvaita] during practice [sadhana] – which one attempts on account of ignorance – and non-duality [advaita] after attainment is not true. Who else is one but the tenth man both while one is anxiously search [for the tenth man] and when one finds oneself [to be the tenth man]?

38
If we are the doer of actions, which are like seeds, we shall have to experience the resulting fruit. But when, by enquiring ‘Who is the doer of actions?’ oneself is known, the sense of doership will disappear and the three karmas [agamya, sanchita and prarabdha] will also fall away [since the ego, the doer of the actions and the experiencer of their fruit, will no longer exist]. This indeed is the state of liberation [mukti], which is eternal.

‘Oneself’ may here be taken to mean either the ego or Self, for if the ego (the doer) is known it will be found to be non-existent, while if Self is known it will be found to be the sole existence. In either case, the sense of doership (and of experienceship) will necessarily cease to exist.

39
Only so long as one thinks like a madman ‘I am a bound one’, will thoughts on bondage and liberation remain. But when seeing oneself, ‘Who is this bound one?’ the eternally liberated and ever-attained Self alone will [be found to] exist. When the thought of bondage cannot remain, can the thought of liberation still remain?

40
If it is said, according to the maturity of the mind, that the liberation which is attained may be of three kinds, with form, without form, or with or without form, then I will say that liberation is [in truth only] the annihilation of the form of the ego which distinguishes [liberation] with form, without form, or with or without form. Know thus.

Concluding lines of the kalivenba composed by Sri Muruganar
This work, Ulladu Narpadu, which the divine Sri Ramana composed and linked into one kalivenba, is the light that reveals the Reality.

Description

Upadēśa Kaliveṇbā

The extended (kalivenba) version of Ulladu Narpadu
Notes by Sri Michael James

Since devotees naturally wanted to include Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu among all Bhagavan’s other works that they regularly chanted in his presence, in order to make it easier for them to memorise the verses in the correct order, Bhagavan linked all forty-two of them (the two maṅgalam verses and the forty verses of the main text) together as a single kaliveṇbā, as he did in the case of all the other works that he composed entirely in veṇbā metre, namely Ēkāṉma Pañcakam, Dēvikālōttaram: Jñāṉācāra-Vicāra-Paṭalam, Sarvajñāṉōttaram: Āṉma-Sāṭṣātkāra-p-Pirakaraṇam, Bhagavad Gītā Sāram and Āṉma-Bōdham, except Śrī Aruṇācala Pañcaratnam, which he did not link together as a kaliveṇbā because he had first composed it in Sanskrit, so when it was chanted in his presence each verse was recited first in Sanskrit and then in Tamil. Since உள்ளது நாற்பது (Uḷḷadu Narpadu) means ‘Forty Verses on What Is’ and since the Kaliveṇba version of it is not forty verses but just one, Bhagavan named it உபதேசக் கலிவெண்பா (Upadesa-k-Kaliveṇba) i.e. ‘Teachings in Kaliveṇbā’.

To understand what linking a series of veṇbās together as a kaliveṇbā entails, it is necessary for one to know at least a little about this வெண்பா (veṇbā) metre, which is formed of two or more lines (generally an even number of lines, except in the case of a cintiyal veṇbā, which consists of three lines, or some paḵṟoḍai veṇbās or kaliveṇbās of an iṉṉisai variety), and each line (aḍi) consists of four feet, except for the final line (īṯṟaḍi), which consists of two full feet and one terminating foot, which is of a shorter duration. Each foot (sīr) is formed of units called asai (a term that is often translated as ‘metrical syllable’, but which consists of either one or two actual syllables, as I will explain in more detail below), the plural of which is asaigaḷ, and whereas a full foot in a veṇbā consists of either two or three asaigaḷ, the terminating foot (īṯṟu-c-cīr) consists of just one asai (though according to one way of analysing them, two kinds of terminating foot are considered to consist of two asaigaḷ, though the second one is just a short ‘u’ sound). So for example a kuṟaḷ veṇbā (a ‘dwarf’ or short veṇbā) consists of one line of four feet and a final line of two full feet and one terminating foot, whereas a four-line veṇbā, which is the standard and most commonly occurring variety, consists of three lines of four feet and a final line of two full feet and one terminating foot.

A veṇbā consisting of five to twelve lines is called a பஃறொடை வெண்பா (paḵṟoḍai veṇbā) (a six-line example of which is the final verse of Āṉma-Bōdham, Bhagavan’s Tamil translation of Ātma-Bōdha), whereas one of thirteen or more lines is called a கலிவெண்பா (kaliveṇbā), but however many lines any such veṇbā consists of, each line will consist of four feet except for the final one, which will consist of two full feet and one terminating foot. Therefore when four or more four-line veṇbās are linked together to form a kaliveṇbā, the fourth line of each except the final verse will be transformed into a four-foot line by extending its terminating foot to form a full foot of two or three asaigaḷ (unless the terminating foot is of a type called kāsu or piṟappu, which I will explain below, in which case it may not need to be extended, because in a non-terminal position it would become a two-asai foot of the type called tēmā or puḷimā respectively) and by adding a fourth foot, and the syllables or words in the extension may extend the meaning of either the previous or the following verse, or in many cases both.

For example, when extending the last line of verse 25 to link it to verse 26, Bhagavan changed its terminating foot, யோர் (yōr), to யோர்வாய் (yōrvāy), thereby transforming the imperative ஓர் (ōr), which means ‘investigate’ or ‘know’, into an optative or more polite imperative, ஓர்வாய் (ōrvāy), which means ‘may you investigate’ or ‘may you know’, and then he added a fourth foot, கருவாம் (karuvām), from which the final mute consonant ம் (m) coalesced with the initial vowel அ (a) in the first foot of verse 26. கருவாம் (karuvām) is a euphonic coalescence of two words, ‘கரு ஆம்’ (karu ām), so it is a relative clause that means ‘which is the embryo [womb, efficient cause, inner substance or foundation]’ and that describes the first word of verse 26, அகந்தை (ahandai), ‘the ego’. Therefore when he linked all the forty-two verses of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu to form the one verse of Upadēśa Kaliveṇbā, he added valuable ideas like this to many of the verses.

Though the name வெண்பா (veṇbā) is a compound of two words, ‘வெள் பா’ (veḷ pā), which means a white, pure or simple verse, its unique prosody is actually quite complex, being defined by a set of strict rules of rhythm, rhyme and alliteration (as can be seen from the explanation of some of its rules given in Wikipedia both in Tamil, வெண்பா, and in English, Venpa). The primary, strictest and most complex rules for a veṇbā are those that govern its rhythm, and these apply to all varieties of veṇbā, whereas the rules that govern its rhyme and alliteration are secondary and less complex, and do not apply equally strictly to all varieties of veṇbā. A four-line veṇbā in which all the rules of rhyme and alliteration are strictly adhered to, as in the case of all the verses of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, is called a நேரிசை வெண்பா (nērisai veṇbā), whereas one in which any of these rules are not strictly adhered to is called an இன்னிசை வெண்பா (iṉṉisai veṇbā).

The rules that govern the rhythm of a veṇbā define all the permissible varieties of சீர் (sīr) or metrical foot that can be used, and the type of அசை (asai) that should begin each consecutive foot. There are two principal types of அசை (asai): நேரசை (nēr-asai), which consists one syllable, and நிரையசை (nirai-y-asai), which consists of two syllables, but these are generally referred to as just நேர் (nēr) and நிரை (nirai) respectively. There are also two other types of அசை (asai), which are rarely used except in the terminating foot (īṯṟu-c-cīr) of a veṇbā, namely நேர்பு (nērbu) and நிரைபு (niraibu), which are respectively a நேர் (nēr) or நிரை (nirai) followed by a short ‘u’ sound (as for example in the terminating feet of verses 19 and 27 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, namely சாற்று (sāṯṟu) in both cases, which is a nērbu, and of verses 5, 10 and 34, namely கழறு (kaṙaṟu), யறிவு (yaṟivu) and சழக்கு (caṙakku) respectively, all of which are niraibu).

The first syllable of a nirai must be short (either a short vowel or a consonant combined with a short vowel) and also open (not followed by a mute consonant, that is, one that is not followed by (and hence combined with) a vowel), whereas its second syllable can be either short or long and either open or closed (followed by a mute consonant). Like the second syllable of a nirai, a nēr can be either short or long and either open or closed, so if a foot (sīr) begins with a short open syllable, its first two syllables will form a nirai, or else its first syllable will form a nēr.

As I mentioned above, except the terminating foot (īṯṟu-c-cīr), each foot (sīr) in a veṇbā consists of either two or three asaigaḷ, but the third asai of any foot will always consist of a single syllable, so it will be a nēr. Therefore (excluding the terminating foot) there are eight varieties of sīr that can be used in a veṇbā (namely four each of two asaigaḷ and three asaigaḷ), and each variety is given a name that is easy to remember and is of the same metrical form as the sīr it describes, namely tēmā (nēr-nēr), puḷimā (nirai-nēr), kūviḷam (nēr-nirai), karuviḷam (nirai-nirai), tēmāṅgāy (nēr-nēr-nēr), puḷimāṅgāy (nirai-nēr-nēr), kūviḷaṅgāy (nēr-nirai-nēr) and karuviḷaṅgāy (nirai-nirai-nēr). Likewise there are four varieties of ஈற்றுச்சீர் (īṯṟu-c-cīr) or ‘terminating foot’, which are also given easily remembered names: nāḷ (nēr), malar (nirai), kāsu (nērbu), piṟappu (niraibu).

The varieties of sīr are classified according to their final asai, so there are two varieties of மாச்சீர் (mā-c-cīr), namely tēmā and puḷimā, two varieties of விளச்சீர் (viḷa-c-cīr), namely kūviḷam and karuviḷam, and four varieties of காய்ச்சீர் (kāy-c-cīr), namely tēmāṅgāy, puḷimāṅgāy, kūviḷaṅgāy and karuviḷaṅgāy. This classification is helpful to define தளை (taḷai), the ‘tie’ that binds each sīr to the next one so as to ensure that a rhythmic flow or pattern of sounds is maintained in each veṇbā, because the type of each sīr determines the type of asai that should begin the next sīr. That is, a mā-c-cīr (tēmā or puḷimā) must be followed by a sīr beginning with a nirai (puḷimā, karuviḷam, puḷimāṅgāy, karuviḷaṅgāy, malar or piṟappu), whereas a viḷa-c-cīr (kūviḷam or karuviḷam) or a kāy-c-cīr (tēmāṅgāy, puḷimāṅgāy, kūviḷaṅgāy or karuviḷaṅgāy) must be followed by a sīr beginning with a nēr (tēmā, kūviḷam, tēmāṅgāy, kūviḷaṅgāy, nāḷ or kāsu). These rules are called வெண்டளை (veṇḍaḷai), the தளை (taḷai) that characterises a வெண்பா (veṇbā), and for other types of metres other rules of taḷai apply.

As an example of how this works, let us consider verse 26 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu:
அகந்தையுண் டாயி னனைத்துமுண் டாகு
மகந்தையின் றேலின் றனைத்து — மகந்தையே
யாவுமா மாதலால் யாதிதென்று நாடலே
யோவுதல் யாவுமென வோர்.

ahandaiyuṇ ḍāyi ṉaṉaittumuṇ ḍāhu
mahandaiyiṉ ḏṟēliṉ ḏṟaṉaittu — mahandaiyē
yāvumā mādalāl yādideṉḏṟu nādalē
yōvudal yāvumeṉa vōr.

English translation: If the ego comes into existence, everything comes into existence; if the ego does not exist, everything does not exist. The ego itself is everything. Therefore, know that investigating what this is alone is giving up everything.
The asaigaḷ that form each sīr of this verse are:
nirai-nēr-nēr nēr-nēr nirai-nēr-nēr nēr-nēr
nirai-nēr-nēr nēr-nēr nirai-nēr — nirai-nēr-nēr
nēr-nirai nēr-nirai nēr-nirai-nēr nēr-nirai
nēr-nirai nēr-nirai-nēr nēr.
Therefore the names of each of these feet (sīrgaḷ) are:
puḷimāṅgāy tēmā puḷimāṅgāy tēmā
puḷimāṅgāy tēmā puḷimā — puḷimāṅgāy
kūviḷam kūviḷam kūviḷaṅgāy kūviḷam
kūviḷam kūviḷaṅgāy nāḷ.
Here we can see that, in accordance with the principles of veṇḍaḷai, each kāy-c-cīr (in this case each puḷimāṅgāy or kūviḷaṅgāy) and each viḷa-c-cīr (in this case each kūviḷam) is followed by a sīr beginning with a nēr-asai, whereas each mā-c-cīr (in this case each tēmā) is followed by a sīr beginning with a nirai-y-asai.

The principles that govern the rhymes and alliterations within each veṇbā are called தொடை (toḍai), which in this context means ‘connection’ (being derived from the causative form of தொடு (toḍu), which means to connect or link), and which is of two principal kinds, namely எதுகை (edugai), which is ‘rhyming’ or matching of the second letter or group of letters (whether a consonant, a consonant-consonant combination or a consonant-vowel combination) of two or more feet (sīrgaḷ), and மோனை (mōṉai), which is alliteration of the first letter (whether a vowel or a consonant-vowel combination) of two or more feet. Both of these types of toḍai are required in a நேரிசை வெண்பா (nērisai veṇbā), but before I explain how they should be used I should first mention one other feature of such a veṇbā.

That is, the fourth and final foot of the second line of a nērisai veṇbā (and of every alternate line of a nērisai kaliveṇbā) is what is called a தனிச்சொல் (taṉi-c-col) or ‘detached word’, and it is separated from the first three feet of that line by a dash. The reason it is generally called a தனிச்சொல் (taṉi-c-col) or ‘detached word’ rather than a தனிச்சீர் (taṉi-c-cīr) or ‘detached foot’, even though it often includes more than one word, is that it is detached from the preceding feet not only in terms of its intonation but also ideally in terms of its meaning. That is, its meaning is supposed to be separated from that of the preceding feet, such as by being the start of a new sentence (though this is not always the case), so it may either be a separate sentence, as in the case of the taṉi-c-col in verse 16 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, ‘நாமுடம்போ’ (nāmuḍambō), ‘Are we a body?’, or more often a part of the same sentence as the subsequent feet.

In a nērisai veṇbā an edugai connection (a rhyming of the second letter or group of letters) should exist between the first foot of the first and second lines and the taṉi-c-col (the fourth foot of the second line), and another edugai connection should exist between the first foot of the third and fourth lines. The edugai in the last two lines can match that of the first two lines (as in the case of the first maṅgalam verse of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu and verses 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 22, 25, 31, 32, 36, 39 and 40), but it need not do so (as in the case of the other twenty-nine verses). Therefore when Bhagavan extended each verse of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu to form Upadēśa Kaliveṇbā he had to add a new taṉi-c-col to each fourth line, and in each case the taṉi-c-col had to match the edugai of the first foot of that line and the preceding line.

According to the Tamil principles of alliteration (mōṉai) the first letter (which may either be a vowel or a consonant-vowel combination) of two or more feet (sīrgaḷ) must either be identical or belong to the same class (iṉam). The twelve Tamil vowels are divided into three classes: one is அ (a), ஆ (ā), ஐ (ai) and ஔ (au); another is இ (i), ஈ (ī), எ (e) and ஏ (ē), and the semivowel-vowel combination யா (yā) also belongs to this class; and the final one is உ (u), ஊ (ū), ஒ (o), ஓ (ō). Likewise three pairs of consonants each form a class: one is ஞ் (ñ) and ந் (n); another is ம் (m) and வ் (v); and another is த் (t) and ச் (c).

In a nērisai veṇbā alliteration (mōṉai) must occur at a minimum between the first and third foot of each line, but in practice alliteration within each line and between consecutive lines is often more extensive. For example, feet that are linked by edugai are often also linked by mōṉai, and sometimes all the feet in a line or in two consecutive lines alliterate. More rarely, every foot in a veṇbā alliterates, and still more rarely every foot is linked by both mōṉai and edugai, as in the case of the first maṅgalam verse of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu:
உள்ளதல துள்ளவுணர் வுள்ளதோ வுள்ளபொரு
ளுள்ளலற வுள்ளத்தே யுள்ளதா — லுள்ளமெனு
முள்ளபொரு ளுள்ளலெவ னுள்ளத்தே யுள்ளபடி
யுள்ளதே யுள்ள லுணர்.

uḷḷadala duḷḷavuṇar vuḷḷadō vuḷḷaporu
ḷuḷḷalaṟa vuḷḷattē yuḷḷadā — luḷḷameṉu
muḷḷaporu ḷuḷḷaleva ṉuḷḷattē yuḷḷapaḍi
yuḷḷadē yuḷḷa luṇar.

English translation: If what exists did not exist, would existing awareness exist? Since the existing substance exists in the heart without thought, how to think of the existing substance, which is called ‘heart’? Being in the heart as it is alone is thinking. Know.
In this verse the first letter of the initial foot is the vowel ‘உ’ (u), and this is also the first vowel of each subsequent foot, so this forms a mōṉai connection (alliteration) between every foot of the verse (in other words, every foot alliterates). Likewise the second group of letters in the initial foot of this verse is ‘ள்ள’ (ḷḷa), and this is also the second group of letters in each subsequent foot except the terminating one, so this forms an edugai connection between every foot except the last.

Note that though every foot except the first one begins with a consonant, this is not counted from the perspective of mōṉai, because in each case the consonant has coalesced with the initial vowel உ (u) according the principles of puṇarcci or sandhi (euphonic conjoining of consecutive letters, either between two consecutive words or between the units that make up a word such as suffixes and prefixes), so it is either the last letter of the previous word, the last consonant of the previous word if that word ended with a ‘u’, or the letter ‘y’ or ‘v’ added as a euphonic glide if the previous word ended with any other vowel.

However as I mentioned earlier, it is very unusual for every foot in a verse to have the same edugai and mōṉai, as in this verse, so a more usual pattern of edugai and mōṉai occurs in most other verses of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, such as verse 30:
நானா ரெனமனமுண் ணாடியுள நண்ணவே
நானா மவன்றலை நாணமுற — நானானாத்
தோன்றுமொன்று தானாகத் தோன்றினுநா னன்றுபொருள்
பூன்றமது தானாம் பொருள்.

nāṉā reṉamaṉamuṇ ṇāḍiyuḷa naṇṇavē
nāṉā mavaṉḏṟalai nāṇamuṟa — nāṉāṉāt
tōṉḏṟumoṉḏṟu tāṉāhat tōṉḏṟiṉunā ṉaṉḏṟuporuḷ
pūṉḏṟamadu tāṉām poruḷ.

English translation: As soon as the mind reaches the heart inwardly investigating who am I, when he who is ‘I’ dies, one thing appears spontaneously as ‘I am I’. Though it appears, it is not ‘I’. It is the whole, the substance, the substance that is oneself.
The edugai in the first two lines of this verse is ‘னா’ (ṉā), a consonant-vowel combination, which is the second letter (or syllable as we would say in English) in the first foot of each of these two lines and of the taṉi-c-col, whereas the edugai in the last two lines is ‘ன்று’ (ṉṟu) and ‘ன்ற’ (ṉṟa), which are consonant-consonant combinations, which are respectively the second group of letters in the first foot of each of these two lines. In each of the four lines the first and third feet alliterate: in the first line the mōṉai or alliterated letter is ‘நா’ (nā) and ‘ணா’ (ṇā); in the second line it is again ‘நா’ (nā), but in this line it is the initial letter not only of the first and third feet but also of the fourth; in the third line it is ‘தோ’ (tō); and in the fourth line it is ‘பூ’ (pū) and ‘பொ’ (po), in which the vowels are considered to be matching for the purposes of alliteration (mōṉai).

What I have explained here is just the basic rules of சீர் (sīr), தளை (taḷai) and தொடை (toḍai) that define a வெண்பா (veṇbā), enough to give at least a rough idea of what a highly sophisticated form of poetry it is, but there is more to it than just these basic rules. For example, the type of sīr and the combination of them used in a veṇbā determine its rhythm, which is called ஓசை (ōsai) in Tamil, and though the rhythm of all veṇbās is what is called செப்பலோசை (seppal-ōsai), which means ‘replying rhythm’ or ‘declaring rhythm’ (in the sense of replying or declaring in a majestic, dignified or authoritative manner), there are different kinds of this rhythm, which depend on whether a veṇbā consists entirely or mostly of இயற்சீர்கள் (iyaṟ-cīrgaḷ: feet consisting of two asaigaḷ), entirely or mostly of வெண்சீர்கள் (veṇ-cīrgaḷ: feet consisting of three asaigaḷ), or a more or less even mixture of both. Each kind of rhythm has a certain tone and thereby expresses a particular bhāva (feeling, emotion, mood or attitude), so since the type of sīr used (and consequently the type of taḷai formed between consecutive sīrgaḷ) sets the tone of each veṇbā, and since its tone should be appropriate its meaning, a skilful poet will naturally compose veṇbās in which the tone matches the meaning. Therefore the ability to compose veṇbās is both a science and an art, and it is considered to be the benchmark that defines a poet in Tamil.

However, for poets who are not familiar with classical Tamil literature, composing a veṇbā is extremely challenging and in some cases insurmountably so, as Kavyakantha Ganapati Sastri discovered when he tried to do so, because though he was considered by many to be the most talented Sanskrit poet of his time and had been awarded the title ‘kāvyakaṇṭha’ (one who has poetry in his throat) because of his poetic skill and ability to compose extempore verses in Sanskrit, he found that he was not able to compose even one veṇbā. How he discovered this is that, since he did not know much about the sophistication of Tamil poetry, he was once talking in Bhagavan’s presence about the greatness of Sanskrit poetry, saying that no other language in the world has such intricate, sublime and beautiful metres, so Bhagavan asked him whether there is any metre in Sanskrit comparable to veṇbā in Tamil. He therefore asked Bhagavan to explain the rules of veṇbā, saying that even if no such metre existed in Sanskrit he could compose Sanskrit verses in it. However when Bhagavan explained to him all the rules, he struggled to compose a veṇbā in Sanskrit, but each time he attempted Bhagavan pointed out errors that disqualified it, so he eventually gave up. Bhagavan then suggested that he could instead try to compose a veṇbā in Telugu, his mother tongue, but though he tried he did not succeed.

Soon after he composed Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu Bhagavan asked Lakshmana Sarma whether he had read it, but he replied that it was difficult for him understand such classical Tamil poetry, because at school he had opted to study Sanskrit instead of Tamil as his second language (since in those days English was the primary language of instruction in most Indian schools, and as a second language children could choose to study either their native language or Sanskrit, so like most other brahmins, Lakshmana Sarma had chosen to study Sanskrit). However, since Bhagavan had asked him, he took this opportunity to ask Bhagavan to teach him the meaning of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, and when Bhagavan agreed and began to do so he became so entranced by it that he wanted Bhagavan to translate it into Sanskrit, and since Bhagavan had told him that Kavyakantha had been unable to compose any veṇbā in Sanskrit, he asked Bhagavan to translate Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu into Sanskrit in veṇbā metre.

Bhagavan declined, however, saying that he (Sarma) was more proficient in Sanskrit than himself, and therefore suggested that he should try to translate it himself. Lakshmana Sarma replied that since even Kavyakantha was not able to compose any veṇbās, he would not be able to do so, and hence only Bhagavan could do so, but Bhagavan told him that composing veṇbās is not actually so difficult if one is familiar with their natural rhythm and their simple rules of rhyme and alliteration, so he agreed to try if Bhagavan would help him. He accordingly began by trying to translate the first verse as a veṇbā in Sanskrit, but he was not able to do so, so he asked Bhagavan to show him how it could be done, and hence Bhagavan composed the following translation of it in veṇbā:
सद्विना सद्ज्ञान मस्ति किमुसत्यम्
वृत्तिरहि तम्हृदिवि भात्यतः — तत्तृदयम्
ध्यायतिक थम्हृदित दात्मभा वस्थितिर्
ध्यानम्स द्वस्तुनस् स्यात् ॥

sadvinā sadjñāna masti kimusatyam
vṛttirahi tamhṛdivi bhātyataḥ — tattṛdayam
dhyāyatika thamhṛdita dātmabhā vasthitir
dhyānamsa dvastunas syāt.

पदच्छेद: सत् विना सत् ज्ञानम् अस्ति किमु? सत्यम् वृत्ति रहितम् हृदि विभाति. अतस् तत् हृदयम् ध्यायति कथम्? हृदि तदात्म भाव स्थितिर् ध्यानम् सत् वस्तुनः. स्यात्.

Padacchēda (word-separation): sat vinā sat-jñānam asti kimu? satyam vṛtti rahitam hṛdi vibhāti. atas tat hṛdayam dhyāyati katham? hṛdi tadātma-bhāva sthitir dhyānam sat-vastunaḥ. syāt.

English translation: Without sat [existence, being or reality], could sat-jñānam [awareness of being] exist? The reality shines in the heart free of thoughts. Therefore how to meditate on it, the heart? Standing [staying, remaining or abiding] in the heart as it is [that is, as thought-free being] is contemplation of [or meditation on] sat-vastu [the real substance or essence, which is being]. May [you] be [as it is].
Lakshmana Sarma was very happy when Bhagavan composed this verse, so he again asked him to translate all the verses of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu in this manner, but Bhagavan replied that it would be more useful for him (Sarma) if he were to compose his own translation, so he began to translate it in a simpler Sanskrit metre. After completing all the verses, he began again, this time choosing a different metre, and in this way he composed several translations in different metres until he had one he was satisfied with. Since he sought Bhagavan’s help each time, not only to assist him in composing the verses but also to explain the meaning and implication of the original Tamil verses, he had a unique opportunity to study Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu repeatedly under the close guidance of Bhagavan.

Many years later, in February 1947, Bhagavan mentioned to Suri Nagamma that Kavyakantha had not been able to compose any veṇbā in either Sanskrit or Telugu, so she asked him to compose some veṇbās in Telugu, and though he initially declined, the next day he composed three Telugu veṇbās, which he immediately translated into Tamil, and a few days later he wrote two more in both Telugu and Tamil, and then he named the Tamil version of these five verses Ēkāṉma Pañcakam. How he came to compose these verses is recorded by Suri Nagamma in more detail in letters 95 and 96 (dated 15th and 20th February 1947) of Letters from Ramanasramam (2006 edition, pages 191-5).

I once asked Sadhu Om why, when Kavyakantha’s skill as a poet was of such high repute, he was not able to compose any veṇbā, to which he replied, ‘Yes, it is a wonder. Perhaps Bhagavan’s silent grace prevented him in order to subdue his pride, but it may also be partly because he was not familiar with Tamil literature in general and with veṇbās in particular’. He then explained that the best way to learn to write poetry in any metre is to read, recite or listen to verses of that metre, and he said that in his case, for example, he was able to compose veṇbās even before he learnt any of the rules of sīr, taḷai and toḍai and without analysing or even thinking about them, and that he had learnt to do so simply because he had heard and read many veṇbās and was therefore able to recognise their natural pattern and flow.

I then asked him if it would be possible to compose veṇbās in any language, such as in English, even though it is so unlike Tamil, and he replied, ‘Yes, it would be very easy’, and then immediately composed an English veṇbā:
When you are | knowing all | when you are | almighty
When you are | all love | verily Lord — then all my
Asking | anything more | undoubted | ly betrays
Loss of | the whole of my | love.
When written or printed, lines of Tamil poetry are always divided according to feet (sīrgaḷ) rather than words (that is, space is left between each two consecutive feet, but not between words within any foot), even though part of a word may belong to one foot while the rest may belong to the next one, and also though one foot may contain two or more words coalesced. Accordingly the first line of this verse would be written or printed as ‘Whenyouare knowingall whenyouare almighty’, but to make it easier to read I left each word separated and typed a vertical line between each two consecutive feet within a line, even though that meant dividing one word in two, namely ‘undoubtedly’, which is split here between the last two feet of the third line.

If we analyse this verse, we can see that it complies with all the rules of sīr, taḷai and toḍai that define a veṇbā. The type of each sīr is:
tēmāṅgāy tēmāṅgāy tēmāṅgāy tēmāṅgāy
tēmāṅgāy tēmā puḷimāṅgāy — tēmāṅgāy
tēmā puḷimāṅgāy tēmāṅgāy tēmāṅgāy
tēmā puḷimāṅgāy nāḷ.
In accordance with the principles of veṇḍaḷai, each kāy-c-cīr (tēmāṅgāy or puḷimāṅgāy) is followed by a foot beginning with a nēr (tēmāṅgāy, tēmā or nāḷ) and each mā-c-cīr (tēmā) is followed by a foot beginning with a nirai (puḷimāṅgāy).

In the first line the alliteration (mōṉai) is the syllable ‘whe’ that begins the first and third feet; in the second line it is ‘whe’ in the first foot and ‘ve’ in the third foot; in the third line it is ‘a’ in the first foot, which in ‘ask’ is pronounced like ஆ (ā) in Tamil, and ‘u’ in the third foot, which in the prefix ‘un’ is pronounced like அ (a) in Tamil and therefore belongs to the same class as the ‘a’ in ‘ask’; and in the final line it is the syllable ‘lo’ that begins the first and third feet.

In the first two lines the rhyme (edugai) is the syllable ‘en’ in ‘when’ and ‘then’, which occurs not only in the first foot of the first line and the first and last feet of the second line, as required, but also coincidentally in the third foot of the first line. In the last two lines the edugai is the ‘s’ in the first foot of the third line, ‘asking’, and in the first foot of the last line, ‘loss of’. However, one of the requirements of edugai is that in each case the preceding vowel (the one in the first syllable of the foot) should be of the same length and hence the same duration, so since the ‘a’ in ‘ask’ is pronounced as a long vowel, like ஆ (ā) in Tamil, the ‘o’ in ‘loss’ needs to be lengthened so that it sounds somewhat like ‘aw’ in ‘law’ or ‘awful’, much as the present British Queen and an earlier generation of British aristocrats might pronounce it if they were to say, ‘Oh, what a terrible loss’ (pronounced ‘lauss’) or ‘It was lost’ (pronounced ‘laust’), or as they might pronounce the usually short ‘o’ in ‘God’ as ‘Gawd’ (a somewhat more exaggerated form of which is also widely used for emphasis in expressions such as ‘Oh my Gawd’ or ‘Gawd help us’). Such lengthening of a vowel for metrical purposes is permissible and quite common in classical Tamil poetry, such as in the first word of verse 28 of Upadēśa Undiyār, தனாது (taṉādu), in which for the purpose of edugai Bhagavan lengthened the usually short second syllable in தனது (taṉadu), which means ‘one’s own’ or ‘of oneself’, and also in the third foot of the second line of verse 32 of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu, in which he lengthened the already long second syllable in இராது (irādu), which means ‘not being’, ‘without being’ or in this case ‘instead of being’, making it இராஅது (irāadu), in order to transform what would otherwise have been just one nirai, namely ‘திரா’ (dirā), into a full foot of two asaigaḷ, a nirai and a nēr, namely ‘திராஅ’ (dirāa).

After I posted my previous article, Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu: Tamil text, transliteration and translation, I decided that my translation of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu would be incomplete if I did not also post a translation of Upadēśa Kaliveṇbā, because the meaning of many of the verses of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu is enhanced by the extensions that Bhagavan added to them in Upadēśa Kaliveṇbā. As far as I know the first English translation of Upadēśa Kaliveṇbā was one that Sadhu Om and I made together, which was first published on pages 217-22 of the October 1981 issue of The Mountain Path under the title ‘Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu – Kaliveṇbā’, and which David Godman later reproduced on his blog. A variation of that translation along with a word-for-word meaning was also included in the book Sri Ramanopadesa Noonmalai, but the translation of it that I give below is an entirely fresh one and more accurate than all my previous translations of it. The core of this translation is the same as the translation of Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu in my previous article, together with a fresh translation of the extensions that Bhagavan added when composing Upadēśa Kaliveṇbā.

When I began to write this article I intended to write a brief explanation about each of these extensions, but when doing so I found myself explaining other words and ideas in each verse, since they seemed in need of explanation at least as much if not more than the extensions, so I then decided to write a more detailed explanation of each verse, until I found that doing so was taking so long that it would take me several months to complete, and would make this article into the size of a book of several hundred pages. Therefore I decided to include in this article only my translation and explanatory paraphrase of each verse, and to post my detailed explanations of them as a series of separate articles over the coming months.

Though I have now written a detailed explanation for many of these verses, my explanations of some of them are more detailed than others, so I need to revise (and in most case elaborate) each of them before posting them. However, though I expect to post the first of them soon, I will not be able to write more explanations for a while, because I need to devote some time to revising and editing the English translation of Sādhanai Sāram, which I should have done earlier because it is long overdue for republication. I will also soon have to do at least some minimal editing on The Path of Sri Ramana, which is likewise due for republication, so while I am working on these I will have less time to write anything for this blog, but I will try to post at least some short articles from time to time, such as ones adapted from recent emails I have written in reply to friends who have written asking me about various aspects of Bhagavan’s teachings.

—Sri Michael James
This article can be found here

Other Ramana Shlokams

Ulladu Narpadu – Kalivenba – Ramana – Lyrics In Tamil, English, Telugu with Translation, Meaning, Commentary, Audio MP3 and Significance

Ulladu Narpadu Kalivenba

Ulladu Narpadu Kalivenba

Ulladu Narpadu – Kalivenba

Description

Upadēśa Kaliveṇbā

Other Ramana Shlokams