Author Topic: Sri Ramanopadesa Noonmalai ஸ்ரீ ரமனோபதேச நூன்மாலை  (Read 13035 times)

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
Sri Ramanopadesa Noonmalai 

ஸ்ரீ ரமனோபதேச நூன்மாலை
                                             
Meaning :  Sri Sadhu Om

Translation: Michael James

Ulladu Narpadu

உள்ளது நாற்பது
பாயிரம்-Prefaratory verses

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

                                                      -ஸ்ரீ முருகனார்

When  Muruganar entreated,"(Graciously) reveal to us the nature of Reality and the means of attaining  it so that we may
  be saved ", the noble  Sri Ramana,  being free from the delusion of the unreal world, joyously and authoritatively revealed Ulladu Narpadu ( The Forty verses on Reality).
« Last Edit: August 03, 2014, 11:01:12 PM by Balaji »
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
2.  உள்ளதொன் றன்றுபல வென்பார்க ளுட்கொளுமா
    றுள்ளதொன் றென்றேதா னோதியவவ்-வுள்ளது
    நாற்பதுவெண் பாக்களையோர் நற்கலிவெண் பாவாக்கி
    யேற்பவளித் தான்ரமணன் எண்.

Know that Sri Ramana, aptly converted those Forty Verses on Reality, which He had sung to proclaim that the Reality is one, into one excellent Kalivenba and gave ( it to the world) so that those who say that the Reality is not one, but many, may understand ( the oneness of  Reality).
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
மங்களம்

உள்ளதல துள்ளவுணர் வுள்ளதோ வுள்ளபொரு
ளுள்ளலற வுள்ளத்தே யுள்ளதா-- லுள்ளமெனு
முள்ளபொரு ளுள்ளலெவ னுள்ளத்தே யுள்ளபடி
யுள்ளதே யுள்ள லுணர் வாயே...

Benedictory  Verses
Mangalam

If the Reality 'I' did not exist, could there exist the consciousness 'am' (the consciousness of one's own existence)?" Since ( that ) Reality exists in the heart devoid of thought, how to ( or who can) meditate upon (that) Reality, which is called the Heart? Know that abiding in the Heart as it is ( that is, without thought, as ' I am'), alone is meditating (upon the Reality).

"Rephrase thus:  If the reality( one's own existence, 'I') did not exist, could there exist the consciousness of Being ( the consciousness  of one's existence ' am ')?.

Note:  The last two lines of this verse, " How to ( or who can) meditate upon the Reality?  Know that abiding in the Heart as it is , alone is meditating ( upon the Reality)", were composed by Sri Bhagavan on 7th August 1928, and the first two lines were composed and added by Him four days later.   Therefore the first two lines should be understood to be an explanation of the question and statement made in the mast two lines.   Since the Reality is that which exists within one devoid  of thought , it is beyond the range of mental conception.   Therefore , how can anyone meditate or form a correct mental conception of that thought-transcending  Reality,  But since everyone experiences the consciousness  ' am' it is clear that there does exist a Reality of oneself and that, the Reality is within the range of one's knowledge, though beyond the range of conceptual knowledge of thought.   Since it is we alone who know our own existence or Reality as ' I am', we are not only the Reality (sat) but also the consciousness (chit) which known our Reality ( verse 23 of Upadesa Undiyar) .   Therefore if , instead of rising in the form of a thought  'I  am this ' or ' I am that', we remain as we really are-that is as the thought-free existence-consciousness ' I am '-, that alone is truly the state of Knowing or meditating upon the Reality  (verse 26 of Upadesa Undiyar).

The opening  words of this verse" Ulladu aladu ulla unarvu ulladu" ( If the reality did not exist, could there exist the consciousness 'am' ? may  also be taken to mean either (1) " Can the consciousness (chit) of (one's own) existence (sat) be other than (that) existence?" or (2) " Other than  the Reality (sat) can there exist a consciousness ( chit) to meditate ( upon the reality)?".

In 1929 a devotee named K. Lakshmana Sharma ('who') attempted to  translate some of the verses of Ulladu Narpadu into Sanskrit in the same venba metre in which the Tamil original was composed, but he was unable to translate even a single verse in that metre.  Seeing this, Sri  Bhagavan  himself translated this first benedictory verse into Sanskrit in venba metre as follows:-

Withought reality ( sat) could there  by knowledge of reality ( sat-jnana)? The Reality shines in the heart( devoid of thought.   Therefore, how is one to meditate upon it ( that Reality), the heart? Abuidance in the Heart as it is ?  Is Meditation (Dhyana)  upon the Reality (sat-vastu).
« Last Edit: August 06, 2014, 04:18:16 PM by Balaji »
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
                                             ...-உள்ளே
மரணபய மிக்குளவம் மக்களர ணாக
மரணபவ மில்லா மகேசன் -- சரணமே
சார்வர்தஞ் சார்வொடுதாஞ் சாவுற்றார் சாவெண்ணஞ்
சார்வரோ சாவா தவர் நித்தர்...


Mature souls who have intense inner fear of death cling to the Feet of the deathless and birthless Great Lord as (their) refuge.  By their clinging ( thus to His Feet), they have died as individuals and have thereby become one with that deathless Lord.  (Therefore)            Can( such) deathless people (again) have the thought of death?  (They are) eternal.

Note:  Whereas the previous verse describes the path of Self-enquiry , this verse describes the path of self-surrender.   But since the Great Lord ( Mahesan)mentioned in this verse  is described as ' deathless and birthless' (marana-bhavam-illa), it is to be understood that He is not a mere name and form- for every name and form has a beginning (birth) and an end (death)-but is only the nameless and formless Reality 'I am ' mentioned in the previous verse.   Therefore clinging to His Feet is to be understood to mean clinging or attending to the existence-consciousness ' I am'.  As Sri Bhagavan Himself once said," The Feet of Guru ( or God) are not outside you.  They shine within you as 'I'.   Therefore only if  you cling to 'I' you are truly clinging to His Feet".   By this clinging to ' I', the ego will die and one will remain as the deathless and eternal Self.   Such Self-abidance alone is true self-surrender.

Thus we  should understand from these two benedictory verses that though the paths of Self-enquiry and self surrender are described as though they were two different paths, they are in practice one and the same.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2014, 11:37:44 PM by Balaji »
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile

                                                       ....பார்வைசேர்
1.  நாமுலகங்  காண்டலா னானாவாஞ் சத்தியுள
    வோர்முதலை யொப்ப  லொருதலையே--நாமவுருச்
    சித்திரமும் பார்ப்பானுஞ் சேர்படமு மாரொளியு
    மத்தனையுந் தானா மவன்...



Because  we, who are joined with sight, see the world, accepting one principle ( or ' first thing') which has a manifold power is indispensable.   the picture of names and forms, the seer, the co-existing screen and the pervading light--all these are He, who is Self.

Explanatory paraphrase:  Because we, the ego or individual, whose adjunct-nature is the faculty to see things as other than ' I' see this world of multiplicity, it is indispensable for us to accept the existence of one first principle which has a power to appear as many.  This world-picture, which consists merely of names and forms, the seer of this picture, the screen or supporting base upon which h this picture appears, and the pervading light which illumines this picture- all these are only He, that one first principle, who is none other than the real Self.

Explanatory Note:  The link-words at the beginning of this verse are parvai ser, which literally mean ' who are joined with sight and which imply and the faculty of seeing is not natural to us but is only an adjunct which we have appended on ourself and from which we can consequently detach ourself.

The  words or mudalai, which mean ' one principle' or ' one first thing ' denote the one Reality which underlies the appearance of both the world and the seer.   The entire appearance consisting of the world, the seer, the screen and the light are not  other than that one first principle, which is affirmed in the last line of this verse to be the real Self.   But  so long as we experience a difference between ourself, the seer, and the world which we see, that one first principle still be experienced by us as God, a third  separate entity who is endowed with unlimited qualities such as Omnipotence and Omniscience and who governs the entire  world and all the souls in that world.

The words  nanavam sakti, which literally mean ' a manifold power' or ' a power which is many ' denote the power of Maya or delusion which is the cause of the appearances of all manyness and which is the same as the wonderful power ( adisaya sakthi) mentioned in verse 6 of Arunachala Ashtakam. Though in absolute truth, this power is not other than the' first principle the real Self, it seems to be something different from the real Self when it gives rise to this appearance of manyness.  Since manyness could not appear to exist if this power did not exist, and since there is nothing other than this power which could appear as many it is sometimes said that this power itself has become many.   However , its becoming many is not actually a real becoming but only a seeming becoming because even when manyness is seen, all that manyness is in truth only the one first principle, which is the non-dual real Self.   The act of becoming many or seeming to become many is postulated only because we see the world.   but even when we see this world of duality and  multiplicity should be understood to be merely an unreal appearance.

The words ' the pervading light ('aroli') here mean the mind-light , which is a reflection of the real light of self-consciousness and which is the limited light by which we see the entire picture of names and forms.
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
                                                       ..உலகு --கர்த்தனுயிர்
2.  மும்முதலை யெம்மதமு முற்கொள்ளு மோர்முதலே
     மும்முதலாய் நிற்குமென்று மும்முதலு --மும்முதலே
     யென்னலகங் கார மிருக்கும்மட்டே யான்கெட்டுத்
     தன்னிலையி னிற்ற றலையாகும்...

Every religion first postulates three principles, the world, God and Soul  'Arguing the one principle (mentioned in the previous verse) alone exists as, the three principles,(No.) the three principles are  always three principles' is (possible) only so long as the ego exists.   Abiding in one's own state ( the state  of self), 'I'  ( the ego) having been annihilated, is the highest.

Note:  All arguments about the three principles, the world, soul and God, and about the reality  which underlies those three principles, arise only because of the ego, the wrong knowlege which rises in the limited form ' I am this body' Since none of these arguments can stand in the egoless state of Self-abidance, that state is the highest of all states and is infinitely superior to any of the doctrinal religions, each of which postulates its own limited tenets about the nature of the world, soul and God.   Refer also the verse 34 of this work.
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
                                                               ....-கொன்னே
3.   உலகுமெய்பொய்த் தோற்ற முலகறிவா மன்றென்
     றுலகுசுக மன்றென் றுறைத்தெ ..னுலகுவிட்டுத்
     தன்னையோர்ந் தொன்றிரண்டு தானற்று நானற்ற
     வந்நிலையெல் லார்க்குமொப் பாம்...
 
The world is real','(No, it is ) an unreal appearance';'the world is sentient', ' It is not', ' the world is happiness', ' It is not'-what is the use  of arguing thus in vain? Having given up the world and having known oneself, both one and two ( duality) having  come to an end-that state in which ' I ' has ceased to exist is agreeable to all.

Explanatory paraphrase:   'The world is real or sat, it is sentitnent or chit, and it is happiness or ananda' ' No, it is unreal, insentient and miserable'-to engage in such vain arguments is futile. When one has given up attending to the world, when one has known onself by enquiring  'who am I, where is the individual who seeks to know the truth about the world"?   and when one has thereby put an end to all thoughts both non-duality and  about duality, the resulting state of egolessness will be free of all arguments and will be loved by everyone.

Note:  Sri Bhagavan and other Sages teach that the world is an unreal appearance which is  devoid both of sentience and of happiness only in order to enable us to give up our attachement to it and thereby to turn within and to know Self.   When they teach this truth about the world, they do not intend that we should engage in futile arguments about the world.   If we have really understood the truth  that the world is unreal, we should give  up all arguments about it and should instead  turn within in order to know ' Who am I, the individual  who knows this unreal world?'  Only if we thus know the truth  of 'I' the knowing subject, can we correctly know the truth of the world, the known object.   Since the resulting state of Self-knowledge is devoid of the ego, which is the root  of all problems and sufferings  and the cause of all arguments, Sri Bhagavan declares that state is agreeable to all.
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
                                                                ....ஊனே --துன்னும்
4.    உருவந்தா னாயி னுலகுபர மற்றா
      முறுவந்தா னன்றே லுவற்றி --னுருவத்தைக்
      கண்ணுறுதல் யாவனெவன் கண்ணலாற் காட்சியுண்டோ
      கண்ணதுதா னந்தமிலாக் கண்ஆமே


If oneself is a form composed of flesh, the world and God will be likewise (that is, they will also be forms) ; if oneself is not  a form, who can see their forms, and how ?  Can the sight  ( that which is seen) be otherwise than the eye ( the seer)? Self, the (real) eye  is the limitless eye ( the eye which is devoid of the limitation of name and form).

Note:   The words" Kan alal Katchi undo" may also be taken to mean, without the eye ( the seer), can there be the sight ( that which is seen)?"  However , Sri Bhagavan Himself used to explain these words to mean " Can the sight  be otherwise than the eye?", which is a meaning having a far  deeper import.
Since the nature of what is seen cannot be different from the nature of the seer, and since  the ego or mind can come into existence only by identifying the name and form of a body as 'I' it can see only names and forms and can never see Self, the nameless and formless reality.  Only when one gives up identifying the body as 'I' can one see or realize Self.   Since in that state of self-realization one remains only as Self, the nameless and formless existence-consciousness bliss( sat-chit- ananada) one can then see only that nameless and formless existence-consciousness-bliss and can never see the names and forms of this world.  That is why- Sri Bhagavan asks in this verse,? " If oneself is not a form (but only the formless Self), who can see their forms ( the forms of the world and God), and how?".

It is to be noted here that the Tamil word 'Kan' which  literally means ' eye' also means 'consciousness' (chit) or 'knowledge ' ( jnana).   Therefore the last sentence of this verse also means, "Self, the real) consciousness ( or knowledge) is the limitless ( and therefore  formless) consciousness  ( or knowledge)".
« Last Edit: September 12, 2014, 02:29:39 PM by Balaji »
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
                                                            ---எண்ணில்
5.    உடல்பஞ்ச கோச வுருவதனா லைந்து
      முடலென்னுஞ் சொல்லி லொடுங்கு --முடலன்றி
      யுண்டோ வுலக முடல்விட் டுலகத்தைக்
      கண்டா ருளரோ கழறுவாய்...

If we scrutinize, the body is form (composed) of five sheaths (pancha-kosas).  Therefore, all the five (sheaths) are included in the term 'body' (that is, any of the five sheaths may be denoted when we use the term 'body').  Without the body, does the world exist? That  is, in the absence of any of the five sheaths , does  any world, subtle or gross, exist?) Say is there anyone who, having given up the body, (that is, having  given up identifying the body  as 'I', as in sleep death or Self-realisation ) has seen the world?

Note:  Refer to the note to verse 22 of Upadesa Undiyar where the give sheaths  (pancha-kosal) are enumerated.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2014, 05:21:30 PM by Balaji »
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
                                                                      ...--கண்ட
6.   உலகைம்  புலன்க ளுருவேறன் றவ்வைம்
      புலனைம் பொறிக்குப் புலனா --முலகைமன
      மொன்றைம் பொறிவாயா லோர்ந்திடுக லான்மனத்தை
      யன்றியுல குண்டோ வறை...


The world which is seen is nothing other than the form of the five sense-knowledges ( sight, sound, smell, taste and touch).  Those five sense-knowledges are sensations (known ) to the five sense-organs.  Since the one mind (or the mind alone) knows the world though the five sense-organs, say, without the mind does the world exist?

(That is, in the absence of the mind which perceives it, does any such thing as a world exist? Hence the world depends for its seeming existence upon the mind.)

Note:  Since in verse 17 of Upadesa Undiyar Sri Bhagavan reveals that if one vigilantly scrutinizes the form of the mind, it will be found that there is no such thing as mind at all, and since in this verse He reveals that the world does not exist in the absence of the mind, we should understand that when through Self-enquiry the mind is found to be non-existent, the world will also be found to be non-existent.  Thus the experience which results from Self-enquiry is ajata-the knowledge that the mind and world have never truly come into existence, and that the one unborn and unchanging Self alone truly exists.  This experience is the Supreme and Absolute Truth.
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
                                                                .....நேரே-நின்ற
7.   உலகறிவு மொன்றா யுதித்தொடுங்கு மேனு
     முலகறிவு தன்னா லொளிறு-முலகறிவு
     தோன்றிமறை தற்கிடனாய்த் தோன்றிமறை யாதொளிரும்
     பூன்றாமா மஃதே பொருள் ஆமால்...




Although the world, which is (seen) in front ( of us), and the mind (which sees it) ( appear or come into existence) and subside ( disappear or cease to exist) simultaneously,  the world (exists and ) shines ( only) because of ( or by ) the mind.  That which is the Whole (purana) and which shines without appearing and disappearing as the base for the appearance and disappearance of the world and  mind, alone is the Reality.

Note:  The world and mind are unreal because they appear at one time and disappear at another time, and because they are divided as separate entities.  Only that which shines eternally without appearing and disappearing, and which is a single undivided whole is the Reality.  Just as the rope is the base on which the unreal snake appears and disappears, so the eternal and undivided Reality is the base on which the unreal world and mind appear and disappear.
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile

                                                                            ....-ஏண்றதாம்
8.  எப்பெயரிட் டெவ்வுருவி லேத்தினுமார் பேருருவி
     லப்பொருளைக் காண்வழிய தாயினுமம்--மெய்ப்பொருளி
     னுண்மையிற்ற னுண்மையினை யோர்ந்தொடுங்கி யொன்றுதலே
     யுண்மையிற் காண லுணர்ந்திடுக...


Whoever worships ( the nameless and formless Reality) in whatever form giving (it) whatever  name, that is the way to see that ( nameless and formless) Reality in (that) name and form, because) it is possible
( to see it thus).  However, becoming one ( with the Reality), having known one's own truth ( that is having known the truth that one is not the ego, the individual who worships and sees names and forms, but only the real Self, who never sees names and forms and  having (thereby) subsided in the ( nameless and formless) truth of that Reality, alone is seeing in truth ( in other words, being the Reality is alone truly seeing the Reality)  Know thus.
 
Note:  Although it is possible to see the  Reality in name and form either as God or as Guru, that is not truly seeing the Reality, because the reality ( whose nature was defined in the previous verse) is in truth nameless and formless Regarding seeing God or the Reality . Sri Bhagvan once said in English " To see is to know, to know is to become and to become is to be ".  Therefore , being the Reality ( that is abiding as the real Self, which is devoid of name and form) having known the truth  that the  ego ( which is the seer of names and forms) is non-existent  and having thereby subsided and become one with the reality , alone is truly seeing the Reality.( verse 26 of Upadesa Undiyar).
 
The tamil words ' per uruvil' can be interpreted in three different ways namely to mean (1) ' in name and form' ( qualifying the nature of the seeing), (2) 'nameless and formless' ( qualifying the nature of the Reality), or (3) 'without name and  form ' (qualifying the nature of the seeing).  However, for the reasons given in the Path of Sri Ramana-Part Two, appendix 4(b) the third interpretation is not fitting here and hence only the first two interpretations are included in this translation the first without brackets and the second within brackets.
 
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
                                                                  ...--விண்மை
9.         இரட்டைகண் முப்புடிக ளென்றுமொன்று பற்றி
            யிருப்பவா மவ்வொன்றே தென்று -கருத்தினுட்
            கணடாற் கழலுமவை கண்டவ ரேயுண்மை
            கண்டார் கலங்காரே காண்.....


The dyads and the triads,(which are unreal appearances like) the blueness of the sky , exist by always clinging to 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, the ego upon whom these dyads and triads depend for their existence ?') they ( the dyads and triads ) will slip off. (Since their base the ego, will be found to be non-existent) that is, they will disappear, being found to be non-existent , because their support and base, the ego, will itself be found to be non-existent).  Only those who have ( thus) seen the non-existence .   Only those who have ( thus) seen the non-existence of the ego and of all its products , namely the dyads and triads are those who have seen the truth(the real Self, which is the source and absolute base  upon which the unreal ego seems to exist). (After seeing thus) they will not be perturbed ( by the unreal appearance of the dyads and triads, because in their outlook those dyads and triads will be non-existent)  See thus.

Note:  The dyads mentioned here are the dvandvas or pairs of opposites such as good and bad, light and darkness, pleasure and pain, bondage and liberation, knowledge and ignorance and so on while the triads are the triputis or three factors of objective knowledge such as the knower, the act of knowing and the object known, the seer the act of seeing and the object seen, and so on.   All these differences are an unreal appearance and they always cling to or depend upon the ego for their  seeming existence.   Therefore, when through  Self-enquiry the ego is found to be non-existent, all these differences will also be found to be non-existent, and that which will remain shining is only Self, the ever-existing and ever-undifferentiated reality, which is the absolute base upon which the unreal ego and all its products, the dyads and triads, seemed to exist.

Refer to appendix  (C) of  The Path of Sri Ramana-Part Two, where it  is explained why the 'one' (ondru) upon which the dyads and triads depend is to be understood to be the ego and not Self.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2014, 02:42:15 PM by Balaji »
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
                                           ...இருள்போல் --மண்டும்
10.  அறியாமை விட்டறிவின் றமறிவு விட்டவ்
      வறியாமை யின்றாகு மந்த --வறிவு
      மறியா மையுமார்க்கென் றம்முதலாந் தன்னை
      யறியு மறிவே யறிவுஆம்

Without ignorance (about objects), which is dense like darkness , knowledge (about objects) does not exist ; ( similarly) without knowledge ( about objects), that ignorance does not exist.  Only the knowledge which knows the (non -existence of the individual) self ( the ego), who is the base ( of knowledge  and ignorance about objects), ( by enquiring ' To whom are that knowledge and ignorance?') is (true) Knowledge.

Note:  Knowledge about objects, and ignorance about objects are a dyad or dvandva each of which depends upon the other for its seeming existence.  If there did not previously exist an ignorance of a thing, the knowledge of that thing could not come into existence.   And only when the knowledge of that thing dawns, do we come to know that an ignorance of it existed previously.   Thus without our present knowledge of that thing, our prior ignorance would not be known and hence would not exist.

Since knowledge and ignorance about objects are both mere thoughts , they can rise only after the rising of the first thought, the ego.   But when one enquires 'who am I', the individual to whom both knowledge and ignorance arise?' one will realize that the ego or individual who experiences knowledge and ignorance about objects is truly non-existent, and that Self alone truly exists.  Only that Knowledge which thus knows the non-existence of the ego and the sole existence of Self, is true Knowledge.  That knowledge is Self.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2014, 04:05:17 PM by Balaji »
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya

Balaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1096
    • View Profile
                                                 ...---அறிப
11.   அறிவுறுந் தன்னை யறியா தயலை
        யறிவ தறியாமை யன்றி --யறிவோ
        வறிவயற் காதாரத் தன்னை யறிய
        வறிவறி யாமை யறுமே...


Knowing other things without knowing onself ( the mind or ego), who knows the objects known, is ( only) ignorance; can it instead be ( true) knowledge? When ( through the enquiry 'Who am I', the individual who knows the objects  known) one knows ( the non-existence of ) oneself ( the knowing ego) the base for knowledge and the other ( that is , the base of knowledge and ignorance about objects ) will cease to exist.

Note:  The word arivadu may mean either ' ( the act of ) knowing ' or ' that which knows'.   If the latter meaning is taken, the first sentence of this verse would translate thus:  "That which knows other things without knowing itself, which knows  the objects known, is (only) ignorance; can it instead be ( true) knowledge?" In other words, the mind, which knows other things without knowing the truth of itself, is not knowledge but only ignorance.

However, when the mind gives up knowing other things and tries instead to know itself by scrutinizing  'Who am I?', it will be found to be truly non-existent, and hence all its knowledge and ignorance about other things  will automatically cease to exist.  The resulting state, in which all knowledge and ignorance about objects has ceased to exist due to the destruction of their base, the knowing mind, alone is the state of true knowledge.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2014, 02:16:06 PM by Balaji »
Om Namo Bagavathe Sri Ramanaya