The authoritative version of Ulladu Narpadu, and the meaning of verse eight

May 10, 2005

The most authoritative version of Ulladu Narpadu has

to be the one that Bhagavan wrote himself in Tamil.

Most of the original text was composed in 1928, with

Muruganar suggesting topics and Bhagavan composing

verses on the selected themes. A few verses that

Bhagavan had composed several years earlier were also

included. The first benedictory verse, which is an

exquisite summary of Bhagavan’s teachings and

experience, was written by Bhagavan without any topic

being suggested by Muruganar.

At a later date Bhagavan composed the kali venba

version, which was the same text except that an extra

word or phrase was added to each verse. This turned it

into a continuous poem, rather than forty separate

verses, and made it easier to chant. The extra words

added a little to the meaning and occasionally made

clear ideas that were only implicit in the original

version. A translation of this kali venba version,

made by Sadhu Om and Michael James, was published in

The Mountain Path in the 1981, pp. 217-222. The kali

venba version is the one chanted at Ramanasramam every

Tuesday night, but translations of the text are almost

all taken from the original 1928 version that does not

have the extra words.

Translations of these Tamil verses are always

interpretations since there are several places where

one has to choose from different possible meanings.

Some of the possibilities give contradictory meanings,

often on quite crucial points. In verse eight, for

example, which has been discussed recently on this

site, there are two legitimate translations and

interpretations: one would say that name and form

meditation can result in realisation, and the other,

says it cannot. It all depends on how one translates

one syllable – il – in the verse. It could be a

negative, and if it is taken that way the verse would

say that name and form meditation does not result in

realisation. Sadhu Om has taken this option in his

translations and commentaries, whereas everyone else

has opted for the equally legitimate alternative,

which says that name and form meditation does lead to

realisation.

On occasions such as these one has to look at what

Bhagavan has to say in his spoken comments. He was

often asked about certain phrases in Ulladu Narpadu,

and his replies on these occasions have to be regarded

as the definitive interpretations of obscure and

ambiguous points.

Verse four is a good example of this. The current

edition of Collected Works has the following

translation:

If Self has a form, the world and God likewise have

form. If Self is without form, by whom and how can

form (of world and God) be seen? Without the eye, can

there be sight or spectacle? The Self, the Real Eye,

is infinite.

The phrase ‘Without the eye, can there be sight or

spectacle?’ can also be translated as ‘Can what is

seen be of a different nature to the eye?’ Almost all

the translators have opted for the Collected Works

idea, but this was not what Bhagavan was trying to

say. Sadhu Om has the following translation:

If one is a form, the world and God will also be so.

If one is not a form, who can see their forms and how?

Can what is seen be of a different nature to the eye?

Self, the eye, is the infinite eye.

This alternative version, which has a rather unusual

interpretation of the original Tamil, is supported by

Bhagavan himself and must therefore be regarded as the

correct idea. In Maha Yoga (1973 ed, p. 72) he has

this to say on Ulladu Narpadu verse four:

Bhagavan: If the eye that sees be the eye of flesh,

then gross forms are seen; if the eye be assisted by

lenses, then even invisible things are seen to have

form; if the mind be that eye, then subtle forms are

seen; thus the seeing eye and the objects seen are of

the same nature; that is, if the eye be itself a form,

it sees nothing but forms. But neither the physical

eye nor the mind has any power of vision of its own.

The real Eye is the Self; as He is formless, being the

infinite consciousness, the reality, He does not see

forms.

This is clearly a completely different idea to

the one presented in the Collected Works translation,

but with Bhagavan’s authority behind it, we must

accept it as the correct rendering.

Unfortunately, I have not come across any instance of

Bhagavan explaining the correct meaning of the

grammatical ambiguity in verse eight. One can make a

case for both points of view. On such occasions, where

the meaning is in dispute, it is always useful to see

what Lakshman Sarma has to say in Revelation, his

Sanskrit rendering of Ulladu Narpadu, and his Tamil

commentary on the same verse. Both were done under

Bhagavan’s supervision, and checked by him, so there

has to be a strong supposition that the interpretation

in these sources was supported by Bhagavan. Lakshman

Sarma has the following rendering (Revelation, 1980,

p.11):

Even though to worship Him in any form and by any name

is a means towards the right vision of Him, who

[really] is without form and name, true vision of Him

consists in being at one with Him by merging in Him,

the transcendental Being, through the realisation of

the identity of the Real Self with His real essence.

Lakshman Sarma does not take ‘il’ to be a negative in

this translation, so it may be reasonable to assume

that Bhagavan did not intend it to be taken in this

way. However, this is one of the grey areas of Ulladu

Narpadu translation.

Best Wishes David Godman

_________

Messenger - want a free and easy way to contact your friends online?

http://uk.messenger.

May 11, 2005

Dear David,

Thanks for a very helpful response.

In "Power of the Presence" vol 3, the chapter of Lakshman Sarma, you mention

the commentary he wrote on Ulladu Narpardu that was serialised in the

newspaper 'Jana Mittiran'. You go on to say how Bhagavan ensured this was

printed by the Ashram and that...

"Bhagavan left no one in doubt that this was his own commentary and

interpretation. Prior to the publication in book form of Lakshman Sarma's

commentary, if anyone asked Bhagavan about the meaning of a particular verse

in Ulladu Narpadu, he would take out the scrapbook in which he pasted the

weekly Jana Mittiran commentaries and show the relevant section to the

questioner."

Is Lakshman Sarma's "Maha Yoga" the English version and compilation of the

commentaries above, or do these exist in a separate published form?

In your post you also mention:

"A translation of this kali venba version, made by Sadhu Om and Michael

James, was published in The Mountain Path in the 1981, pp. 217-222."

Do you or others on the list know if this available on line or published in

book form? I would be interested to read it.

Thanks and best wishes,

Peter

cm_ramesh · September 25, 2011

Om Namo Bhagavate Ramanaya

Dear Mr David,

I am keen in learning the text Ulladhu Naarpadhu. Would be extremely grateful if you could send me an English version of the same. I am not too familiar with Tamil Language. Thank you in advance for the help. I am not able to open the pdf file in the Ramana maharshi web site.

Ramesh, Lebanon