Guest guest Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 mangalam i: " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, thought free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be meditated on? And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self whose nature is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be at one with It within the Heart. " (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, titled Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. ------------------------- Lakshmana Sarma spent more than twenty years in close association with Bhagavan Sri Ramana and he made a deep study of His teachings under His personal guidance. One day in 1928 or 1929 Sri Bhagavan asked Lakshmana Sarma, " Have you not read Ulladu Narpadu? " Lakshmana Sarma replied that he had not, because he was unable to understand the classical style of Tamil in which it was composed, but he eagerly added that he would like to study it if Sri Bhagavan would graciously teach him the meaning. Thus began the disciple's close association with his Master. Sri Bhagavan started to explain to him slowly and in detail the meaning of each verse, and Lakshmana Sarma, being a lover of Sanskrit, started to compose Sanskrit verses embodying the meaning of each Tamil verse as it was explained to him. After composing each verse in Sanskrit, Lakshmana Sarma submitted it to Sri Bhagavan for correction and approval, and if Sri Bhagavan's approval was not forthcoming he would recompose the verse as often as was necessary until His approval was obtained. In this way all the verses of Ulladu Narpadu were rendered into Sanskrit within a few months. But Lakshmana Sarma was unable to stop with that. He was so fascinated by the profound import of Ulladu Narpadu that he felt impelled to go on revising his Sanskrit rendering any number of times until he was able to make it an almost perfect and faithful replica of the Tamil original. For two or three years he went on repeatedly revising his translation with the close help and guidance of Sri Bhagavan, who always appreciated his sincere efforts and who once remarked, " It is like a great tapas for him to go on revising his translation so many times. " Because of his repeated efforts to make such a faithful Sanskrit rendering of Ulladu Narpadu, Lakshmana Sarma was blessed with the opportunity of receiving long and pertinent instructions from Sri Bhagavan about the very core of His teachings. (From the Preface to " Maha Yoga " by Lakshmana Sarma.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Reflecting upon this first mangalam of " Ulladu Narpadu " which has to do with identity of Existence (that which IS), Consciousness and the Heart (the Self) I came across the following in " Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi. " D.: What is the nature of the Reality? M.: (a) Existence without beginning or end - eternal. (b) Existence everywhere, endless, infinite. © Existence underlying all forms, all changes, all forces, all matter and all spirit. The many change and pass away (phenomena), whereas the One always endures (noumenon). (Talks:28) The only permanent thing is Reality; and that is the Self. You say " I am " , " I am going " , " I am speaking " , " I am working " , etc. Hyphenate " I am " in all of them. Thus I - AM. That is the abiding and fundamental Reality. This truth was taught by God to Moses: " I AM that I-AM " . " Be still and know that I-AM God. " so " I-AM " is God. You know that you are. You cannot deny your existence at any moment of time. For you must be there in order to deny it. This (Pure Existence) is understood by stilling your mind. The mind is the outgoing faculty of the individual. If that is turned within, it becomes still in course of time and that " I-AM " alone prevails. " I-AM " is the whole Truth. (Talks: 503) The Absolute Existence is the Self. You are also conscious of the Existence. That Existence is also consciousness (Sat and Chit). That is your real nature. (Talks: 520) Peter On Behalf Of Peter 02 February 2009 16:13 Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam mangalam i: " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, thought free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be meditated on? And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self whose nature is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be at one with It within the Heart. " (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, titled Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 These words from Bhagavan Ramana may throw some light on the first mangalam... Devotee: Sri Bhagavan speaks of the Heart as the seat of consciousness and as identical with the Self. What does the Heart exactly signify ? Bhagavan: The question about the heart arises because you are interested in seeking the source of consciousness. To all deep thinking minds, the enquiry about the 'I' and its nature has an irresistible fascination. Call it by any name, God, Self, the Heart or the seat of consciousness, it is all the same. The point to be grasped is this, that Heart means the very core of one's being, the centre, without which there is nothing whatever. The Heart is not physical, it is spiritual. Hridayam equals hrit plus ayam; it means `this is the centre'. It is that from which thoughts arise, on which they subsist and where they are resolved. The thoughts are the content of the mind and they shape the universe. The Heart is the centre of all. That from which beings come into existence is said to be Brahman in the Upanishads. That is the Heart. Brahman is the Heart. (Maharshi's Gospel, Ch.4) Peter On Behalf Of Peter 02 February 2009 16:13 Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam mangalam i: " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, thought free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be meditated on? And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self whose nature is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be at one with It within the Heart. " (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, titled Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 Dear Peter, Thank you for these valuable postings. Is it your intention to continue with the rest of Ulladu Narpadu? That would be marvellous for us. All best wishes and warmest regards, Yours in Bhagavan, Alan --- On Wed, 4/2/09, Peter <not_2 wrote: Peter <not_2RE: Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam Date: Wednesday, 4 February, 2009, 11:47 AM These words from Bhagavan Ramana may throw some light on the firstmangalam...Devotee: Sri Bhagavan speaks of the Heart as the seat of consciousness andas identical with the Self. What does the Heart exactly signify ?Bhagavan: The question about the heart arises because you are interested inseeking the source of consciousness. To all deep thinking minds, the enquiryabout the 'I' and its nature has an irresistible fascination. Call it by any name, God, Self, the Heart or the seat of consciousness, itis all the same. The point to be grasped is this, that Heart means the verycore of one's being, the centre, without which there is nothing whatever.The Heart is not physical, it is spiritual. Hridayam equals hrit plus ayam;it means `this is the centre'. It is that from which thoughts arise, onwhich they subsist and where they are resolved. The thoughts are the contentof the mind and they shape the universe. The Heart is the centre of all.That from which beings come into existence is said to be Brahman in theUpanishads. That is the Heart. Brahman is the Heart.(Maharshi's Gospel, Ch.4)Peter []On Behalf Of Peter02 February 2009 16:13 Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalammangalam i:"Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is RealConsciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, thoughtfree, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be meditated on?And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self whose natureis Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be at onewith It within the Heart."(from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, titledUlladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 Dear Alan, Yes, I would like to continue with the rest of Ulladu Narpadu if that is OK. I thought I might post a verse from there once a week and then in between verses share some other passages from Sri Ramana's works which hopefully will help me/us gain a better understanding of the verses. Other people are very welcome to share any other passages from Sri Ramana's works which they feel are relevant. Best wishes, Peter ________________________________ On Behalf Of Alan Jacobs 04 February 2009 12:02 RE: Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam Dear Peter, Thank you for these valuable postings. Is it your intention to continue with the rest of Ulladu Narpadu? That would be marvellous for us. All best wishes and warmest regards, Yours in Bhagavan, Alan --- On Wed, 4/2/09, Peter <not_2 wrote: Peter <not_2 RE: Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam Wednesday, 4 February, 2009, 11:47 AM These words from Bhagavan Ramana may throw some light on the first mangalam... Devotee: Sri Bhagavan speaks of the Heart as the seat of consciousness and as identical with the Self. What does the Heart exactly signify ? Bhagavan: The question about the heart arises because you are interested in seeking the source of consciousness. To all deep thinking minds, the enquiry about the 'I' and its nature has an irresistible fascination. Call it by any name, God, Self, the Heart or the seat of consciousness, it is all the same. The point to be grasped is this, that Heart means the very core of one's being, the centre, without which there is nothing whatever. The Heart is not physical, it is spiritual. Hridayam equals hrit plus ayam; it means `this is the centre'. It is that from which thoughts arise, on which they subsist and where they are resolved. The thoughts are the content of the mind and they shape the universe. The Heart is the centre of all. That from which beings come into existence is said to be Brahman in the Upanishads. That is the Heart. Brahman is the Heart. (Maharshi's Gospel, Ch.4) Peter <%40> [@ . com <%40> ] On Behalf Of Peter 02 February 2009 16:13 <%40> Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam mangalam i: " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, thought free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be meditated on? And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self whose nature is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be at one with It within the Heart. " (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, titled Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 Dear peter, Thanks very much. It is certainly O.K.! Something to look forward to indeed. Renewed regards, Alan --- On Wed, 4/2/09, Peter <not_2 wrote: Peter <not_2RE: Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam Date: Wednesday, 4 February, 2009, 12:15 PM Dear Alan,Yes, I would like to continue with the rest of Ulladu Narpadu if that is OK.I thought I might post a verse from there once a week and then in betweenverses share some other passages from Sri Ramana's works which hopefullywill help me/us gain a better understanding of the verses. Other people arevery welcome to share any other passages from Sri Ramana's works which theyfeel are relevant.Best wishes,Peter____________ _________ _________ __ []On Behalf Of Alan Jacobs04 February 2009 12:02RE: [ - Ramana Guru] Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalamDear Peter,Thank you for these valuable postings. Is it your intention to continue withthe rest of Ulladu Narpadu? That would be marvellous for us.All best wishes and warmest regards,Yours in Bhagavan,Alan --- On Wed, 4/2/09, Peter <not_2 (AT) btinternet (DOT) com> wrote:Peter <not_2 (AT) btinternet (DOT) com>RE: Ulladu Narpadu - firstmangalamWednesday, 4 February, 2009, 11:47 AMThese words from Bhagavan Ramana may throw some light on the firstmangalam...Devotee: Sri Bhagavan speaks of the Heart as the seat ofconsciousness andas identical with the Self. What does the Heart exactly signify ?Bhagavan: The question about the heart arises because you areinterested inseeking the source of consciousness. To all deep thinking minds, theenquiryabout the 'I' and its nature has an irresistible fascination. Call it by any name, God, Self, the Heart or the seat ofconsciousness, itis all the same. The point to be grasped is this, that Heart meansthe verycore of one's being, the centre, without which there is nothingwhatever.The Heart is not physical, it is spiritual. Hridayam equals hritplus ayam;it means `this is the centre'. It is that from which thoughts arise,onwhich they subsist and where they are resolved. The thoughts are thecontentof the mind and they shape the universe. The Heart is the centre ofall.That from which beings come into existence is said to be Brahman intheUpanishads. That is the Heart. Brahman is the Heart.(Maharshi's Gospel, Ch.4)Peter<HarshaSatsa ngh%40 s.com> [HarshaSatsa ngh <HarshaSatsa ngh%40 s.com> ]On Behalf Of Peter02 February 2009 16:13<HarshaSatsa ngh%40 s.com> Ulladu Narpadu - firstmangalammangalam i:"Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? IsRealConsciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells,thoughtfree, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - bemeditated on?And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Selfwhose natureis Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to beat onewith It within the Heart."(from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence,titledUlladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 4, 2009 Report Share Posted February 4, 2009 Dear Peter and others, An interesting reference to Existence occurs in the Guru Vachaka Kovai no. 1087 . Alan ATHEISM Surely, only he who, through confusion, believes hiself to be non-existent will declare that You are non-existent. How can he who realises his own being as it actually is disregard as non-existent You who are that very same being? Muruganar: How can he who is aware of his own existence deny the existence of God who is not different from that existence? Bhagavan: By virtue of this nature you are the Supreme Being, the perpetually radiating Sun of the Self, which is the true reality, impossible to reject or deny, shining out in the darkness [of ignorance] as the light [of Jnana], the 'I am' of even he who denies your existence. From Ramana Puranam, lines 461-2 , " Peter " <not_2 wrote: > > > These words from Bhagavan Ramana may throw some light on the first > mangalam... > > Devotee: Sri Bhagavan speaks of the Heart as the seat of consciousness and > as identical with the Self. What does the Heart exactly signify ? > > Bhagavan: The question about the heart arises because you are interested in > seeking the source of consciousness. To all deep thinking minds, the enquiry > about the 'I' and its nature has an irresistible fascination. > > Call it by any name, God, Self, the Heart or the seat of consciousness, it > is all the same. The point to be grasped is this, that Heart means the very > core of one's being, the centre, without which there is nothing whatever. > The Heart is not physical, it is spiritual. Hridayam equals hrit plus ayam; > it means `this is the centre'. It is that from which thoughts arise, on > which they subsist and where they are resolved. The thoughts are the content > of the mind and they shape the universe. The Heart is the centre of all. > That from which beings come into existence is said to be Brahman in the > Upanishads. That is the Heart. Brahman is the Heart. > > (Maharshi's Gospel, Ch.4) > > Peter > > > > > On Behalf Of Peter > 02 February 2009 16:13 > > Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam > > mangalam i: > > " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real > Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, thought > free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be meditated on? > And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self whose nature > is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be at one > with It within the Heart. " > > (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, titled > Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 , " Peter " <not_2 wrote: > > mangalam i: > > " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real >> " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real > Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, thought > free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be meditated on? > And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self whose nature > is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be at one > with It within the Heart. " > > (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, titled > Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. Namaste all, uLLadu aladu uLLa uNarvu uLado? uLLa poruL uLLal aRa uLLatte uLLadAl uLLal enum uLLa poruL uLLal evan? uLLatte uLLapaDi uLLade uLLal uNar. This is the original Tamil verse Mangalam-1 of Bhagavan. I am giving this original Tamil for you all to see the majesty of Ramana's classical Tamil (even if you do not understand Tamil!). Let it be. I have a Tamil commentary of uLLadu naarpadu running to more than 100 pages by an author called `WHO'. I think it is Lakshmana Sharma himself. I give below the commentary (translated into English) of just the first line of Mangalam 1. After reading this, if you all want more of this I shall proceed with the rest of the translation of the commentary. I can assure you the commentary is most valuable. I do not know whether this commentary is available in English online. I should appreciate and thank Peter for opening this topic for us. Commentary on the first line: There are two meanings for this line. Both are valid. These are the first two sentences of the translation that Peter has posted. First meaning of first line: Can there be a sense of Existence without something that is? Here the conclucsion is there exists something that always is. The jIva- Ishvara-jagat (soul-God-universe) which appears as real is not real, but there is a substratum (adhishTAnam) of Reality underneath. This is the truth declared by the Upanishads, which call this Reality `brahman'. Bhagavan himself explains this as follows: " Every one sees himself and the universe around him. He thinks both are real. If they are real they should always appear, not off and on. But they appear and also disappear. They appear in the waking and dream state but not in the deep sleep state. In other words they appear only when the mind is there. They do not appear when the mind is not there. Therefore the seer JIva and the seen universe are only thought-forms of the mind and not real. Where these thoughts arise from, where they merge, that is the only shining Reality " . This same content is going to be given by Verse beginning with `ulagaRivum onRAy' later. So what appears only off and on is unreal and what appears always uninterruptedly is Real. Recall B.G. *nAsato vidyate bhAvo …*. Which gives the distinction between sat and asat. `What does not exist before and after, is only non-existent even in the present but only appears to exist' says Gaudapada in his Karika. Those who accept this maxim of Reality are advaitins. Others are dvaitins. The standard example for this unreal appearance of the universe and the Reality of the AdhishTAnam is the snake-rope example. Brahman is the adhishhTAnam (sub-stratum, base) ; jIva-Ishvara-jagat is Aropitam (Superposed entities). The snake which is imagined hides the rope which exists. So also the imagined jIva-Ishvara-jagat hides the existent brahman. So long as brahman is seen only as the universe (By the way `Universe' here will include jIva and Ishvara also because if the universe is not there, the JIva and Ishvara also are not there), brahman will not be seen or known as brahman. When by Atman-Realisation, Wisdom arises, the universe will not be seen as universe but as Brahman, the only Reality. This appearance and disappearance is the characteristic of mAyA. Really mAyA is not real. But that will be known only on Self- Realisation. Before that, that is, so long as the universe is taken to be real, one has to say mAyA exists. This mAya is also called avidyA or ajnAna. When the rope appears as snake, the appearance is due to the confusion in the mind of the seer. Now the jIva-Ishvara-jagat appearance is due to what? Is there a consciousness other than brahman and is it that which shows the universe to us? Is brahman inert or conscious? Is consciousness brahman or is consciousness a quality of brahman? The replies to these are given by the second meaning of the first line of the verse. It is actually the second sentence that appears in the translation posted by Peter. We shall take it up in the next post. (To be contd.) PraNAms to all Seekers of Truth. profvk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Dear Sri Krishnamurthy, Thank you for this posting. Yes, please do continue following on with Peter. These Forty Verses on Reality are the key text of Bhagavan's teaching, in his own words, and it is most important for us to assimilate its wisdom. Yes, WHO was the nom de plume of Sri K. Laksmarna Sarma, a Devotee close to Bhagavan in his lifetime. He also wrote a major philosophic book on the Teaching called Maha Yoga. With warm regards, Yours in Bhagava, Alan --- On Thu, 5/2/09, V. Krishnamurthy <profvk wrote: V. Krishnamurthy <profvk Re: Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam Date: Thursday, 5 February, 2009, 12:45 AM , "Peter" <not_2 wrote:>> mangalam i:> > "Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real>> "Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real> Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, thought> free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be meditated on?> And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self whose nature> is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be at one> with It within the Heart."> > (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, titled> Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma.Namaste all,uLLadu aladu uLLa uNarvu uLado?uLLa poruL uLLal aRa uLLatte uLLadAluLLal enum uLLa poruL uLLal evan?uLLatte uLLapaDi uLLade uLLal uNar.This is the original Tamil verse Mangalam-1 of Bhagavan. I am giving this original Tamil for you all to see the majesty of Ramana's classical Tamil (even if you do not understand Tamil!).Let it be. I have a Tamil commentary of uLLadu naarpadu running to more than 100 pages by an author called `WHO'. I think it is Lakshmana Sharma himself. I give below the commentary (translated into English) of just the first line of Mangalam 1. After reading this, if you all want more of this I shall proceed with the rest of the translation of the commentary. I can assure you the commentary is most valuable. I do not know whether this commentary is available in English online. I should appreciate and thank Peter for opening this topic for us.Commentary on the first line:There are two meanings for this line. Both are valid. These are the first two sentences of the translation that Peter has posted.First meaning of first line: Can there be a sense of Existence without something that is? Here the conclucsion is there exists something that always is. The jIva-Ishvara-jagat (soul-God-universe) which appears as real is not real, but there is a substratum (adhishTAnam) of Reality underneath. This is the truth declared by the Upanishads, which call this Reality `brahman'. Bhagavan himself explains this as follows:"Every one sees himself and the universe around him. He thinks both are real. If they are real they should always appear, not off and on. But they appear and also disappear. They appear in the waking and dream state but not in the deep sleep state. In other words they appear only when the mind is there. They do not appear when the mind is not there. Therefore the seer JIva and the seen universe are only thought-forms of the mind and not real. Where these thoughts arise from, where they merge, that is the only shining Reality". This same content is going to be given by Verse beginning with `ulagaRivum onRAy' later. So what appears only off and on is unreal and what appears always uninterruptedly is Real. Recall B.G. *nAsato vidyate bhAvo …*. Which gives the distinction between sat and asat. `What does not exist before and after, is only non-existent even in the present but only appears to exist' says Gaudapada in his Karika. Those who accept this maxim of Reality are advaitins. Others are dvaitins. The standard example for this unreal appearance of the universe and the Reality of the AdhishTAnam is the snake-rope example. Brahman is the adhishhTAnam (sub-stratum, base) ; jIva-Ishvara- jagat is Aropitam (Superposed entities).The snake which is imagined hides the rope which exists. So also the imagined jIva-Ishvara- jagat hides the existent brahman. So long as brahman is seen only as the universe (By the way `Universe' here will include jIva and Ishvara also because if the universe is not there, the JIva and Ishvara also are not there), brahman will not be seen or known as brahman. When by Atman-Realisation, Wisdom arises, the universe will not be seen as universe but as Brahman, the only Reality. This appearance and disappearance is the characteristic of mAyA. Really mAyA is not real. But that will be known only on Self-Realisation. Before that, that is, so long as the universe is taken to be real, one has to say mAyA exists. This mAya is also called avidyA or ajnAna. When the rope appears as snake, the appearance is due to the confusion in the mind of the seer. Now the jIva-Ishvara- jagat appearance is due to what? Is there a consciousness other than brahman and is it that which shows the universe to us? Is brahman inert or conscious? Is consciousness brahman or is consciousness a quality of brahman? The replies to these are given by the second meaning of the first line of the verse. It is actually the second sentence that appears in the translation posted by Peter. We shall take it up in the next post. (To be contd.)PraNAms to all Seekers of Truth.profvk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 -Dear friends, There is a relevant quote in the Bhagavad Gita 2 V 16 Of the unreal there is no existence; of the real there is no non- existence. regards, alan -- In , Alan Jacobs <alanadamsjacobs wrote: > > Dear Sri Krishnamurthy, >  > Thank you for this posting. Yes, please do continue following on with Peter. These Forty Verses on Reality are the key text of Bhagavan's teaching, in his own words, and it is most important for us to assimilate its wisdom. Yes, WHO was the nom de plume of Sri K. Laksmarna Sarma, a Devotee close to Bhagavan in his lifetime. He also wrote a major philosophic book on the Teaching called Maha Yoga. >  > With warm regards, > Yours in Bhagava, > Alan > > --- On Thu, 5/2/09, V. Krishnamurthy <profvk wrote: > > V. Krishnamurthy <profvk > Re: Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam > > Thursday, 5 February, 2009, 12:45 AM , " Peter " <not_2@> wrote: > > > > mangalam i: > > > > " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is > Real > >> " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is > Real > > Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, > thought > > free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be > meditated on? > > And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self > whose nature > > is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be > at one > > with It within the Heart. " > > > > (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, > titled > > Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. > > Namaste all, > > uLLadu aladu uLLa uNarvu uLado? > uLLa poruL uLLal aRa uLLatte uLLadAl > uLLal enum uLLa poruL uLLal evan? > uLLatte uLLapaDi uLLade uLLal uNar. > > This is the original Tamil verse Mangalam-1 of Bhagavan. I am giving > this original Tamil for you all to see the majesty of Ramana's > classical Tamil (even if you do not understand Tamil!). > > Let it be. I have a Tamil commentary of uLLadu naarpadu running to > more than 100 pages by an author called `WHO'. I think it is > Lakshmana Sharma himself. I give below the commentary (translated > into English) of just the first line of Mangalam 1. After reading > this, if you all want more of this I shall proceed with the rest of > the translation of the commentary. I can assure you the commentary > is most valuable. I do not know whether this commentary is available > in English online. I should appreciate and thank Peter for opening > this topic for us. > > Commentary on the first line: > > There are two meanings for this line. Both are valid. These are the > first two sentences of the translation that Peter has posted. > > First meaning of first line: > > Can there be a sense of Existence without something that is? Here > the conclucsion is there exists something that always is. The jIva- > Ishvara-jagat (soul-God-universe) which appears as real is not real, > but there is a substratum (adhishTAnam) of Reality underneath. This > is the truth declared by the Upanishads, which call this > Reality `brahman'. Bhagavan himself explains this as follows: > > " Every one sees himself and the universe around him. He thinks both > are real. If they are real they should always appear, not off and on. > But they appear and also disappear. They appear in the waking and > dream state but not in the deep sleep state. In other words they > appear only when the mind is there. They do not appear when the mind > is not there. Therefore the seer JIva and the seen universe are only > thought-forms of the mind and not real. Where these thoughts arise > from, where they merge, that is the only shining Reality " . This same > content is going to be given by Verse beginning with `ulagaRivum > onRAy' later. > > So what appears only off and on is unreal and what appears always > uninterruptedly is Real. Recall B.G. *nAsato vidyate bhAvo …*. Which > gives the distinction between sat and asat. `What does not exist > before and after, is only non-existent even in the present but only > appears to exist' says Gaudapada in his Karika. Those who accept this > maxim of Reality are advaitins. Others are dvaitins. > > The standard example for this unreal appearance of the universe and > the Reality of the AdhishTAnam is the snake-rope example. Brahman is > the adhishhTAnam (sub-stratum, base) ; jIva-Ishvara- jagat is Aropitam > (Superposed entities). > > The snake which is imagined hides the rope which exists. So also the > imagined jIva-Ishvara- jagat hides the existent brahman. So long as > brahman is seen only as the universe (By the way `Universe' here will > include jIva and Ishvara also because if the universe is not there, > the JIva and Ishvara also are not there), brahman will not be seen or > known as brahman. When by Atman-Realisation, Wisdom arises, the > universe will not be seen as universe but as Brahman, the only > Reality. This appearance and disappearance is the characteristic of > mAyA. Really mAyA is not real. But that will be known only on Self- > Realisation. Before that, that is, so long as the universe is taken > to be real, one has to say mAyA exists. This mAya is also called > avidyA or ajnAna. > > When the rope appears as snake, the appearance is due to the > confusion in the mind of the seer. Now the jIva-Ishvara- jagat > appearance is due to what? Is there a consciousness other than > brahman and is it that which shows the universe to us? Is brahman > inert or conscious? Is consciousness brahman or is consciousness a > quality of brahman? The replies to these are given by the second > meaning of the first line of the verse. It is actually the second > sentence that appears in the translation posted by Peter. We shall > take it up in the next post. (To be contd.) > > PraNAms to all Seekers of Truth. > profvk > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Dear Prof Vk, Thank you very much indeed! Yes please do continue with the rest of the translation of the Lakshmana Sharma's Tamil commentary, who wrote under the name of " Who " . As far as I know there isn't a translation of this in English - either online or in book form. This in itself is very suprising given Lakshmana's commentary on the verses is practically a record of the personal instruction he received from Bhagavan himself. Annamalai Swami gives an interesting account of this: " Since Bhagavan thought that Lakshman Sarma ought to be acquanited with [ulladu Narpadu] he offered to explain it to him, line by line. Each day in the weeks that followed Lakshman Sarma had the rare privelege of having private lessons from Bhagavan. He took notes as Bhagavan explained the meaning of each verse and later used the information Bhagavan imparted to write a Tamil commentary on the work... This commentary was initially serialised in a newspaper called Jana Mittiran, appearing once a week. When the relevant issues of this paper arrived in the ashram, Bhagavan would cut out the commentary and keep it near his sofa. Lakshman Sarma wanted the ashram to print the commentary in book form but Chinnaswami refuse because he and Lakshman Sarma had previously had some disputes about other matters. Lakshman Sarma eventually had to publish the book himself. Bhagavan almost never interfered in the day-to-day business affairs of the ashram office, but when he heard that Chinnaswami had refused to print this book he made an exception. He went to Chinnaswami's room and looked in at him through the window for a period of about fifteen minutes. Chinnaswami didn't notice him because he was busy checking some accounts. Eventually some devotees had to come and tell him that Bhagavan had been standing outside his window for a long time. When Chinnaswami finally stood up to great Bhagavan, Bhagavan said, 'Everyone is saying that Lakshman Sarma's commentary on Ulladu Narpadu is the best. Nobody has studied Ulladu Narpadu the way Sarma has. Why don't you publish his book? Chinnaswami accepted the 'hint'. He agreed to publish the book as an ashram publication as soon as Lakshman Sarma's private edition went out of print. In the meantim he purchased most of Lakshman Sarma's unsold copies, pasted Sri Ramanasramam name over the name and address of the original publisher and sold the books in the ashram store. [David Godman adds] Bhagavan left no one in doubt that this was his own commentary and interpretation. Prior to publication in book form of Lakshman Sarma's commentary if anyone asked Bhagavan about the meaning of a particular vers in Ulladu Narpadu, he would take out the scrap book in which he had pasted the weekly Jana Mittiran commentaries and show the relevant section to the questioner. " (from " The Power of the Presence " part three, p 169-170 by David Godman. Also in " Living by the words of Bhagavan " by David Godman, 2nd Edition pp 103-104) With best wishes, Peter On Behalf Of V. Krishnamurthy 05 February 2009 00:45 Re: Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam , " Peter " <not_2 wrote: > > mangalam i: > > " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real >> " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is Real > Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, thought > free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be meditated on? > And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self whose nature > is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be at one > with It within the Heart. " > > (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, titled > Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. Namaste all, uLLadu aladu uLLa uNarvu uLado? uLLa poruL uLLal aRa uLLatte uLLadAl uLLal enum uLLa poruL uLLal evan? uLLatte uLLapaDi uLLade uLLal uNar. This is the original Tamil verse Mangalam-1 of Bhagavan. I am giving this original Tamil for you all to see the majesty of Ramana's classical Tamil (even if you do not understand Tamil!). Let it be. I have a Tamil commentary of uLLadu naarpadu running to more than 100 pages by an author called `WHO'. I think it is Lakshmana Sharma himself. I give below the commentary (translated into English) of just the first line of Mangalam 1. After reading this, if you all want more of this I shall proceed with the rest of the translation of the commentary. I can assure you the commentary is most valuable. <snip> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Dear Friends, Concerning this thread we need to take note of Prof. Dr. T.M.P.Mahadevan's Commentary on the Forty Verses and the Supplement [1959]( the only commentary on the Supplement, as far as I know). He was an ardent Ramana Devotee and held the Chair as Director of of Advanced Studies in Philosophy at the University of Madras. The title of his book is aptly entitled Ramana Maharshi and His Philosophy of Existence. In his introduction he quotes from the Chandogya Upanishad which in VI ii l states " Existence alone, dear one, was this in the beginning, one only without a second. " In his long Commentary on V.1 he writes that Sat and Satya- Existence and Truth are synonyms transcending past, present and future.....Reality is Sat-Chit or Pure Existence- Pure Consciousness. This is profundity simply stated. Alan , " alan jacobs " <alanadamsjacobs wrote: > > -Dear friends, > > There is a relevant quote in the Bhagavad Gita 2 V 16 > > Of the unreal there is no existence; of the real there is no non- > existence. > > regards, > alan > > -- In , Alan Jacobs > <alanadamsjacobs@> wrote: > > > > Dear Sri Krishnamurthy, > >  > > Thank you for this posting. Yes, please do continue following > on with Peter. These Forty Verses on Reality are the key text of > Bhagavan's teaching, in his own words, and it is most important for > us to assimilate its wisdom. Yes, WHO was the nom de plume of Sri K. > Laksmarna Sarma, a Devotee close to Bhagavan in his lifetime. He also > wrote a major philosophic book on the Teaching called Maha Yoga. > >  > > With warm regards, > > Yours in Bhagava, > > Alan > > > > --- On Thu, 5/2/09, V. Krishnamurthy <profvk@> wrote: > > > > V. Krishnamurthy <profvk@> > > Re: Ulladu Narpadu - first > mangalam > > > > Thursday, 5 February, 2009, 12:45 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " Peter " <not_2@> wrote: > > > > > > mangalam i: > > > > > > " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is > > Real > > >> " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is > > Real > > > Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) > dwells, > > thought > > > free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be > > meditated on? > > > And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self > > whose nature > > > is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to > be > > at one > > > with It within the Heart. " > > > > > > (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, > > titled > > > Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. > > > > Namaste all, > > > > uLLadu aladu uLLa uNarvu uLado? > > uLLa poruL uLLal aRa uLLatte uLLadAl > > uLLal enum uLLa poruL uLLal evan? > > uLLatte uLLapaDi uLLade uLLal uNar. > > > > This is the original Tamil verse Mangalam-1 of Bhagavan. I am > giving > > this original Tamil for you all to see the majesty of Ramana's > > classical Tamil (even if you do not understand Tamil!). > > > > Let it be. I have a Tamil commentary of uLLadu naarpadu running to > > more than 100 pages by an author called `WHO'. I think it is > > Lakshmana Sharma himself. I give below the commentary (translated > > into English) of just the first line of Mangalam 1. After reading > > this, if you all want more of this I shall proceed with the rest of > > the translation of the commentary. I can assure you the commentary > > is most valuable. I do not know whether this commentary is > available > > in English online. I should appreciate and thank Peter for opening > > this topic for us. > > > > Commentary on the first line: > > > > There are two meanings for this line. Both are valid. These are the > > first two sentences of the translation that Peter has posted. > > > > First meaning of first line: > > > > Can there be a sense of Existence without something that is? Here > > the conclucsion is there exists something that always is. The jIva- > > Ishvara-jagat (soul-God-universe) which appears as real is not > real, > > but there is a substratum (adhishTAnam) of Reality underneath. This > > is the truth declared by the Upanishads, which call this > > Reality `brahman'. Bhagavan himself explains this as follows: > > > > " Every one sees himself and the universe around him. He thinks both > > are real. If they are real they should always appear, not off and > on. > > But they appear and also disappear. They appear in the waking and > > dream state but not in the deep sleep state. In other words they > > appear only when the mind is there. They do not appear when the > mind > > is not there. Therefore the seer JIva and the seen universe are > only > > thought-forms of the mind and not real. Where these thoughts arise > > from, where they merge, that is the only shining Reality " . This > same > > content is going to be given by Verse beginning with `ulagaRivum > > onRAy' later. > > > > So what appears only off and on is unreal and what appears always > > uninterruptedly is Real. Recall B.G. *nAsato vidyate bhAvo …*. > Which > > gives the distinction between sat and asat. `What does not exist > > before and after, is only non-existent even in the present but only > > appears to exist' says Gaudapada in his Karika. Those who accept > this > > maxim of Reality are advaitins. Others are dvaitins. > > > > The standard example for this unreal appearance of the universe and > > the Reality of the AdhishTAnam is the snake-rope example. Brahman > is > > the adhishhTAnam (sub-stratum, base) ; jIva-Ishvara- jagat is > Aropitam > > (Superposed entities). > > > > The snake which is imagined hides the rope which exists. So also > the > > imagined jIva-Ishvara- jagat hides the existent brahman. So long as > > brahman is seen only as the universe (By the way `Universe' here > will > > include jIva and Ishvara also because if the universe is not there, > > the JIva and Ishvara also are not there), brahman will not be seen > or > > known as brahman. When by Atman-Realisation, Wisdom arises, the > > universe will not be seen as universe but as Brahman, the only > > Reality. This appearance and disappearance is the characteristic of > > mAyA. Really mAyA is not real. But that will be known only on Self- > > Realisation. Before that, that is, so long as the universe is taken > > to be real, one has to say mAyA exists. This mAya is also called > > avidyA or ajnAna. > > > > When the rope appears as snake, the appearance is due to the > > confusion in the mind of the seer. Now the jIva-Ishvara- jagat > > appearance is due to what? Is there a consciousness other than > > brahman and is it that which shows the universe to us? Is brahman > > inert or conscious? Is consciousness brahman or is consciousness a > > quality of brahman? The replies to these are given by the second > > meaning of the first line of the verse. It is actually the second > > sentence that appears in the translation posted by Peter. We shall > > take it up in the next post. (To be contd.) > > > > PraNAms to all Seekers of Truth. > > profvk > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 >> In his long Commentary on V.1 he writes that Sat and Satya- Existence and Truth >> are synonyms transcending past, present and future.....Reality is Sat-Chit or >> Pure Existence- Pure Consciousness. >> This is profundity simply stated. Dear Alan, This is so profound, isn't it. Might we say that " I-am " and " Sat-Chit " are one and the same? " I am " is both an expression and realisation of awareness (consciousness, chit) and existence ( 'am','is' ) which are not separate from each other, not-two. This seems to me to be the profundity in Sri Ramana's " Atma-Vichara " (self-inquiry). In " Talks " we find the following: D.: When I read Sri Bhagavan's works I find that investigation is said to be the one method for Realisation. M.: Yes, that is vichara. D.: How is that to be done? M.: The questioner must admit the existence of his self. " I AM " is the Realisation. To pursue the clue till Realisation is vichara. Vichara and Realisation are the same. (Talk 390.) Best wishes, Peter On Behalf Of alan jacobs 05 February 2009 15:02 Re: Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam Dear Friends, Concerning this thread we need to take note of Prof. Dr. T.M.P.Mahadevan's Commentary on the Forty Verses and the Supplement [1959]( the only commentary on the Supplement, as far as I know). He was an ardent Ramana Devotee and held the Chair as Director of of Advanced Studies in Philosophy at the University of Madras. The title of his book is aptly entitled Ramana Maharshi and His Philosophy of Existence. In his introduction he quotes from the Chandogya Upanishad which in VI ii l states " Existence alone, dear one, was this in the beginning, one only without a second. " In his long Commentary on V.1 he writes that Sat and Satya- Existence and Truth are synonyms transcending past, present and future.....Reality is Sat-Chit or Pure Existence- Pure Consciousness. This is profundity simply stated. Alan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Dear Peter, I quite agree. I exist therefore I am , and I am that I am, are central to Bhagavan's teaching in my opinion too. All regards, Alan --- On Thu, 5/2/09, Peter <not_2 wrote: Peter <not_2RE: Re: Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalam Date: Thursday, 5 February, 2009, 5:07 PM >> In his long Commentary on V.1 he writes that Sat and Satya- Existence andTruth>> are synonyms transcending past, present and future.....Reality isSat-Chit or>> Pure Existence- Pure Consciousness. >> This is profundity simply stated.Dear Alan,This is so profound, isn't it. Might we say that "I-am" and "Sat-Chit" areone and the same? "I am" is both an expression and realisation of awareness(consciousness, chit) and existence ( 'am','is' ) which are not separatefrom each other, not-two. This seems to me to be the profundity in SriRamana's "Atma-Vichara" (self-inquiry) . In "Talks" we find the following:D.: When I read Sri Bhagavan's works I find that investigation is saidto be the one method for Realisation.M.: Yes, that is vichara.D.: How is that to be done?M.: The questioner must admit the existence of his self. "I AM" is theRealisation. To pursue the clue till Realisation is vichara. Vicharaand Realisation are the same.(Talk 390.)Best wishes,Peter []On Behalf Of alan jacobs05 February 2009 15:02 Re: Ulladu Narpadu - first mangalamDear Friends,Concerning this thread we need to take note of Prof. Dr. T.M.P.Mahadevan' s Commentary on the Forty Verses and the Supplement [1959](the only commentary on the Supplement, as far as I know). He was an ardentRamana Devotee and held the Chair as of of Advanced Studies inPhilosophy at the University of Madras. The title of his book is aptlyentitled Ramana Maharshi and His Philosophy of Existence.In his introduction he quotes from the Chandogya Upanishad which in VI ii lstates "Existence alone, dear one, was this in the beginning, one onlywithout a second."In his long Commentary on V.1 he writes that Sat and Satya- Existence andTruth are synonyms transcending past, present and future.....Reality isSat-Chit or Pure Existence- Pure Consciousness. This is profundity simply stated.Alan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 Namaste, Thank you ProfVK for the excellent posting and explanation of the Managlam i. I also browsed your website and read few articles and will read more of course. Thank you for making your knowledge available to all. Best Regards, Purnima , " V. Krishnamurthy " <profvk wrote: > > , " Peter " <not_2@> wrote: > > > > mangalam i: > > > > " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is > Real > >> " Can there be a sense of existence without something that is? Is > Real > > Consciousness a thing other than That? Since that (Reality) dwells, > thought > > free, in the Heart, how can It - Itself named the Heart - be > meditated on? > > And who is there, distinct from It, to meditate on It, the Self > whose nature > > is Reality Consciousness? Know that to meditate on It is just to be > at one > > with It within the Heart. " > > > > (from Bhagavan Ramana's forty verses on the nature of Existence, > titled > > Ulladu Narpadu, translated by Sri K. Lakshmana Sarma. > > > Namaste all, > > uLLadu aladu uLLa uNarvu uLado? > uLLa poruL uLLal aRa uLLatte uLLadAl > uLLal enum uLLa poruL uLLal evan? > uLLatte uLLapaDi uLLade uLLal uNar. > > This is the original Tamil verse Mangalam-1 of Bhagavan. I am giving > this original Tamil for you all to see the majesty of Ramana's > classical Tamil (even if you do not understand Tamil!). > > Let it be. I have a Tamil commentary of uLLadu naarpadu running to > more than 100 pages by an author called `WHO'. I think it is > Lakshmana Sharma himself. I give below the commentary (translated > into English) of just the first line of Mangalam 1. After reading > this, if you all want more of this I shall proceed with the rest of > the translation of the commentary. I can assure you the commentary > is most valuable. I do not know whether this commentary is available > in English online. I should appreciate and thank Peter for opening > this topic for us. > > Commentary on the first line: > > There are two meanings for this line. Both are valid. These are the > first two sentences of the translation that Peter has posted. > > First meaning of first line: > > Can there be a sense of Existence without something that is? Here > the conclucsion is there exists something that always is. The jIva- > Ishvara-jagat (soul-God-universe) which appears as real is not real, > but there is a substratum (adhishTAnam) of Reality underneath. This > is the truth declared by the Upanishads, which call this > Reality `brahman'. Bhagavan himself explains this as follows: > > " Every one sees himself and the universe around him. He thinks both > are real. If they are real they should always appear, not off and on. > But they appear and also disappear. They appear in the waking and > dream state but not in the deep sleep state. In other words they > appear only when the mind is there. They do not appear when the mind > is not there. Therefore the seer JIva and the seen universe are only > thought-forms of the mind and not real. Where these thoughts arise > from, where they merge, that is the only shining Reality " . This same > content is going to be given by Verse beginning with `ulagaRivum > onRAy' later. > > So what appears only off and on is unreal and what appears always > uninterruptedly is Real. Recall B.G. *nAsato vidyate bhAvo …*. Which > gives the distinction between sat and asat. `What does not exist > before and after, is only non-existent even in the present but only > appears to exist' says Gaudapada in his Karika. Those who accept this > maxim of Reality are advaitins. Others are dvaitins. > > The standard example for this unreal appearance of the universe and > the Reality of the AdhishTAnam is the snake-rope example. Brahman is > the adhishhTAnam (sub-stratum, base) ; jIva-Ishvara-jagat is Aropitam > (Superposed entities). > > The snake which is imagined hides the rope which exists. So also the > imagined jIva-Ishvara-jagat hides the existent brahman. So long as > brahman is seen only as the universe (By the way `Universe' here will > include jIva and Ishvara also because if the universe is not there, > the JIva and Ishvara also are not there), brahman will not be seen or > known as brahman. When by Atman-Realisation, Wisdom arises, the > universe will not be seen as universe but as Brahman, the only > Reality. This appearance and disappearance is the characteristic of > mAyA. Really mAyA is not real. But that will be known only on Self- > Realisation. Before that, that is, so long as the universe is taken > to be real, one has to say mAyA exists. This mAya is also called > avidyA or ajnAna. > > When the rope appears as snake, the appearance is due to the > confusion in the mind of the seer. Now the jIva-Ishvara-jagat > appearance is due to what? Is there a consciousness other than > brahman and is it that which shows the universe to us? Is brahman > inert or conscious? Is consciousness brahman or is consciousness a > quality of brahman? The replies to these are given by the second > meaning of the first line of the verse. It is actually the second > sentence that appears in the translation posted by Peter. We shall > take it up in the next post. (To be contd.) > > PraNAms to all Seekers of Truth. > profvk > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.