Aruṇācala Tattuvam and Dīpa-Darśaṉa Tattuvam: The Reality of Arunachala and Seeing Deepam

Friday 13th December 2024 was Kārttikai Deepam, which is an annual festival celebrated in the Tamil month of Kārttikai (mid-November to mid-December) on the day on which the moon is in conjunction with the constellation Pleiades (known in Sanskrit as kṛttikā and in Tamil as kārttikai), which always coincides with the full moon or comes one or two days before or after it. At 6pm on this day a beacon light or dīpam (popularly spelt deepam) is lit on the summit of Arunachala, and continues to burn for about ten days.

On Kārttikai Deepam day in 1931 (called prajōtpatti in Hindu calendars, the fifth year in the 60-year Jupiter cycle), which was 24th November, when answering some questions about Arunachala, Bhagavan explained its tattva (reality, truth, import or signification), and his explanation was immediately recorded by Muruganar in a Tamil verse entitled ஸ்ரீ அருணாசல தத்துவம் (Śrī Aruṇācala Tattuvam). When he showed this verse to Bhagavan, Muruganar asked him to compose a similar verse explaining the tattva of dīpa-darśana (seeing deepam), so Bhagavan immediately composed a verse in the same metre entitled தீபதர்சன தத்துவம் (Dīpa-Darśaṉa Tattuvam).

Sixteen years ago I wrote an article explaining in detail the meaning of these two verses, The truth of Arunachala and of ‘seeing the light’ (deepa-darsana), and in this present article I will give a revised translation and explanation of each of them.

1. ஸ்ரீ அருணாசல தத்துவம் (Śrī Aruṇācala Tattuvam): The Reality of Arunachala
2. தீபதர்சன தத்துவம் (Dīpa-Darśaṉa Tattuvam): The Reality of Seeing Deepam

ஸ்ரீ அருணாசல தத்துவம் (Śrī Aruṇācala Tattuvam): The Reality of Arunachala

புத்தியகங் காரம் புலம்பெய்த வோங்கு
மத்தியித யந்தான் மறையவனு மாலு
நத்தவறி யாது நலங்குலைய வன்னார்
மத்தியொளி ரண்ணா மலையினது மெய்யே.

buddhiyahaṅ kāram pulambeyda vōṅgu
maddhiyida yandāṉ maṟaiyavaṉu mālu
nattavaṟi yādu nalaṅgulaiya vaṉṉār
maddhiyoḷi raṇṇā malaiyiṉadu meyyē.

பதச்சேதம்: புத்தி அகங்காரம் புலம்பு எய்த ஓங்கும் மத்தி இதயம் தான் மறையவனும் மாலும் நத்த அறியாது நலம் குலைய அன்னார் மத்தி ஒளிர் அண்ணாமலையினது மெய்யே.

Padacchēdam (word-separation): buddhi ahaṅkāram pulambu eyda ōṅgum maddhi idayam tāṉ maṟaiyavaṉum mālum natta aṟiyādu nalam gulaiya aṉṉār-maddhi oḷir aṇṇāmalaiyiṉadu meyyē.

அன்வயம்: மறையவனும் மாலும் நத்த அறியாது நலம் குலைய அன்னார் மத்தி ஒளிர் அண்ணாமலையினது மெய்யே புத்தி அகங்காரம் புலம்பு எய்த ஓங்கும் மத்தி இதயம் தான்.

Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): maṟaiyavaṉum mālum natta aṟiyādu nalam gulaiya aṉṉār-maddhi oḷir aṇṇāmalaiyiṉadu meyyē buddhi ahaṅkāram pulambu eyda ōṅgum maddhi idayam tāṉ.

English translation: Oneself, the heart, the centre, which surges when intellect and ego are grief-stricken, is the actual reality of Annamalai, which shone between them, Brahma and Vishnu, pride to be destroyed, not knowing as desired.

Explanatory paraphrase: The actual reality [truth, tattva, import or signification] of Annamalai [Arunachala], which shone [forth as a column of light] between them, Brahma and Vishnu, [in order for their] pride to be destroyed [because of their] not knowing [or perceiving its top or bottom] as [they] desired, is oneself, the heart, the centre, which surges [ascends, rises high or is exalted] when intellect and ego are grief-stricken [despairing because of their not being able to know their real nature, and thereby becoming humble and willing to subside and surrender].

Padavurai (word-explanation): புத்தி (buddhi): intellect | அகங்காரம் (ahaṅkāram): ego | புலம்பெய்த (pulambeyda): when obtaining grief, when being grief-stricken, when [they] are grief-stricken {compound of pulambu, ‘lamentation’, ‘wailing’, ‘anguish’, ‘grief’, ‘affliction’ or ‘agitation’, and eyda, the infinitive of eydu, ‘approach’, ‘obtain’, ‘acquire’ or ‘reach’, used idiomatically in the sense ‘when obtaining’ or ‘when they obtain’} | ஓங்கும் (ōṅgum): surging, which surges {adjectival participle of ōṅgu, ‘rise high’, ‘ascend’, ‘surge’, ‘spread’, ‘expand’, ‘grow’, ‘increase’, ‘flourish’ or ‘be exalted’} >>> so ‘புத்தி அகங்காரம் புலம்பு எய்த ஓங்கும்’ (buddhi ahaṅkāram pulambu eyda ōṅgum) is a relative clause that means ‘which surges when intellect and ego are grief-stricken’ <<< மத்தி (maddhi): centre, middle {alternative form of maddhiyam, Tamil form of the Sanskrit madhya} | இதயம் (idayam): heart {Tamil form of the Sanskrit hṛdaya} | தான் (tāṉ): oneself {Tamil generic pronoun, somewhat like ‘one’ in English, which in this context means ‘oneself’, but can also mean ‘he’, ‘she’ or ‘it’, and that can be used as an intensifying suffix meaning ‘myself’, ‘yourself’, ‘himself’, ‘herself’, ‘itself’, ‘indeed’ or ‘certainly’} >>> so ‘மத்தி இதயம் தான்’ (maddhi idayam tāṉ) means ‘oneself, the heart, the centre’, and hence ‘புத்தி அகங்காரம் புலம்பு எய்த ஓங்கும் மத்தி இதயம் தான்’ (buddhi ahaṅkāram pulambu eyda ōṅgum maddhi idayam tāṉ) is a noun phrase that means ‘oneself, the heart, the centre, which surges when intellect and ego are grief-stricken’, which implies:

oneself, the heart, the centre, which surges [ascends, rises high or is exalted] when intellect and ego are grief-stricken [despairing because of their not being able to know their real nature, and thereby becoming humble and willing to subside and surrender]

<<< மறையவனும் (maṟaiyavaṉum): Brahmā {maṟaiyavaṉ, which is a compound of maṟai, ‘concealment’, ‘secret’ or ‘Vēdas’, and avaṉ, ‘he’, is a Tamil name of Brahmā, the Lord of creation, and he is called thus because of his association with the Vēdas; and the suffix um in this context means ‘and’, linking this word with the next} | மாலும் (mālum): and Viṣṇu {māl is a Tamil name of Viṣṇu, the Lord of sustenance or preservation, perhaps derived from māla, a Sanskrit name of his; and the suffix um in this context means ‘and’, linking this word with the previous one} | நத்த (natta): to desire, to wish, to want {infinitive used as an adverb, implying ‘as desired’ or ‘as they desired’} | அறியாது (aṟiyādu): not knowing, not experiencing, not cognising, not perceiving {negative adverbial participle} | நலம் (nalam): pride {the basic meaning of nalam is ‘goodness’, and by extension it also means whatever is generally considered to be good or favourable, including reputation, fame and prestige, and since the nature of ego is to take pride in such things, this word is used here as a metonym for pride} | குலைய (gulaiya): to become loose, to be unravelled, to disperse, to scatter, to melt, to be destroyed {infinitive} | அன்னார்மத்தி (aṉṉār-maddhi): in their midst, between them {compound of aṉṉār, ‘such people’ or ‘they’, and maddhi, ‘middle’, ‘midst’ or ‘midway’} | ஒளிர் (oḷir): shine {root of this verb used here in the sense of an adjectival participle, ‘shining’ or ‘which shone’} >>> so ‘மறையவனும் மாலும் நத்த அறியாது நலம் குலைய அன்னார் மத்தி ஒளிர்’ (maṟaiyavaṉum mālum natta aṟiyādu nalam gulaiya aṉṉār-maddhi oḷir) is a relative clause that means ‘which shone between them, Brahma and Vishnu, pride to be destroyed, not knowing as desired’ <<< அண்ணாமலையினது (aṇṇāmalaiyiṉadu): of Aṇṇāmalai {genitive (sixth case) form of Aṇṇāmalai, a Tamil name of Aruṇācala} | மெய்யே (meyyē): actual reality {intensified form of mey,‘reality’ or ‘truth’} >>> so ‘அண்ணாமலையினது மெய்யே’ (aṇṇāmalaiyiṉadu meyyē) means ‘the actual reality of Aṇṇāmalai’ and hence ‘மறையவனும் மாலும் நத்த அறியாது நலம் குலைய அன்னார் மத்தி ஒளிர் அண்ணாமலையினது மெய்யே’ (maṟaiyavaṉum mālum natta aṟiyādu nalam gulaiya aṉṉār maddhi oḷir aṇṇāmalaiyiṉadu meyyē) is a noun phrase that means ‘the actual reality of Annamalai, which shone between them, Brahma and Vishnu, pride to be destroyed, not knowing as desiredd’, which implies:

the actual reality [truth, tattva, import or signification] of Annamalai [Arunachala], which shone [forth as a column of light] between them, Brahma and Vishnu, [in order for their] pride to be destroyed [because of their] not knowing [or perceiving its top or bottom] as [they] desired

Explanation: This verse is a single sentence consisting of a subject and a subject complement, and as is generally the case with such sentences in Tamil, the copula (any form of the verb ‘be’, in this case ‘is’) is implicit and therefore not expressed. According to the order of the words in the verse, the subject seems to be the noun phrase ‘புத்தி அகங்காரம் புலம்பு எய்த ஓங்கும் மத்தி இதயம் தான்’ (buddhi ahaṅkāram pulambu eyda ōṅgum maddhi idayam tāṉ), ‘Oneself, the heart, the centre, which surges when intellect and ego are grief-stricken’, and its complement seems to be the noun phrase ‘மறையவனும் மாலும் நத்த அறியாது நலம் குலைய அன்னார் மத்தி ஒளிர் அண்ணாமலையினது மெய்யே’ (maṟaiyavaṉum mālum natta aṟiyādu nalam gulaiya aṉṉār-maddhi oḷir aṇṇāmalaiyiṉadu meyyē), ‘the actual reality of Annamalai, which shone between them, Brahma and Vishnu, pride to be destroyed, not knowing as desired’, but in verses words are often not arranged in their logical order, as they would be in prose, so in such a case it is necessary to rearrange them in their natural prose order.

Since the aim of this verse is to state what the actual reality of Annamalai is, the subject is logically the second phrase, ‘மறையவனும் மாலும் நத்த அறியாது நலம் குலைய அன்னார் மத்தி ஒளிர் அண்ணாமலையினது மெய்யே’ (maṟaiyavaṉum mālum natta aṟiyādu nalam gulaiya aṉṉār-maddhi oḷir aṇṇāmalaiyiṉadu meyyē), ‘the actual reality of Annamalai, which shone between them, Brahma and Vishnu, pride to be destroyed, not knowing as desired’, and the subject complement is the first phrase, ‘புத்தி அகங்காரம் புலம்பு எய்த ஓங்கும் மத்தி இதயம் தான்’ (buddhi ahaṅkāram pulambu eyda ōṅgum maddhi idayam tāṉ), ‘Oneself, the heart, the centre, which surges when intellect and ego are grief-stricken’. Therefore in the anvayam and explanatory paraphrase of this verse I have rearranged these two phrases in this order.

‘அண்ணாமலையினது மெய்யே’ (aṇṇāmalaiyiṉadu meyyē) means ‘the actual reality [truth, tattva, import or signification] of Annamalai’, and the rest of the subject is a relative clause describing Annamalai (which is a Tamil name for Arunachala), namely ‘மறையவனும் மாலும் நத்த அறியாது நலம் குலைய அன்னார் மத்தி ஒளிர்’ (maṟaiyavaṉum mālum natta aṟiyādu nalam gulaiya aṉṉār-maddhi oḷir), which means ‘which shone between them, Brahma and Vishnu, pride to be destroyed, not knowing as desired’, and which implies ‘which shone [forth as a column of light] between them, Brahma and Vishnu, [in order for their] pride to be destroyed [because of their] not knowing [or perceiving its top or bottom] as [they] desired’. This relative clause refers to the story of the origin of Arunachala, and also (since Arunachala is ādi-liṅga-svarūpa, the original liṅga form of Lord Siva) the origin of the liṅga (liṅgōdbhava), which in brief is as follows:

Brahma, the form of God who is responsible for the creation of this world-appearance, and Vishnu, the form of God who is responsible for its sustenance, stability or protection, were once gripped by pride and therefore began quarrelling with each other, each claiming to be the greatest, so to subdue their pride Lord Siva, the form of God who is responsible for the final dissolution or destruction of this illusory world-appearance, manifested in their midst as a vast column of light, the top and bottom of which could not be seen. Wondering how this column had appeared and was enduring, even though it had not been created by Brahma and was not being sustained by Vishnu, they decided that they could resolve their argument by seeing which one of them could reach its top or bottom. Therefore Brahma assumed the form of a swan and began flying upwards in order to find the summit of the column, while Vishnu took the form of a boar and began burrowing deep into the ground in order to find its foot.

Though Brahma flew upwards for thousands of years, he could not reach the summit, so he eventually gave up all hope of ever reaching it. However, though he knew that he had failed, his pride and egotism were not subdued, so to protect his prestige he decided to tell a lie, saying that he had reached the summit. Vishnu, in the meanwhile, also understood that he would never be able to reach the foot of the self-luminous column, but unlike Brahma his pride and egotism were thereby subdued, so he decided to return and humbly admit his failure. Therefore when he and Brahma finally returned and met at their starting point, he honestly admitted that he was unable to reach the foot, and being sure that Brahma would not have been able to reach the summit he declared that whatever the column of light may be, it was greater than either of them, and hence he began to praise it as the supreme Lord of all. Brahma laughed in derision, declaring that he had reached the summit, and mocked Vishnu, saying that he was praising the column only because of his failure, and that he should instead praise him (Brahma) since he had proved himself to be the greatest of all. Seeing the dishonesty and arrogance of Brahma, Siva manifested himself in his human-like form from within the column and declared Brahma to be a liar.

Since Vishnu had lost his ego in his attempt to find the foot of Siva, the column of light, he merged and became one with him, and hence since that time he is worshipped as the equal of Siva. However, since Brahma was humbled only after Siva declared him to be a liar, he was cursed never to be worshipped in any temple, and hence he is worshipped only through Vedic rituals, which are kāmya karmas, actions performed for the fulfilment of selfish desires.

After Siva thus blessed Vishnu and cursed Brahma, Vishnu understood that he had been possessed by egotism because he had forgotten Siva, who is the one real nature (svarūpa) of all, and hence he prayed to him never to allow him to forget him again. He also prayed to him saying that he could not sustain the world in the presence of the column of light — which was the light of ātma-jñāna or pure self-awareness — and therefore beseeched him to assume a seemingly lacklustre form on earth so that people could remember him and thereby be saved from the delusion of ego. In answer to this prayer of Vishnu, therefore, Siva contracted his form as the column of light into the form of the holy mountain Arunachala, mere remembrance of which will subdue and eventually eradicate ego.

As Bhagavan points out in this verse, in this story Lord Siva in the form of Arunachala, the mountain of light, signifies ‘மத்தி இதயம் தான்’ (maddhi idayam tāṉ), ‘oneself, the heart, the centre’, namely ātma-svarūpa (the real nature of ourself, meaning ourself as we actually are), which is the heart or centre of all, being sat-cit, the original light of pure being-awareness, ‘I am’; Vishnu signifies ‘அகங்காரம்’ (ahaṅkāram), ‘ego’, the distorted and deluded form of awareness that experiences itself not just as ‘I am’ but as ‘I am this body’; and Brahma signifies ‘புத்தி’ (buddhi), ‘intellect’, the instrument by which we as ego try to understand and gain mastery over the external world, which appears as soon as we rise as ego, thereby mistaking ourself to be a body.

Brahma flying upwards to find the summit of the column represents the effort that we make to understand the truth of the world, God and ourself through our outward-going intellect, which seeks to know the reality by extroverted means such as science, religion or philosophy. So long as we thus direct our attention and efforts outwards, away from our own being, ‘I am’, we can never know the reality as it actually is, so whatever knowledge we gain thereby is only a lie, meaning that it is not real knowledge but just an illusory pretence masquerading as such.

Vishnu burrowing deep down into the ground to find the foot of the column represents the effort that we as ego make to be aware of ourself as we actually are by penetrating deep into our own heart, the innermost core or centre of ourself. Only when we thus direct all our interest, attention and effort inwards, towards our own being, ‘I am’, can we be aware of ourself as we actually are, thereby eradicating ego, the false awareness of ourself as a person, a body consisting of five sheaths (namely the physical body, life, mind, intellect and will). And since the reality of ourself is also the reality of both the world and God, only when we thus know ourself as we actually are will we know the world and God as they actually are.

This shining forth of Arunachala, the heart, as the infinite light of pure awareness, which is ourself as we actually are, thereby dissolving the false appearance of ego together with all its upādhis (adjuncts that it mistakes itself to be), such as the intellect, and everything known by it, just as the rising sun dissolves all darkness, is what Bhagavan indicates in the first line by the adjectival participle ‘ஓங்கும்’ (ōṅgum), ‘surging’, ‘rising high’, ‘ascending’, ‘expanding’, ‘flourishing’ or ‘being exalted’, which corresponds to ‘ஒளிர்’ (oḷir), ‘shining’ or ‘which shone’, in the last line. That is, just as Annamalai shone forth as a column of light between Brahma and Vishnu to subdue their pride by showing them that they could not see its top or bottom as they desired, so it surges from within, shining forth as the infinite light of pure awareness, the heart, when ego and intellect despair, recognising their inability to know their own reality.

Just as Vishnu’s pride was subdued only when he burrowed deep into the ground in search of the foot of the column of fire and thereby recognised his inability to reach it, ego’s pride in its seemingly separate existence will be subdued only when it tries more and more to penetrate deep within itself in search of its own reality and thereby recognises its inability to know itself as it actually is. And just as Vishnu was able to recognise the infinite greatness of the column of fire only when his pride was completely subdued, only when ego’s pride (its urge to rise and dance about as a separate entity) is completely subdued will its reality, the heart, shine forth from within, swallowing it forever in its infinite light of pure awareness.

In other words, ego will be able to see its own non-dual reality, the pure light of ‘I’, only when it subsides and dissolves completely in the heart by looking evermore keenly within, thereby giving up its false awareness ‘I am this body’, as Bhagavan implies in the next verse.

தீபதர்சன தத்துவம் (Dīpa-Darśaṉa Tattuvam): The Reality of Seeing Deepam

இத்தனுவே நானா மெனுமதியை நீத்தப்
புத்தியித யத்தே பொருந்தியக நோக்கா
லத்துவித மாமெய் யகச்சுடர்காண் கைபூ
மத்தியெனு மண்ணா மலைச்சுடர்காண் மெய்யே.

ittaṉuvē nāṉā meṉumatiyai nīttap
buddhiyida yattē porundiyaha nōkkā
ladduvita māmey ahaccuḍarkāṇ gaibhū
maddhiyeṉu maṇṇā malaiccuḍarkāṇ meyyē.

பதச்சேதம்: ‘இத் தனுவே நான் ஆம்’ எனும் மதியை நீத்து, அப் புத்தி இதயத்தே பொருந்தி அகநோக்கால், அத்துவிதம் ஆம் மெய் அகச்சுடர் காண்கை பூ மத்தி எனும் அண்ணாமலை சுடர் காண் மெய்யே.

Padacchēdam (word-separation): ‘i-t-taṉuvē nāṉ ām’ eṉum matiyai nīttu, a-b-buddhi idayattē porundi aha-nōkkāl, adduvitam-ām mey aha-c-cuḍar kāṇgai bhū maddhi eṉum aṇṇāmalai cuḍar kāṇ meyyē.

அன்வயம்: பூ மத்தி எனும் அண்ணாமலை சுடர் காண் மெய்யே அகநோக்கால் ‘இத் தனுவே நான் ஆம்’ எனும் மதியை நீத்து, அப் புத்தி இதயத்தே பொருந்தி, அத்துவிதம் ஆம் மெய் அகச்சுடர் காண்கை.

Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): bhū maddhi eṉum aṇṇāmalai cuḍar kāṇ meyyē aha-nōkkāl ‘i-t-taṉuvē nāṉ ām’ eṉum matiyai nīttu, a-b-buddhi idayattē porundi, adduvitam-ām mey aha-c-cuḍar kāṇgai.

English translation: Giving up the mind called ‘this body alone is I’, that mind merging in the heart by looking inside, seeing the light of ‘I’, the non-dual reality, is the actual reality of seeing the light of Annamalai, which is called the centre of the world.

Explanatory paraphrase: The actual reality [truth, tattva, import or signification] of seeing the light on Annamalai, which is called the centre of the world, is seeing the light of ‘I’ [or heart-light], the non-dual reality, having given up the mati [mind, which is always aware of itself as] ‘this body alone is I’, [and] that buddhi [mind or dēhātma-buddhi, the false awareness that a body is oneself] having [subsided and] merged in the heart by aha-nōkku [inward look, looking inside, looking at ‘I’ or self-attentiveness].

Padavurai (word-explanation): இ (i): this {proximal demonstrative prefix} | தனுவே (taṉuvē): body alone {intensified form of taṉu, Tamil form of the Sanskrit tanu, ‘body’, ‘person’ or ‘outward form’} | நான் (nāṉ): I {nominative (first case) singular form of the first person pronoun} | ஆம் (ām): is {third person neuter future form of ā, ‘be’, but in Tamil third person neuter future forms of verbs (which generally end with ‘um’ and are the same in both singular and plural) are often used generically in a gender-neutral and partially tense-neutral sense, referring not to the past but to either the present or the future (particularly to express present actions or states that are predictable, typical, habitual, customary or to be expected), so in this context ām is used as a third person form of the present tense: ‘is’} | எனும் (eṉum): called {adjectival participle, serving the same function as inverted commas in English} | மதியை (matiyai): mind {accusative (second case) form of mati, ‘mind’, ‘intellect’, ‘understanding’, ‘discernment’, ‘thought’ or ‘idea’} | நீத்து (nīttu): separating from, renouncing, rejecting, abandoning, giving up {adverbial participle} >>> so ‘இத் தனுவே நான் ஆம் எனும் மதியை நீத்து’ (‘i-t-taṉuvē nāṉ ām’ eṉum matiyai nīttu) means “giving up the mind called ‘this body alone is I’”, which implies:

having given up the mati [mind, which is always aware of itself as] ‘this body alone is I’

<<< அ (a): that {distal demonstrative prefix} | புத்தி (buddhi): intellect, mind [implying here the dēhātma-buddhi, the false awareness that a body is oneself] | இதயத்தே (idayattē): in the heart {intensified form of idayattu, the inflectional base of idayam, Tamil form of the Sanskrit hṛdaya, ‘heart’, used here in a locative (seventh case) sense} | பொருந்தி (porundi): combining, uniting, merging, subsiding, abiding, remaining {adverbial participle} | அகநோக்கால் (aha-nōkkāl): by inside-look, by I-look {compound of aham, which is both a Tamil noun that means ‘inside’, ‘mind’, ‘heart’ or ‘home’ and a Sanskrit pronoun that means ‘I’, and nōkkāl, the instrumental (third case) form of nōkku, ‘look’ or ‘sight’, a noun derived from the verb nōkku, ‘see’, ‘look at’, ‘view’, ‘consider’ or ‘attend to’, so aha-nōkkāl means ‘by inside-look’ or ‘by I-look’, thereby implying ‘by looking inside’, ‘by looking at I’ or ‘by self-attentiveness’} >>> so ‘அப் புத்தி இதயத்தே பொருந்தி அகநோக்கால்’ (a-b-buddhi idayattē porundi aha-nōkkāl ) means ‘that mind merging in the heart by looking inside’, which implies:

[and] that buddhi [mind or dēhātma-buddhi, the false awareness that a body is oneself] having [subsided and] merged in the heart by aha-nōkku [inward look, looking inside, looking at ‘I’ or self-attentiveness]

<<< அத்துவிதமாம் (adduvitam-ām): non-dual, which is non-dual {compound of adduvitam, a Tamil form of the Sanskrit advaita, ‘non-duality’, and ām, ‘being’ or ‘which is’, an adjectival participle that when appended to a noun forms either an adjective (in this case ‘non-dual’) or a relative clause (in this case ‘which is non-dual’)} | மெய் (mey): reality, truth, real, true | அகச்சுடர் (aha-c-cuḍar): heart-light, I-light, light of ‘I’ {compound of aham, ‘heart’ or ‘I’, and cuḍar, ‘light’, ‘lustre’, ‘luminosity’ or ‘brightness’} | காண்கை (kāṇgai): seeing {verbal noun} >>> so ‘அத்துவிதமாம் மெய் அகச்சுடர் காண்கை’ (adduvitam-ām mey aha-c-cuḍar kāṇgai) means ‘seeing the light of I, the non-dual reality’ or ‘seeing the non-dual real light of I’, which implies:

seeing the light of ‘I’ [or heart-light], the non-dual reality

<<< பூமத்தி (bhū-maddhi): world-centre, centre of the world {compound of bhū, ‘world’ (either the planet Earth or material universe more generally), and maddhi, ‘centre’} | எனும் (eṉum): which is called {adjectival participle} | அண்ணாமலைச்சுடர்காண்மெய்யே (aṇṇāmalai-c-cuḍar-kāṇ-meyyē): the actual reality of seeing the light on Annamalai {compound of two compounds, namely aṇṇāmalai-c-cuḍar, ‘Aṇṇāmalai-light’, ‘light of Aṇṇāmalai’ or ‘light on Aṇṇāmalai’ (which is a compound of aṇṇāmalai, ‘Aṇṇāmalai’ [a Tamil name of Aruṇācala], and cuḍar, ‘light’, ‘lamp’ or ‘flame’), and kāṇ-meyyē, ‘the actual reality of seeing’ (which is a compound of kāṇ, ‘seeing’ [the root of this verb, used here as a verbal noun], and meyyē, ‘actual reality’ [intensified form of mey,‘reality’ or ‘truth’])} >>> so ‘பூமத்தி எனும் அண்ணாமலைச்சுடர் காண் மெய்யே’ (bhū-maddhi eṉum aṇṇāmalai-c-cuḍar kāṇ meyyē) means ‘the actual reality of seeing the light of Annamalai, which is called the centre of the world’, which implies:

the actual reality [truth, tattva, import or signification] of seeing the light on Annamalai, which is called the centre of the world

Explanation: In this verse Bhagavan has given us a very clear, compact and neat summary of his teachings. Firstly, he indicates that the obstacle we need to overcome is the false awareness ‘இத் தனுவே நான் ஆம்’ (i-t-taṉuvē nāṉ ām), ‘this body alone is I’. What is aware of itself as ‘I am this body’ is the mind (mati) in the sense of ego. Since we are aware of other problems only when we are aware ‘I am this body’, as in waking and dream, and not when we are not aware ‘I am this body’, as in sleep, this false awareness is the root of all other problems, so in order to be permanently free of all problems, we need to give up this false awareness.

Secondly, he implies that to give up this false awareness ‘I am this body’, we who have risen as ego, which is this dēhātma-buddhi or false awareness that a body is ourself, must subside and merge back into the heart, the source from which we have risen. And thirdly he indicates that the means by which we can merge back into the heart, thereby giving up the false awareness ‘I am this body’, is அகநோக்கு (aha-nōkku), ‘looking inside’ or ‘looking at I’, which means being self-attentive.

Fourthly, he implies that if we merge back into the heart by being self-attentive, what we will see or be aware of is ‘அத்துவிதமாம் மெய் அகச்சுடர்’ (adduvitam-ām mey aha-c-cuḍar), ‘the light of I, the non-dual reality’ or ‘the non-dual real light of I’, namely the infinite light of pure awareness, which shines eternally as our own being, ‘I am’, and which is non-dual, meaning that it is ‘one only without a second’ (ēkam ēva advitīyam), or in other words, that other than which nothing exists. What then does ‘அத்துவிதமாம் மெய் அகச்சுடர் காண்கை’ (adduvitam-ām mey aha-c-cuḍar kāṇgai), ‘seeing the light of I, the non-dual reality’, actually mean? How can we see that which is ‘one only without a second’?

We obviously cannot see it as an object, meaning as something other ourself, because if it were other than ourself, it would not be non-dual? Therefore we can see it only by being it. As Bhagavan often used to say, being alone is the true seeing, or as he says in verse 26 of Upadēśa Undiyār:

தானா யிருத்தலே தன்னை யறிதலாந்
தானிரண் டற்றதா லுந்தீபற
     தன்மய நிட்டையீ துந்தீபற.

tāṉā yiruttalē taṉṉai yaṟidalān
tāṉiraṇ ḍaṯṟadā lundīpaṟa
     taṉmaya niṭṭhaiyī dundīpaṟa.

பதச்சேதம்: தான் ஆய் இருத்தலே தன்னை அறிதல் ஆம், தான் இரண்டு அற்றதால். தன்மய நிட்டை ஈது.

Padacchēdam (word-separation): tāṉ-āy iruttal-ē taṉṉai aṟidal ām, tāṉ iraṇḍu aṯṟadāl. taṉmaya niṭṭhai īdu.

அன்வயம்: தான் இரண்டு அற்றதால், தான் ஆய் இருத்தலே தன்னை அறிதல் ஆம். ஈது தன்மய நிட்டை.

Anvayam (words rearranged in natural prose order): tāṉ iraṇḍu aṯṟadāl, tāṉ-āy iruttal-ē taṉṉai aṟidal ām. īdu taṉmaya niṭṭhai.

English translation: Being oneself alone is knowing oneself, because oneself is devoid of two. This is tanmaya-niṣṭhā.

Explanatory paraphrase: Being oneself [that is, being as one actually is without rising to know anything else] alone is knowing oneself, because oneself [one’s real nature] is devoid of two [that is, devoid of the fundamental duality of subject and object, knower and thing known, and also devoid of any possibility of being divided as two selves, one self as a subject to know the other self as an object]. This is tanmaya-niṣṭhā [‘steadfastness as that’: the state of being firmly fixed or established as ‘that’ (tat), the one infinite reality called brahman].

Knowing anything other than ourself is a mental activity, so it is an act of knowing, whereas knowing ourself does not entail any mental activity, so it is not an act of knowing but a state of just being as we actually are. What we actually are is just pure awareness, meaning awareness that is aware of nothing other than itself, so since awareness knows itself just by being itself, to know ourself we need not do anything but just need to be as we actually are, which means just to be without ever rising as ego to know anything else.

Therefore, though the adjective ‘அத்துவிதமாம்’ (adduvitam-ām), ‘non-dual’ or ‘which is non-dual’, applies explicitly to ‘மெய்’ (mey), ‘the reality’, which is ‘அகச்சுடர்’ (aha-c-cuḍar), ‘the I-light’, ‘the heart-light’ or ‘the light of I’ (meaning the light that is ‘I’, the heart, namely the light of pure awareness, which shines eternally and immutably as our own being, ‘I am’), it also applies implicitly to ‘காண்கை’ (kāṇgai), ‘seeing’, because it is only by means of non-dual seeing that we can see what is non-dual, ‘one only without a second’. And as we have seen above, ‘non-dual seeing’ means just being as we actually are, namely as pure being-awareness (sat-cit), which knows itself eternally just by being itself.

This non-dual seeing of ourself as the light of pure awareness that we always actually are is the tattva (reality, truth, import or signification) of seeing ‘அண்ணாமலைச்சுடர்’ (aṇṇāmalai-c-cuḍar), ‘the light on Annamalai’, and this non-dual seeing can be achieved only by ego merging back into the heart, which is the non-dual light of pure awareness, by means of அகநோக்கு (aha-nōkku), ‘looking inside’ or ‘being self-attentive’, thereby giving up the false awareness ‘இத் தனுவே நான் ஆம்’ (i-t-taṉuvē nāṉ ām), ‘this body alone is I’.

- Enlace a artículo -

Más info en https://ift.tt/8fj16Xi / Tfno. & WA 607725547 Centro MENADEL (Frasco Martín) Psicología Clínica y Tradicional en Mijas. #Menadel #Psicología #Clínica #Tradicional #MijasPueblo

*No suscribimos necesariamente las opiniones o artículos aquí compartidos. No todo es lo que parece.