தனக்குள்ளே தனைப்பார்ந்துத் தானாய் வானாய்
தவத்துள்ளே தனைத்தானே தனிமை கண்ட
உனக்குள்ளாம் உழக்குக்குள் கிழக்கும் மேற்கும்
உற்றகணக் கோடுவழக் கேது முண்டோ
thanakkuLLE thanaippaarndhuth thaanaay vaanaay
thavaththuLLE thanaiththaanae thanimai kaNda
unakkuLLaaam uzakkuLkuL kizhakkum maeRkum
uRRakaNak kOduvazak kaethu muNdO
Looking within oneself, seeing oneself (there), becoming oneself—becoming like the sky;
Within tapas (austerity/meditative discipline), seeing one’s own aloneness/solitary state;
Within you—inside the ‘uzhakku’ (a small measure/vessel)—there are east and west;
For the accepted/held “lines of calculation” and their disputes, what cause/reason is there at all?
Turn the gaze inward until the self stands revealed as vast, sky-like awareness. In true tapas one discovers the solitary Self (the state beyond dependence on outer supports). When the body-mind is seen as a small vessel that already contains all directions—east and west within itself—then quarrels about external “correct paths,” directional rules, or calculative/astrological determinations lose their necessity.
The verse is structured as an inward reversal: (1) self-inquiry, (2) tapas, (3) the microcosm, and (4) the futility of external disputation.
1) “Looking within oneself … becoming like the sky” points to an interiorization of consciousness. “Sky” functions as a classic Siddhar/Upanishadic symbol for the boundless, unobstructed nature of awareness—ungraspable, uncolored by objects, and not confined by the body.
2) “Within tapas … seeing one’s own solitude” suggests that the fruit of disciplined practice is not merely moral austerity but the recognition of an inner aloneness: a kaivalya-like state where the Self is experienced as self-sufficient. This is not social isolation but ontological “singleness”—freedom from needing external confirmations.
3) “Within you, inside the uzhakku, east and west” introduces the Siddhar microcosm doctrine: the human body (small measure/vessel) contains the whole cosmos. “East and west” can be read as literal directions collapsing into the inner field, or as yogic polarity (solar/lunar currents) within the subtle body. The implication is that what people seek by going outward—pilgrimage, directional auspiciousness, cosmic alignments—can be encountered in the inner terrain through yogic knowing.
4) “What cause is there for disputing the lines of calculation?” critiques reliance on external calculative frameworks—often implying astrology/ritual timing, directional prescriptions, or scholastic argument about the ‘right’ route. Once the seeker realizes that the decisive ‘direction’ is inward and that the cosmos is already mirrored in the body, such disputes become secondary or unnecessary.
Overall, the verse leans toward non-dual and yogic epistemology: the real ‘map’ is inner realization, not external coordinates. Yet it preserves Siddhar ambiguity by not explicitly naming the inner mechanisms (nāḍīs, cakras, sushumnā), leaving them as suggestive subtext.