வேத நெறி யோர்குருவின் பாதம் பணிந்தே
போத நெறி யேநிற்கில் வாதமொடு ஞானப்
பாதை வழி யாகும் பல பேத வழி சாகும்
நாதமறி நாதரவர் வேதை யுருவாமே
Vētha neṟi yōrkuruvin pātham paṇinthē
Pōtha neṟi yēniṟkil vāthamodu ñānap
Pāthai vazhi yākum pala pētha vazhi cākum
Nāthamaṟi nātharavar vēthai yuruvaamē
Having bowed to the feet of a guru of the Vedic way,
if one stands (steadfast) in the way of bodha (awakening/understanding),
then the path of knowledge becomes a path ‘with vādam’;
the many paths of bheda (difference/sectarian division) die away.
Those Nāthas who know the nāda (inner sound) become the very form of the Veda.
Submit first to the guru-principle (symbolized by bowing to the guru’s feet). If you then abide in the inner path of awakening, knowledge matures in a way that dissolves quarrel and factionalism. When the inner nāda is realized, the Nātha-yogi becomes Veda in living form—Veda not as text or debate, but as direct embodied knowing.
The verse juxtaposes three registers that Siddhar literature often holds together without fully reconciling: (1) “Veda-neri” (the orthodox or scriptural way), (2) “bodha-neri” (the way of direct awakening), and (3) the Nātha paradigm of nāda (inner sound) yoga.
1) Guru’s feet as epistemology and discipline: “Bowing to the feet” is not merely devotional; it signals surrender of egoic authorship and entry into a lineage where knowledge is transmitted as practice. In Siddhar framing, the “guru” is both an external teacher and an inner function that corrects delusion.
2) Bodha-neri as interiorization of Veda: By placing “bodha-neri” after “Veda-neri,” the verse implies that scriptural orientation is incomplete unless it becomes lived awakening. Veda is thereby reinterpreted from being a body of authoritative statements to being a state of realization.
3) “Vādam” as a double-coded term: In plain Tamil, “vādam” is debate/argumentation; in Siddha medical-alchemical vocabulary, it can also echo vāta (wind/prāṇa). Either way, the line can be read as: (a) true jñāna is not mere polemic; it outgrows disputation and renders “many bheda-paths” irrelevant; or (b) jñāna proceeds along the channel of regulated vāyu/prāṇa—i.e., yogic physiology is the roadway for knowledge.
4) “Many bheda-paths die”: “Bheda” can mean sectarian distinctions (Saiva/Vaishnava/Buddhist, etc.), doctrinal dualisms, or even the mind’s compulsive habit of splitting reality into opposing categories. The ‘death’ here is the cessation of difference-making at the level of ultimate seeing.
5) Nāda-knowing Nāthas as ‘Veda embodied’: “Nādam aṟi Nāthar” points to Nātha yoga: the interior auditory current (anāhata/nāda) that draws attention inward and stabilizes nondual absorption. When that is known, the yogi is said to become “Veda’s form”—not quoting Veda but incarnating its claimed purpose (truth-realization). The verse thus elevates experiential yoga over textual mastery while still honoring the Vedic frame.