Chapter-1 Indian Aesthetics-1 Summary PDF

Preview

Summary

ART EXPERIENCE- M. HiriyannaCHAPTER 1: INDIAN AESTHETICS-IOne of the important feature of classical Indian schools of thought is their transformative nature; they were intended less as intellectual exercise and more to practically shape the lives of their adherents. The goal was not truth or knowled...

Description

ART EXPERIENCE -M. Hiriyanna CHAPTER 1: INDIAN AESTHETICS-I One of the important feature of classical Indian schools of thought is their transformative nature; they were intended less as intellectual exercise and more to practically shape the lives of their adherents. The goal was not truth or knowledge (tattvajnana); rather, to attain freedom (moksa) through action in accordance with truths realised. Hiriyanna speaks of the relation between ethics and aesthetics. In Sanskrit philosophical works, we frequently find parallels between goodness and beauty. Works on poetics and drama are fundamental in understanding a general theory of fine art. The history and evolution of these aesthetic theories is closely intertwined with that of Indian philosophy in general. Earlier views were based on worship of a multiplicity of supernatural beings (devas) responsible for the forces of nature. The aim of life was to gain their favour so as to reach their abode and companionship in the afterlife. This soon gave way to the philosophical quest of understanding the fundamental underlying unity of the world. The accepted conclusion was the Upanisadic atman theory: all is one, manifested in the inner Self of man, as opposed to external, seemingly diverse physical reality. This points to an identification of Nature with Man. Another important aspect is understanding what we perceive as real as bearing only a semblance of reality and being, in actuality, illusory. All of this gave another basis to an idea lingering from the earlier pluralistic view: that the greatest good was attainable only after death. Naturally, then, this life was regarded as mere passage to a better one. Discarding this reality as unreal, the next step was asceticism and the extinguishing of desires. Post-Upanisads, this view changed (although its source can be traced to certain Upanisadic passages: the word jivanmukta was not used therein but the concept had begun to evolve). Jivanmukti refers to the highest conception of freedom. The goal of existence here is not the attainment of hypothetical bliss in the afterlife but in the here and now. This conception transformed entire ways of life and systems of ethics. A life of harmony was achievable not through sloughing off interests, but through refining them. The training of emotions and feelings thus gained precedence over that of the intellect and the will. These developments influenced the theories of art as seen in Sanskritic treatises on poetics. Precisely when these works began to appear is unclear; tradition places Bhamaha (c. 7 century) among the earliest writers on poetics. However, in his works the subject already has a definite shape. Among Bhamaha, Dandin, Udbhata, Rudrata, Vamana, there are minor differences of detail but a related way of thinking. Collectively they represent the first stage of the growth of poetic criticism.

th

In this earlier (pracina) school, poetry is dealt with under dosas, gunas and alankaras. Hiriyanna leaves out the third as it is not considered essential by all, and it is nearly specific to imaginative literature and thus not so significant for general aesthetic theory. Some of the conditions under the first two are intended solely for logical and grammatical considerations, such as coherence of thought and correctness of language. Even in others, the central ‘essence’ of poetry is assigned a subordinate place. The attention of the pracina school is centred on the outward expression of poetry, sabda (word) and artha (sense or meaning).

Certain forms of these are regarded as dosas and others gunas; the merit and excellence of poetry lie in the absence of the former and presence of the latter. The later (navina) school has a very different theory, going into what forms the ‘real essence’ of poetry. Hiriyanna cites the Dhvanyaloka. It starts by distinguishing between explicit and implicit meaning. The worth of a poem is placed in the implicit; the explicit is significant insofar as it points to the implicit. Together they allow a ‘poetic mood’ to manifest. Here, dosas and gunas are relative, with no objective scale of valuation. Whatever serves the poetic end is a guna; whatever does not, a dosa. This judgement is made only with reference to the ‘inner meaning which constitutes the truly poetical’. The artist is concerned not with technical brilliance or syntactical perfection; rather, with the successful expression and communication of thoughts and emotions felt with poetic intensity. The implicit meaning is further divided into three: fact (vastu), the imaginative (alamkara) and the emotional (rasa). The first is the least ‘artistic’; its aesthetic value lies in treatment, not subject. Hiriyanna considers only the remaining two, calling true art a compound of imagination and feeling. Hiriyanna points out that the navina theory of art corresponds directly to the doctrine of atman: word and explicit meaning are mere vesture clothing the essence of poetry, the way external reality is passing and unreal; it is only when we penetrate these exteriors that we reach the ultimate and the true. Gradually more stress came to be placed on emotional mood rather than imaginative thought (explained previously in the context of jivanmukti). Poetry came to have a twofold purpose: the direct aim of aesthetic pleasure (sadyah-paranirvrti), and the indirect aim of refinement of character. As rasa became the atman of Sanskrit poetry, different schools of philosophy advanced their own theories of rasa; Hiriyanna speaks about Vedanta and Sankhya. Vedantic Thought Among various Upanisadic terms used to refer to Brahman- the inner harmony of the universe- one is ananda (bliss); i.e., the restful bliss that comes from directly experiencing and realising that harmony. It must be unmediated and cannot be merely intellectually apprehended. Common experience takes the sensory at face value; the disunity of the self and not-self are taken for granted. Vedantin final truth lies in the realisation of ultimate oneness; this synthesis takes place in perfect knowledge. One who attains perfect knowledge- the jivanmukta- transcends the fragmentary view of reality and assigns it no significance. This higher viewpoint is not possible while we are on the empirical plane. Rarely, however, there is a break in this routine, and in the sudden transition from one empirical self to another, we transcend our narrow selves. We do not fully realise unity, but we lose ourselves and feel delight, however short-lived. There are many answers to the question of what gives rise to such an attitude (e.g. novelty, symmetry etc), many theories of the beautiful. According to the Vedantin, these are not true beauty but the outward symbols thereof. Diverse in themselves, they point to the underlying harmony of perfect beauty, identical with ultimate reality, revealed only to the knower. We may perceive beauty superficially and describe it as such, feeling ananda in the experience of it, but true beauty is not expressible or objective, it can only be transcendentally realised. Beauty in Nature, therefore, is anything that creates such a break in routine and leads us towards the realisation of delight. According to Sankara, life is characterised by avidya-kama-karma, i.e, strife and selfinterests/desires caused by ignorance. Ananda can be experienced with the extinguishing of these, the transcendence of inner turmoil, even subconscious. Thus, the condition for pleasure is the absence of desire. Ananda can be experienced only from a point of detachment from the

ego. Even without enlightenment, we may experience detached delight: where the series of kama-karma is eliminated, the source of delight being unknown. This is an artistic attitude. When avidya is eliminated, even in latent form, this is the saintly, fully enlightened attitude. The immediate aim of art being delight/pleasure, attainable only in the absence of desire, the artist has to induce a sense of detachment. The devices of art such as rhythm, symmetry are intended to aid concentration upon the art and thereby induce relaxation and joy. The other important purpose is to create a sense of unity to the portrayed. As the knower realises unity in Nature’s diversity, so must one in artistic perception. The truth of art and beauty is lower than that of Nature, but a viewer who appreciates art gets a fleeting foretaste of moksa. Sankhya Thought This is a dualistic system starting with two disparate absolutes, purusa and prakrti. For the Sankhya conception of art, it is important to know that through the mediation of the mental apparatus, Purusa (the self or pure awareness) is enabled to realise the either of the two ideals of bhoga and apavarga (to experience pleasure and pain, or to attain spiritual aloofness through right knowledge). Hiriyanna briefly touches upon the concept of the three Gunas as it relates to aesthetic theory. The gunas are responsible for a large number of effects, most important of which are sukha, dukha and moha, brought about by the gunas of sattva, rajas and tamas respectively. He notes two particular applications of the doctrine of gunas: A) Everything, whether of the external physical world or the internal mental apparatus, is made of these three factors, being predominantly sattvic or rajasic or tamasic. The buddhi is intrinsically sattvic, but has within it vasanas or impulses that may modify it towards being predominantly rajasic or tamasic. B) Prakrti is divided into two, the psychic apparatus with the buddhi as the main factor, and the physical world constituted of the five basic elements. Pain or pleasure comes from the interaction between these two spheres of prakrtic development: the buddhi and the objective world (Purusa stands by as an onlooker). Being sattvic, the buddhi should give rise only to pleasure. However, its vasanas coupled with the character of the particular object of interaction may cause different results. The same object or experience may cause different sensations to different people, or even the same person at different times. Thus, all that is perceived is perceived through individual interests and biases. People live in a secondary world, ignoring the intrinsic nature of things. The basic cause of this is placed in the mistaken conflation of buddhi and Purusa. When Purusa and buddhi are entirely dissociated, the question of pleasure and pain does not arise at all. Ordinary empirical life is a state of individual purpose and desire causing pain and uncertain pleasure. Acquisition of true knowledge and realising the disparity of Prakrti and Purusa allows transcendence. Such a jivanmukta sees things not as they are related to him but as they are absolutely and attains serenity. This is beyond the reach of the ordinary man; he seeks temporary release in art. Pleasure untainted by pain does not exist in the real world and must be sought outside it, i.e., in art. The idealised world of art does not answer to egoistic impulses and is not composed of the three gunas. It automatically generates pleasure. The artist’s purpose is to lend peace of mind by creating an escape from the real world into an ideal one.

Hiriyanna then explains rasa theory as given in the Kavya-prakasa, associated with Bhatta Nayaka and shows how it is identical to Sankhya theory. He mentions three points of note: 1) Objects of art have no referents; they are impersonal. In life, everything is consciously or unconsciously, directly or indirectly, related to the perceiver (atman) or to someone else (tatastha). Man cannot transcend these relations; art is the best means of escape. 2) Three stages in the appreciation of poetry lead to aesthetic experience. The first is to apprehend the meaning of the words; the second is to find, through these, abstract conceptions unrelated to anything in particular; and finally, the actual experience of delight. Aesthetic delight comes from contemplating the imaginative (and therefore impersonal) creations of the poet. The three stages are represented as vyaparas or processes: a) abhidha, the means by which words convey their ordinary meaning, b) bhavana, the process of impersonalising or generalising, and c) bhogikarana, that by virtue of which we derive pure pleasure (bhoga). This usage creates a link with Sankhya theory. It also implies that the artistic attitude is connected more to the empirical world than to the saintly. Moreover, Purusa being passive, all activity is attributed to Prakrti. It creates, as well as brings about Purusa’s experience of pleasure and pain. These two activities are paralleled in art and the aesthetic experience. 3) The aesthetic attitude is one of samvit, i.e., dissociated contemplation as shown by visranti (composure). Thus, the natural attitude is one of pleasure and pain, the spiritual one of neither, and the artistic one of pure pleasure. Hiriyanna concludes with the following distinction: In the pessimistic Sankhya, Nature has both beauty and ugliness and nothing is wholly pleasurable at all times; man must look elsewhere. For optimistic Vedanta, everything is beautiful and harmonious. Even without the saint’s knowledge of atman we may derive aesthetic enjoyment from Nature. The artist, with the spontaneous expression of feeling, helps open our eyes to this pleasure which we might otherwise miss. In a sense, art is Nature presented in a way that it appeals to the viewer. In both systems of thought, the aim of art is to induce detachment: but in Vedanta, this translates to forgetting the individual ego, while in Sankhya it is an escape from reality. The former is a path to reality, the latter a deflection from it. The former reveals the best of Nature, the latter offers something other and better than it....