1. Man is essentially a rational cognizer, a body with a mind localised in it or an “engine with a will”
II. INDIAN VIEW OF CIVILISATION
a. Civilization as a Western notion forms the basis of most academic studies, primarily reflecting a culture of cities, of the so-called urban sophistication. In the Indian context, the equivalent context is sabhyata,word derived from sabha etymologically from the earlier meaning of which was ‘shining together’ and the latter one meant ‘an assembly of men in harmony’. The harmony of mind, action and speech is an often repeated theme of Vedic prayers, i.e., everything emanates from the centre in the same way as the rta (cosmic order) emanates from the satya (eternal truth). The concept of sabhyata is so much refinement, as it is an attempt to re-seek the rhythm of existence. This concept of perfect internal harmony pervades not only the idea of the Vedic village (grama) – the centre holding the circle and vice-a-versa – but also in music, art, aesthetics and even in sciences, astronomy, civil engineering, and so on (Misra: 1971).
A civilized person thus is one who may appear crude in appearance yet is endowed with an understanding of the inherent harmony in things, both sentient as well as non-sentient. In this way, urbanities were subsumed within higher values of cultural growth rather than the peak of growth. This stresses the simultaneous coexistence of many worlds rather than the uniqueness or absolute Tribal Art values given to any one of them. This fundamental way of life, this dynamic rhythm, of the intertwined and seemingly incongruent and divergent manifestations of nature and man are depicted as an integral vision in the apparently repetitious aspect of Indian art, sanskrit poetry, and so on. Linear time itself is not the driving force behind the creative process; infact, creation did not – and does not – take place within the concept of time.
On the other hand, time and space are real in the modern context, and achievements of man are landmarks in terms of the arrow of time, evolution, as the apex of the universe from whence the rest of existence is subservient to him. While the Indian view does not reject history, it transcends it, since life and reality are not acts of an irreducible human destiny. Human existence is simultaneously temporal and atemporal, such as is exemplified by exponents of Indian aesthetics. It implies an innate tolerance towards other view points and a ready acceptance, not a repulsion of new ideas. It is in this context that the word itihas – history – means ‘so it has been’ and not ‘so it was’ as is the case with Western notions. It makes one both tradition bound as well as free in terms of the obligation to the cosmic being on the one hand and to the ancestors on the other – gods intervening in this dynamic rhythm. There is mutual complimentarity – no opposition; both universal being (narayan) and man (nara) depend on each other in a two way movement that reconciles all contradictions and apparent divergences – all reflecting the same Brahman (Misra: op.cit).
This basic two way process, this interaction, is what allows for the dynamic coexistence and interchange, e.g., between sanskirt, dravidian and munda languages; between textual and non-textual traditions; at themargi and desi trends in art, music; at the socio-religious levels of itihas and puranas, and so on. Similarly, philosophy as darshan – insight within, without and beyond – governs all laws, physical and mental that come under the Supreme or Truth. This requires sacrifice – to make sacred – self-surrender, which is a continuous process of self-expansion, i.e., man breaks through his egoistic shell to glide into the ocean of infinitude. It is a ceaseless process of give and take. Art, literature, science and technology happen to be the products of this self-expansion, as this is the expression of truth that is beautiful, that is bliss (Bhattacharya: 1971). In short, this worldview reflects a universe which is curvilinear, multi-layered and multi-directional, going back and forth.
b. This does not deny the fact that the phenomenological world was not tackled rationally. There were plausible explanations about the physical world and of understanding human phenomenon without taking recourse to divine explanations. Certain universal cosmic principles were evolved during Vedic times – as must have been the case with the Harappan times as reflected in their material remains – about the cosmos (natural laws or rta) within which even the gods had to function. Later on basic elements of matter with their qualities were also developed, as we learn from the Upanishads in terms of an enquiry into the intelligible reality of the physical world. The early evidence of astronomy, mathematics and life-sciences is a clear indication of this rational way of looking at natural phenomena. Of course, some way along the line this rational attitude was lost, but that requires another study.
It may recalled that most research, until recently, highlighted elitist or other-worldly nature of Indian civilization within an equilibrium model, ignoring the dynamics of change. One can no longer ignore the set of values as reflected in its literature, arts, scientific manuscripts, etc. which are as detailed and voluminous as the religious and philosophical ones. In short, this modern confrontational viewpoint, singular or monolithic interpretation such as that of only metaphysical and normative texts, will not allow one to adequately provide a realistic view of the lifestyle of this civilization.
If the goal is to search for meaning behind Art in all its manifestations, then the ways in which it is already being carried out, has failed to do so. This is because so far it has been alienated from the important dimension of the subject of study. It is only when the mechanistic, analytical, evolutionary approaches (which assume that the underlying significance of this kind of activity can be inferred by quantitative methods along, or at best by some intuitive-aesthetic or pseudo-religious approach) are transcended that the complexity and richness of this tradition may provide a glimpse into the underlying philosophies and worldviews in a symbolic way. The process of decoding the total system can only begin in this fashion.
III. TRIBAL ART QUA ART
There is growing realisation that any philosophy and explanation of Art without an account and understanding of aesthetic experience is inadequate and lifeless. This trend of thought has also dominated by and large the phenomenology of aesthetic experience. The scientific theory of an expression of this directedness of consciousness upon an object, is quite different to the universe of discourse that is given shape by artistic experience and expression. In the triad of consciousness, aesthetic objects and Art expression, experience is definitely the primal source, common to all human communities. Art experience is an exudation of consciousness from the privacy of the inner, and cannot therefore be treated merely as a ‘thing’. The language of Art moves beyond the conceptual, semantic, and syntactic constraints involved in it, since there in its cognizance the reality of silence playing a major role. One may say that the language of Art is an obvious deviation from empirical, ordinary language but it does not fully relinquish the garb of ordinary language; the latter being more of an instrument and less an expression of be-ing carrying a deeper and new meaning.
tribalartindia 