Basis of Continuity in Indian Art

What is the core of continuity in Indian art? The Indian concept, followed not just by the Vaidikas, but by Buddhists, Jainas, Tantrikas, Vaishnavas and Shaivas is the concept of four Purusharthas: Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha. What does one live for? Everyone lives for largely these four things. They have to be pursued by the individual. If they are to be pursued by the individual, then it is not the king or even the guru, can do it for us. We are the ones who will do Karma. This is a fundamental idea of Indian civilization. Each of us has to to pursue Dharma. We have to make money, Artha; the King cannot make money for me, give me a dole and become a welfare state. Kama, of course, the king will enjoy his life through his senses while we enjoy through our senses. Similarly Moksha is personal.

If all the Purusharthas are individual, then all choices are individual. Do you want to be a painter? Do you want to be a poet? Do you want to be a musician? Do you want to be somebody who can use all these arts together? That is, do you want to be a filmmaker? What is the kind of genre that you want to do as an artist? This has to be your choice, nobody can give it to you. That’s why there is the old English saying that poets are not made but born. If somebody wants to do poetry he is born a poet in the sense that right from childhood he or she has Pratibha, has the vision and that method is chosen by him. Everything here rests around the individual and the individual choice, therefore the question of leader, the question of guru is only as somebody who can make suggestions. So great anugraha or kindness of the Guru is needed in order to enlighten me, but my enlightenment has to be personal. Swanubhuti. I don’t know anything else other than my own anubhuti.

The Vedic Roots of Indian Art

If everyone is doing it for themselves and by themselves, how does continuity in Indian art become possible? That is the question we’ll investigate now. Let us take one of the most ancient Indian art forms. The oldest is one and only, that is Rigveda. Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samaveda and Atharaveda that is the oldest artistic work. The book is not the true Rigveda. The Rigveda is something which is to be heard live. The manuscript of the Rigveda never came into existence properly till about 12th or 13th century. People were discouraged to learn the text of a veda from a written manuscript. Something which was composed, whether 2,500 or 5,000 years ago, was preserved and is available to us today. Another thing that we may have heard is that the Veda is the origin of all Indian arts, particularly music. Is it just a matter of reverence that we say so? Just in order to celebrate? No. It is literally true.

Now, Vedic mantra is poetry in Chandas or in a metre. It is to be recited in a particular manner. When it was recited then, just the text was recited in three tones. What is the difference between speech and recitation? When we speak, our voice rises and falls a little bit. But when the rise and fall of the voice is more prominent that is called recitation or paath पढना. Till 200 years ago, before the arrival of print in India पढना meant ‘to recite’. Now it means reading a book silently. This is how words change.

The Veda पाठ was in three tones: Udata, Anudatta and Svarita. The Veda was to be recited only these three tones. But the Sama Veda had to be recited in seven tones. Therefore Sama was not called recitation, Sama was called gaan. Once there are seven notes then we have the possibility of a more complicated way of using those notes or sangeet. In present times, the word for music is sangeet. In ancient times at the time of Veda, gaan was called Gaandharv. Because it came from the region of Gandhar, Afghanistan, where music is forbidden and musical instruments are broken today.

The Sapta Swaras of Sama Gaan

The fundamental difference is that seven notes are used in Saama gaan. What is the difference between the use of seven notes in Saama Gaan and what may be called music? There are no alankara, there is no gamaka in Saama Gaan. Unfortunately, today you hear all these vedic mantras being sung as if contemporary music is being sung. This happened just in the last 25 years. This is not to be done because recitation of the Vedic mantra is restricted to a certain ambience of a sound. When it is heard from afar then we know this is a Vedic chant. This sound, this recitation is only for this purpose, otherwise the sound gets a context for which it is not meant. This is a very fundamental question of culture.

When we keep that sound restricted to that purpose and we have the freedom to create so many other kinds of sounds, so many kinds of music, with so many alankaras. One can do North Indian music, Carnatic music, Bengali music; one can do all kinds of things with sound. It is primarily a way of manipulating sound and creating a vibe. When we sing the Rabindra Sangeet then we have to make a sound in a particular manner, and a particular way of producing sound. Now this kind of creation with a variety was envisaged in India from very early on. The purpose is not to create something new. Art is not for creating techniques.

Natya as the Panchama Veda

Art has to have a higher purpose. When we come to art, where do we find the fundamentals of art? Where do we find an art form which can contain all other art forms and be a beacon of light for all other art forms? Theater. Every other form comes under it. The primary quality of theater is that we see and hear at the same time. The story has been told in the Natya Shastra that Indra goes to Brahma, the creator, and says:

krīḍanīyakamicchāmo dṛṣyaṃ śravyaṃ ca yadbhavet // Natyashastra 1.11 //

Brahmaji I want something to entertain me, which is seen, which is seen as an art form and in which there is something to hear at the same time. So Brahma gives him Natya Veda, not Natyashastra or Natyavidya. This is an art form, but is it just an art? It is a Natya Veda. We discussed how music has grown out of the Vedic chant and Vedic gaan. Here natya is presented as Veda again. Indra did not go to Brahma and say “give me great spiritual knowledge”; he said “krīḍanīyakamicchāmo”. He gives something very big, natya veda. What is this distinctive quality about the fifth Veda? The fifth Veda has all the four Vedas in it.

Natyashastra has the status of the fifth Veda. Similarly Mahabharata is sometimes called the fifth Veda. This is because Veda is knowledge and natya or art gives us knowledge. In order to learn the four Vedas people need years and it is not possible for most people to learn, understand and come close to it. But theater is something which everybody can go and entertain themselves irrespective of whether one is educated or uneducated, upper class or lower class.

So the value of art is of the same kind, same level and same status as the highest of the so-called spiritual or religious texts. It is of the same nature. These are deep civilizational values in the context of India. We have often heard a musician say that they get mukti from their practice; it is literally true. There are paintings which are done only for religious purposes and there are paintings which are done for other purposes. But their reward can be the same and will be the same.

This is what the tradition has believed and there are hundreds of texts which say so. This is the reason why so much art was produced in India. All the hundreds and thousands of temples all across India, constructed for at least two thousand seven hundred years or more were done not just for Artha; they were for Moksha too. It was also one’s choice, one’s swadharma. Shapathis and Shilpis were proud of their work and they had a tradition to it. This is how India has thought of art and artistic achievements.

Diverse Expressions of Transcendence

If we understand the prayojana of art then we will be able to see the principles of art and finally the diversity of art. This is because something which is a principle of art cannot be stated again and again in the same manner. There is a Ramayana created each time a Rama bhakta sees the leela. My Svanubhuti, my understanding, my perception, my knowledge, my knowing of Rama is something as real as another person’s. There is no contradiction. The Indian vision never thought of going into the controversy of a sola scriptura because that would have put an end to diversity of creation. So this siddhanta is something that we inherit from the Natya Shastra that art is Panchma Veda and then art is Svanubhuti. And that art brings us to the path of moksha.

Thus there is both continuity and diversity. That is there is no superior and inferior language. Sanskrit is not a superior language. It is a language with certain characteristics, power and ability, but all other languages are equally valid. The term for languages is Vak. Vak is in four stages: Para, Pashyanti, Madhyama and Vaikhari. Para is something which cannot be uttered, which is the ultimate. Pashyanti when one becomes conscious of it; Madhyama when one comes close to that consciousness, and Vaikhari when it comes out of the tongue. Whether it comes out of the tongue as Sanskrit or Bangla or Tamil, it is Vaak. It is equally valid. There is no question of hegemony of one. That is why there is a great transfer and recreation from one language to another in India. In India we did not make so many translations. When it came to the original story we just retold it. There was no problem of it what is called today a copyright. The Para is important. The Pashyanti, Madhyama and Vaikhari are not important.

This is how diversity has come about in Indian art. The huge variety that we see right from Afghanistan, Kashmir and down to Sri Lanka and then right up to Burma is because this siddhanta was welcomed and taken. The same idea was recreated in a different place, in a different language for a different audience, but the result was the same: Giving a glimpse of the ultimate, giving a glimpse of the Para. This is the basis of continuity and diversity of Indian art.