|
By Sri Aurobindo (1920)
The arts which appeal to the soul through the eye are able to
arrive at a peculiarly
concentrated expression of the spirit, the aesthesis and
the creative mind of a people, but it is in its literature that
we must seek for its most flexible and many-sided self-expression,
for it is the word used in all its power of clear figure or its
threads of suggestion that carries to us most subtly and variably
the shades and turns and teeming significances of the inner self
in its manifestation. The greatness of a literature lies first in
the greatness and worth of its substance, the value of its thought
and the beauty of its forms, but also in the degree to which, satisfying
the highest conditions of the art of speech, it avails to bring
out and raise the soul and life or the living and the ideal mind
of a people, an age, a culture, through the genius of some of its
greatest or most sensitive representative spirits. And if we ask
what in both these respects is the achievement of the Indian mind
as it has come down to us in the Sanskrit and other literatures,
we might surely say that here at least there is little room for
any just depreciation and denial even by a mind the most disposed
to quarrel with the effect on life and the character of the culture.
The ancient and classical creations of the Sanskrit tongue both
in quality and in body and abundance of excellence, in their potent
originality and force and beauty, in their substance and art and
structure, in grandeur and justice and charm of speech and in the
height and width of the reach of their spirit stand very evidently
in the front rank among the world's great literatures. The language
itself, as has been universally recognised by those competent to
form a judgment, is one of the most magnificent, the most perfect
and wonderfully sufficient literary instruments developed by the
human mind, at once majestic and sweet and flexible, strong and
clearly-formed and full and vibrant and subtle, and its quality
and character would be of itself a sufficient evidence of the character
and quality of the race whose mind it expressed and the culture
of which it was the reflecting medium. The great and noble use made
of it by poet and thinker did not fall below the splendour of its
capacities. Nor is it in the Sanskrit tongue alone that the Indian
mind has done high and beautiful and perfect things, though it couched
in that language the larger part of its most prominent and formative
and grandest creations. It would be necessary for a complete estimate
to take into account as well the Buddhistic literature in Pali and
the poetic literatures, here opulent, there more scanty in production,
of about a dozen Sanskritic and Dravidian tongues. The whole has
almost a continental effect and does not fall so far short in the
quantity of its really lasting things and equals in its things of
best excellence the work of ancient and mediaeval and modern Europe.
The people and the civilisation that count among their great works
and their great names the Veda and the Upanishads, the mighty structures
of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, Kalidasa and Bhavabhuti and
Bhartrihari and Jayadeva and the other rich creations of classical
Indian drama and poetry and romance, the Dhammapada and the Jatakas,
the Panchatantra, Tulsidas, Vidyapati and Chandidas and Ramprasad,
Ramdas and Tukaram, Tiruvalluvar and Kamban and the songs of Nanak
and Kabir and Mirabai and the southern Shaiva saints and the Alwars,
- to name only the best-known writers and most characteristic productions,
though there is a very large body of other work in the different
tongues of both the first and the second excellence, - must surely
be counted among the greatest civilisations and the world's most
developed and creative peoples. A mental activity so great and of
so fine a quality commencing more than three thousand years ago
and still not exhausted is unique and the best and most undeniable
witness to something extraordinarily sound and vital in the culture.
A criticism that ignores or belittles the significance of this
unsurpassed record and this splendour of the self-expressing spirit
and the creative intelligence, stands convicted at once of a blind
malignity or an invincible prejudice and does not merit refutation.
It would be a sheer waste of time and energy to review the objections
raised by our devil's advocate: for nothing vital to the greatness
of a literature is really in dispute and there is only to the credit
of the attack a general distortion and denunciation and a laborious
and exaggerated cavilling at details and idiosyncracies which at
most show a difference between the idealising mind and abundant
imagination of India and the more realistically observant mind and
less rich and exuberant imagination of Europe. The fit parallel
to this motive and style of criticism would be if an Indian critic
who had read European literature only in bad or ineffective Indian
translations, were to pass it under a hostile and disparaging review,
dismiss the Iliad as a crude and empty semi-savage and primitive
epos, Dante's great work as the nightmare of a cruel and superstitious
religious fantasy, Shakespeare as a drunken barbarian of considerable
genius with an epileptic imagination, the whole drama of Greece
and Spain and England as a mass of bad ethics and violent horrors,
French poetry as a succession of bald or tawdry rhetorical exercises
and French fiction as a tainted and immoral thing, a long sacrifice
on the altar of the goddess Lubricity, admit here and there a minor
merit, but make no attempt at all to understand the central spirit
or aesthetic quality or principle of structure and conclude on the
strength of his own absurd method that the ideals of both Pagan
and Christian Europe were altogether false and bad and its imagination
afflicted with a “habitual and ancestral” earthiness, morbidity,
poverty and disorder. No criticism would be worth making on such
a mass of absurdities, and in this equally ridiculous philippic
only a stray observation or two less inconsequent and opaque than
the others perhaps demands a passing notice. But although these
futilities do not at all represent the genuine view of the general
European mind on the subject of Indian poetry and literature, still
one finds a frequent inability to appreciate the spirit or the form
or the aesthetic value of Indian writing and especially its perfection
and power as an expression of the cultural mind of the people. One
meets such criticisms even from sympathetic critics as an admission
of the vigour, colour and splendour of Indian poetry followed by
a conclusion that for all that it does not satisfy, and this means
that the intellectual and temperamental misunderstanding extends
to some degree even to this field of creation where different minds
meet more readily than in painting and sculpture, that there is
a rift between the two mentalities and what is delightful and packed
with meaning and power to the one has no substance, but only a form,
of aesthetic or intellectual pleasure for the other. This difficulty
is partly due to an inability to enter into the living spirit and
feel the vital touch of the language, but partly to a spiritual
difference in similarity which is even more baffling than a complete
dissimilarity and otherness. Chinese poetry for example is altogether
of its own kind and it is more possible for a Western mentality,
when it does not altogether pass it by as an alien world, to develop
an undisturbed appreciation because the receptivity of the mind
is not checked or hampered by any disturbing memories or comparisons.
Indian poetry on the contrary, like the poetry of Europe, is the
creation of an Aryan or Aryanised national mind, starts apparently
from similar motives, moves on the same plane, uses cognate forms,
and yet has something quite different in its spirit which creates
a pronounced and separating divergence in its aesthetic tones, type
of imagination, turn of self-expression, ideative mind, method,
form, structure. The mind accustomed to the European idea and technique
expects the same kind of satisfaction here and does not meet it,
feels a baffling difference to whose secret it is a stranger, and
the subtly pursuing comparison and vain expectation stand in the
way of a full receptivity and intimate understanding. At bottom
it is an insufficient comprehension of the quite different spirit
behind, the different heart of this culture that produces the mingled
attraction and dissatisfaction. The subject is too large to be dealt
with adequately in small limits: I shall only attempt to bring out
certain points by a consideration of some of the most representative
master works of creative intuition and imagination taken as a record
of the soul and mind of the Indian people.
The early mind of India in the magnificent youth of the nation,
when a fathomless spiritual insight was at work, a subtle intuitive
vision and a deep, clear and greatly outlined intellectual and ethical
thinking and heroic action and creation which founded and traced
the plan and made the permanent structure of her unique culture
and civilisation, is represented by four of the supreme productions
of her genius, the Veda, the Upanishads and the two vast epics,
and each of them is of a kind, a form and an intention not easily
paralleled in any other literature. The two first are the visible
foundation of her spiritual and religious being, the others a large
creative interpretation of her greatest period of life, of the ideas
that informed and the ideals that governed it and the figures in
which she saw man and Nature and God and the powers of the universe.
The Veda gave us the first types and figures of these things as
seen and formed by an imaged spiritual intuition and psychological
and religious experience; the Upanishads constantly breaking through
and beyond form and symbol and image without entirely abandoning
them, since always they come in as accompaniment or undertone, reveal
in a unique kind of poetry the ultimate and unsurpassable truths
of self and God and man and the world and its principles and powers
in their most essential, their profoundest and most intimate and
their most ample realities, - highest mysteries and clarities vividly
seen in an irresistible, an unwalled perception that has got through
the intuitive and psychological to the sheer spiritual vision.
And after that we have powerful and beautiful developments of
the intellect and the life and of ideal, ethical, aesthetic, psychic,
emotional and sensuous and physical knowledge and idea and vision
and experience of which the epics are the early record and the rest
of the literature the continuation; but the foundation remains the
same throughout, and whatever new and often larger types and significant
figures replace the old or intervene to add and modify and alter
the whole ensemble, are in their essential build and character transmutations
and extensions of the original vision and first spiritual experience
and never an unconnected departure. There is a persistence, a continuity
of the Indian mind in its literary creation in spite of great changes
as consistent as that which we find in painting and sculpture.
The Veda is the creation of an early intuitive and symbolical
mentality to which the later mind of man, strongly intellectualised
and governed on the one side by reasoning idea and abstract conception,
on the other hand by the facts of life and matter accepted as they
present themselves to the senses and positive intelligence without
seeking in them for any divine or mystic significance, indulging
the imagination as a play of the aesthetic fancy rather than as
an opener of the doors of truth and only trusting to its suggestions
when they are confirmed by the logical reason or by physical experience,
aware only of carefully intellectualised intuitions and recalcitrant
for the most part to any others, has grown a total stranger. It
is not surprising therefore that the Veda should have become unintelligible
to our minds except in its most outward shell of language, and that
even very imperfectly known owing to the obstacle of an antique
and ill-understood diction, and that the most inadequate interpretations
should be made which reduce this great creation of the young and
splendid mind of humanity to a botched and defaced scrawl, an incoherent
hotch-potch of the absurdities of a primitive imagination perplexing
what would be otherwise the quite plain, flat and common record
of a naturalistic religion which mirrored only and could only minister
to the crude and materialistic desires of a barbaric life mind.
The Veda became to the later scholastic and ritualistic idea of
Indian priests and pundits nothing better than a book of mythology
and sacrificial ceremonies; European scholars seeking in it for
what was alone to them of any rational interest, the history, myths
and popular religious notions of a primitive people, have done yet
worse wrong to the Veda and by insisting on a wholly external rendering
still farther stripped it of its spiritual interest and its poetic
greatness and beauty.
But this was not what it was to the Vedic Rishis themselves or
to the great seers and thinkers who came after them and developed
out of their pregnant and
luminous intuitions their own wonderful structures of thought
and speech built upon an unexampled spiritual revelation and experience.
The Veda was to these early seers the Word discovering the Truth
and clothing in image and symbol the mystic significances of life.
It was a divine discovery and unveiling of the potencies of the
word, of its mysterious revealing and creative capacity, not the
word of the logical and reasoning or the aesthetic intelligence,
but the intuitive and inspired rhythmic utterance, the mantra. Image
and myth were freely used, not as an imaginative indulgence, but
as living parables and symbols of things that were very real to
their speakers and could not otherwise find their own intimate and
native shape in utterance, and the imagination itself was a priest
of greater realities than those that meet and hold the eye and mind
limited by the external suggestions of life and the physical existence.
This was their idea of the sacred poet, a mind visited by some highest
light and its forms of idea and word, a seer and hearer of the Truth,
kavayah satyashrutah . The poets of the Vedic verse certainly did
not regard their function as it is represented by modern scholars,
they did not look on themselves as a sort of superior medicine-men
and makers of hymn and incantation to a robust and barbarous tribe,
but as seers and thinkers, rishi, dhira. These singers believed
that they were in possession of a high, mystic and hidden truth,
claimed to be the bearers of a speech acceptable to a divine knowledge,
and expressly so speak of their utterances, as secret words which
declare their whole significance only to the seer, kavaye nivacana
ninya vacamsi . And to those who came after them the Veda was a
book of knowledge, and even of the supreme knowledge, a revelation,
a great utterance of eternal and impersonal truth as it had been
seen and heard in the inner experience of inspired and semi-divine
thinkers. The smallest circumstances of the sacrifice around which
the hymns were written were intended to carry a symbolic and psychological
power of significance, as was well known to the writers of the ancient
Brahmanas.
The sacred verses, each by itself held to be full of a divine
meaning, were taken by the thinkers of the Upanishads as the profound
and pregnant seed-words of the truth they sought and the highest
authority they could give for their own sublime utterances was a
supporting citation from their predecessors with the formula, tad
esha ricabhyukta, “This is that word which was spoken by the Rig
Veda.” Western scholars choose to imagine that the successors of
the Vedic Rishis were in error, that, except for some later hymns,
they put a false and non-existent meaning into the old verses and
that they themselves, divided from the Rishis not only by ages of
time but by many gulfs and separating seas of an intellectualised
mentality, know infinitely better. But mere common sense ought to
tell us that those who were so much nearer in both ways to the original
poets had a better chance of holding at least the essential truth
of the matter and suggests at least the strong probability that
the Veda was really what it professes to be, the seeking for a mystic
knowledge, the first form of the constant attempt of the Indian
mind, to which it has always been faithful, to look beyond the appearances
of the physical world and through its own inner experiences to the
godheads, powers, self-existence of the One of whom the sages speak
variously - the famous phrase in which the Veda utters its own central
secret, ekam sad vipra bahudha vadanti.
The real character of the Veda can best be understood by taking
it anywhere and rendering it straightforwardly according to its
own phrases and images. A famous German scholar rating from his
high pedestal of superior intelligence the silly persons who find
sublimity in the Veda, tells us that it is full of childish, silly,
even monstrous conceptions, that it is tedious, low, commonplace,
that it represents human nature on a low level of selfishness and
worldliness and that only here and there are a few rare sentiments
that come from the depths of the soul. It may be made so if we put
our own mental conceptions into the words of the Rishis, but if
we read them as they are without any such false translation into
what we think early barbarians ought to have said and thought, we
shall find instead a sacred poetry sublime and powerful in its words
and images, though with another kind of language and imagination
than we now prefer and appreciate, deep and subtle in its psychological
experience and stirred by a moved soul of vision and utterance.
Hear rather the word itself of the Veda.
States upon states are born, covering over covering [Or, “the
coverer of the coverer”.] awakens to knowledge: in the lap of the
mother he wholly sees. They have called to him, getting a wide knowledge,
they guard sleeplessly the strength, they have entered into the
strong city. The peoples born on earth increase the luminous (force)
of the son of the White Mother; he has gold on his neck, he is large
of speech, he is as if by (the power of) this honey wine a seeker
of plenty. He is like pleasant and desirable milk, he is a thing
uncompanioned and is with the two who are companions and is as a
heat that is the belly of plenty and is invincible and an overcomer
of many. Play, O Ray, and manifest thyself.* Footnote: Literally,
“become towards us”.
Or again in the succeeding hymn, - Those (flames) of thee, the
forceful (godhead), that move not and are increased and puissant,
uncling the hostility and crookedness of one who has another law.
O Fire, we choose thee for our priest and the means of effectuation
of our strength and in the sacrifices bringing the food of thy pleasure
we call thee by the word. . . . O god of perfect works, may we be
for the felicity, for the truth, revelling with the rays, revelling
with the heroes.
And finally let us take the bulk of the third hymn that follows
couched in the ordinary symbols of the sacrifice, - As the Manu
we set thee in thy place, as the Manu we kindle thee: O Fire, O
Angiras, as the Manu sacrifice to the gods for him who desires the
godheads. O Fire, well pleased thou art kindled in the human being
and the ladles go to thee continually. . . . Thee all the gods with
one pleasure (in thee) made their messenger and serving thee, O
seer, (men) in the sacrifices adore the god. Let the mortal adore
the divine Fire with sacrifice to the godheads. Kindled, flame forth,
O Bright One. Sit in the seat of Truth, sit in the seat of peace.*
Footnote: I have translated these passages with as close a literalness
as the English language will admit. Let the reader compare the original
and judge whether this is not the sense of the verses.
That, whatever interpretation we choose to put on its images,
is a mystic and symbolic poetry and that is the real Veda.
The character of Vedic poetry apparent from these typical verses
need not surprise or baffle us when we see what will be evident
from a comparative study of Asiatic literature, that though distinguished
by its theory and treatment of the Word, its peculiar system of
images and the complexity of its thought and symbolised experience,
it is in fact the beginning of a form of symbolic or figurative
imagery for the poetic expression of spiritual experience which
reappears constantly in later Indian writing, the figures of the
Tantras and Puranas, the figures of the Vaishnava poets, - one might
add even a certain element in the modern poetry of Tagore, - and
has its kindred movements in certain Chinese poets and in the images
of the Sufis. The poet has to express a spiritual and psychical
knowledge and experience and he cannot do it altogether or mainly
in the more abstract language of the philosophical thinker, for
he has to bring out, not the naked idea of it, but as vividly as
possible its very life and most intimate touches. He has to reveal
in one way or another a whole world within him and the quite inner
and spiritual significances of the world around him and also, it
may well be, godheads, powers, visions and experiences of planes
of consciousness other than the one with which our normal minds
are familiar. He uses or starts with the images taken from his own
normal and outward life and that of humanity and from visible Nature,
and though they do not of themselves actually express, yet obliges
them to express by implication or to figure the spiritual and psychic
idea and experience. He takes them selecting freely his notation
of images according to his insight or imagination and transmutes
them into instruments of another significance and at the same time
pours a direct spiritual meaning into the Nature and life to which
they belong, applies outward figures to inner things and brings
out their latent and inner spiritual or psychic significance into
life's outward figures and circumstances. Or an outward figure nearest
to the inward experience, its material counterpart, is taken throughout
and used with such realism and consistency that while it indicates
to those who possess it the spiritual experience, it means only
the external thing to others, - just as the Vaishnava poetry of
Bengal makes to the devout mind a physical and emotional image or
suggestion of the love of the human soul for God, but to the profane
is nothing but a sensuous and passionate love poetry hung conventionally
round the traditional human-divine personalities of Krishna and
Radha. The two methods may meet together, the fixed system of outward
images be used as the body of the poetry, while freedom is often
taken to pass their first limits, to treat them only as initial
suggestions and transmute subtly or even cast them aside or subdue
into a secondary strain or carry them out of themselves so that
the translucent veil they offer to our minds lifts from or passes
into the open revelation. The last is the method of the Veda and
it varies according to the passion and stress of the sight in the
poet or the exaltation of his utterance.
The poets of the Veda had another mentality than ours, their
use of their images is of a peculiar kind and an antique cast of
vision gives a strange outline to their substance. The physical
and the psychical worlds were to their eyes a manifestation and
a twofold and diverse and yet connected and similar figure of cosmic
godheads, the inner and outer life of man a divine commerce with
the gods, and behind was the one spirit or being of which the gods
were names and personalities and powers. These godheads were at
once masters of physical Nature and its principles and forms their
godheads and their bodies and inward divine powers with their corresponding
states and energies born in our psychic being because they are the
soul powers of the cosmos, the guardians of truth and immortality,
the children of the Infinite, and each of them too is in his origin
and his last reality the supreme Spirit putting in front one of
his aspects. The life of man was to these seers a thing of mixed
truth and falsehood, a movement from mortality to immortality, from
mixed light and darkness to the splendour of a divine Truth whose
home is above in the Infinite but which can be built up here in
man's soul and life, a battle between the children of light and
the sons of Night, a getting of treasure, of the wealth, the booty
given by the gods to the human warrior, and a journey and a sacrifice;
and of these things they spoke in a fixed system of images taken
from Nature and from the surrounding life of the war-like, pastoral
and agricultural Aryan peoples and centred round the cult of Fire
and the worship of the powers of living Nature and the institution
of sacrifice. The details of outward existence and of the sacrifice
were in their life and practice symbols, and in their poetry not
dead symbols or artificial metaphors, but living and powerful suggestions
and counterparts of inner things. And they used too for their expression
a fixed and yet variable body of other images and a glowing web
of myth and parable, images that became parables, parables that
became myths and myths that remained always images, and yet all
these things were to them, in a way that can only be understood
by those who have entered into a certain order of psychic experience,
actual realities. The physical melted its shades into the lustres
of the psychic, the psychic deepened into the light of the spiritual
and there was no sharp dividing line in the transition, but a natural
blending and intershading of their suggestions and colours. It is
evident that a poetry of this kind, written by men with this kind
of vision or imagination, cannot either be interpreted or judged
by the standards of a reason and taste observant only of the canons
of the physical existence. The invocation “Play, O Ray, and become
towards us” is at once a suggestion of the leaping up and radiant
play of the potent sacrificial flame on the physical altar and of
a similar psychical phenomenon, the manifestation of the saving
flame of a divine power and light within us. The Western critic
sneers at the bold and reckless and to him monstrous image in which
Indra son of earth and heaven is said to create his own father and
mother; but if we remember that Indra is the supreme spirit in one
of its eternal and constant aspects, creator of earth and heaven,
born as a cosmic godhead between the mental and physical worlds
and recreating their powers in man, we shall see that the image
is not only a powerful but in fact a true and revealing figure,
and in the Vedic technique it does not matter that it outrages the
physical imagination since it expresses a greater actuality as no
other figure could have done with the same awakening aptness and
vivid poetical force. The Bull and Cow of the Veda, the shining
herds of the Sun lying hidden in the cave are strange enough creatures
to the physical mind, but they do not belong to the earth and in
their own plane they are at once images and actual things and full
of life and significance. It is in this way that throughout we must
interpret and receive the Vedic poetry according to its own spirit
and vision and the psychically natural, even if to us strange and
supranatural, truth of its ideas and figures.
The Veda thus understood stands out, apart from its interest
as the world's first yet extant Scripture, its earliest interpretation
of man and the Divine and the universe, as a remarkable, a sublime
and powerful poetic creation. It is in its form and speech no barbaric
production. The Vedic poets are masters of a consummate technique,
their rhythms are carved like chariots of the gods and borne on
divine and ample wings of sound, and are at once concentrated and
wide-waved, great in movement and subtle in modulation, their speech
lyric by intensity and epic by elevation, an utterance of great
power, pure and bold and grand in outline, a speech direct and brief
in impact, full to overflowing in sense and suggestion so that each
verse exists at once as a strong and sufficient thing in itself
and takes its place as a large step between what came before and
what comes after. A sacred and hieratic tradition faithfully followed
gave them both their form and substance, but this substance consisted
of the deepest psychic and spiritual experiences of which the human
soul is capable and the forms seldom or never degenerate into a
convention, because what they are intended to convey was lived in
himself by each poet and made new to his own mind in expression
by the subtleties or sublimities of his individual vision. The utterances
of the greatest seers, Vishwamitra, Vamadeva, Dirghatamas and many
others, touch the most extraordinary heights and amplitudes of a
sublime and mystic poetry and there are poems like the Hymn of Creation
that move in a powerful clarity on the summits of thought on which
the Upanishads lived constantly with a more sustained breathing.
The mind of ancient India did not err when it traced back all its
philosophy, religion and essential things of its culture to these
seer-poets, for all the future spirituality of her people is contained
there in seed or in first expression.
It is one great importance of a right understanding of the Vedic
hymns as a form of sacred literature that it helps us to see the
original shaping not only of the master ideas that governed the
mind of India, but of its characteristic types of spiritual experience,
its turn of imagination, its creative temperament and the kind of
significant forms in which it persistently interpreted its sight
of self and things and life and the universe. It is in a great part
of the literature the same turn of inspiration and self-expression
that we see in the architecture, painting and sculpture. Its first
character is a constant sense of the infinite, the cosmic, and of
things as seen in or affected by the cosmic vision, set in or against
the amplitude of the one and infinite; its second peculiarity is
a tendency to see and render its spiritual experience in a great
richness of images taken from the inner psychic plane or in physical
images transmuted by the stress of a psychic significance and impression
and line and idea colour; and its third tendency is to image the
terrestrial life often magnified, as in the Mahabharata and Ramayana,
or else subtilised in the transparencies of a larger atmosphere,
attended by a greater than the terrestrial meaning or at any rate
presented against the background of the spiritual and psychic worlds
and not alone in its own separate figure. The spiritual, the infinite
is near and real and the gods are real and the worlds beyond not
so much beyond as immanent in our own existence. That which to the
Western mind is myth and imagination is here an actuality and a
strand of the life of our inner being, what is there beautiful poetic
idea and philosophic speculation is here a thing constantly realised
and present to the experience. It is this turn of the Indian mind,
its spiritual sincerity and psychic positivism, that makes the Veda
and Upanishads and the later religious and religio-philosophic poetry
so powerful in inspiration and intimate and living in expression
and image, and it has its less absorbing but still very sensible
effect on the working of the poetic idea and imagination even in
the more secular literature.
Suggested Further Reading
|
Source: This article was originally published
in the Arya in 1920 and is currently in the public
domain. It is reproduced here as per the international conventions
on copyright laws for the benefit of our readers.
|
|