Sunday, October 16, 2005

The Mechanism of Maya

According to the English dictionary (I refer to the online dictionary, Dictionary.com) Maya translates something like this:

    1) The power of a god or demon to transform a concept into an element of the sensible world.
    2) The transitory, manifold appearance of the sensible world, which obscures the undifferentiated spiritual reality from which it originates, the illusory appearance of the sensible world.

Maya

This is a story many of us have heard or read in our childhood. It is a story about the Celestial Sage Narada and the Lord Vishnu (in the Avataar of Sri Krishna)

    Once Narada and the Lord were walking, when Narada asked, “Lord, would you please explain to me the secret of this magic called Maya?" Sri Krishna hesitated, and suggested that Narada wait, lest the concept of Maya be too overpowering for him.

    But Narada would not listen. So the Lord replied, "Of course. Let us sit down under this tree, while I tell you everything. But it's terribly hot and I am thirsty; would you please get me some water?” “Yes my Lord,” Narada replied, and he scampered across the fields to find water. The sun beat down with all its might and the tired Narada walked on and on. Finally he reached a village and approached the nearest house. The door opened -- and there stood a woman. He asked her for water. She brought a pitcher of water and poured it out for him, while he drank. Drinking the water, he looked up and realized that she was the most beautiful woman he had ever seen. Narada was enamored with her beauty. Narada approached her father and asked him for her hand in marriage. The girl's father accepted and they were married.

    The couple settled down to a happily married life. They had children and watched them grow up. All the while, Narada's glory and fame spread far and wide, as did the land he possessed. Narada was ecstatic with life and its pleasures.

    One day, a terrible flood arrived out of nowhere. Narada managed to hold on to his wife and children in the foaming currents of the flood. But the force of the water was so strong, that his wife and children were washed away. As Narada held on to an uprooted tree for dear life, tears streaming down his cheeks he called out to the Lord.

    “Lord! Why did you let me get to this state? My loved ones are all dead and I am struggling to survive...” Then suddenly he saw Lord Krishna sitting under the tree, as he had left him in what seemed several years before. The Lord asked him kindly, “Narada, where is my water?” Narada realized then that what he had experienced was 'Maya', that his loving wife and wonderful life as a family man no longer existed.

I think Maya is a greatly misunderstood concept. We often hear people saying, “Oh! Maya is Illusion; the World we live in is Maya, therefore nothing is real”...and so on. Surely, on the surface, Maya means 'Illusion'. But Maya is not merely syntax. There is a greater meaning to the word. Therefore a simplistic translation to 'illusion' is not sufficient to explain it.

In some of my previous articles, I have described the nature of Consciousness and the world-view held by the Yogis, Mystics and Shamans of various ancient traditions of Spirituality. Let me try to summarize these concepts for the reader's benefit.

In the Mystic's world-view, the primary constituent and life force of this Universe is Conscious Energy – or Consciousness. It is present throughout the Universe, everywhere. It is to the Universe as the atmosphere is to the Earth. It is the core and being of everything.

Consciousness is Intelligent, beyond any quantification or qualification. The material realm that we can see and sense is merely a manifestation of this Consciousness. Or in other words, the Material Universe is a subset of Consciousness. Now, since Consciousness is present everywhere, we as living beings have the inherent ability to tap into it (as we do the physical manifestation of this consciousness – our Material Universe), provided we learn how to manipulate our sensory mechanism appropriately.

Maya is the manifestation of Consciousness, those we observe (and also those we do not observe). Our physical bodies are manifestations of Consciousness as is our physical world – and this is what Maya is. It is reality and not illusory in that sense. But, it is not the only reality (or the Ultimate reality, so to speak). It is merely a fraction of the consciousness.

The human mind is capable of tapping into this Consciousness and when this has been accomplished directly, the state of Kaivalyam or Enlightenment is achieved.

The Auric Egg

As I have referred to earlier (Inner Dialog), a great influence in my metaphysical leaning has been Mesoamerican Shamanism. It is through the teachings of this tradition that I begun to understand Hinduism and Yogic philosophy. Now, I don't claim to be an expert – I am just a layperson trying to walk the ancient trail of spirituality.

Reading books written by Carlos Castaneda on his apprenticeship with Don Juan Matus (the Native American Sorcerer), I came to understand several concepts of our traditions, obfuscated as they are in mythology and metaphors. It is my belief that a more straightforward system of knowledge (such as Nagualism provides) is very essential in carrying on the Mystical traditions in the modern world.

Don Juan had this way (or perhaps it was Castaneda) of putting things so simplistically that a common man like myself would understand a lot of what he had to say. After I learnt about Don Juan's worldview, I turned back to Indian (Hindu) traditions. I was looking for reassurance that what I had learnt was indeed correct.

And I found that indeed what I had learnt from both my Hindu upbringing (not overly religious) and my reading of Castaneda were identical.

What struck me as most fascinating was the idea of “Seeing Consciousness as it flows in the Universe”. According to the Shamans of Mesoamerica, it is possible for a practitioner of Shamanism to see in that way. Later I corroborated this with the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. It is my opinion that the 'Samadhi' state that is referred to in the Yoga Sutras (both Nirbija and Sabija Samadhi) are different levels of “seeing consciousness as it really flows in the Universe”.

A general understanding of 'Samadhi' is of a state of awareness in which the Yogi is oblivious to his surroundings, “immersed in Cosmic Consciousness” or something to that order. I think this 'immersion' of the Yogi in cosmic consciousness is indeed being in that state where one can perceive and understand the 'flow of energy' all around. When the 'true' nature of the Consciousness can be observed.

This state of being is beyond reason or logic. It simply is.

Well, the Shamans believe that every human being (and for that matter, every conscious being) has a sheath/body of Energy which they can see and call it 'the Luminous Egg' -- perhaps for the lack of something better to call it. The Indian Yogis called it the PiNdANda (or the Auric Egg).

According to the Shamans, this luminous body (egg) has numerous filaments of energy all over it. The energy body has a focal point (of sorts) about the size of a tennis ball, positioned two feet behind the left shoulder blade, within the egg.

The rays of Consciousness that are always in flux, throughout space pass through this focal point (which is called the 'assemblage point'), thus giving rise to our awareness of this Consciousness in the sensory world. That is the material world as we see it. The assemblage point can be shifted within and outside the auric egg and with each movement of this assemblage point, our perception changes, as does the Material Universe as we see it.

Of those who have read Castaneda, some have perhaps taken his writings seriously. Others might have found them offensive. For he writes about the 'Peyote' ceremonies, of ingesting 'hallucinogenic Mushrooms' and a few other psychotropic drugs that he consumed under Don Juan's tutelage. (A lot of drug addicts read his books and assumed that he endorsed drug abuse and partied till they dropped). But in all his efforts with Castaneda, Don Juan's intention was merely to make his assemblage point shift, to show him a separate reality. Don Juan later warned Carlos not to continue with these drugs since they can be dangerous to the person.

Anyhow, my purpose for going into these details was to provide an alternate point of view regarding Maya and how it works. Don Juan's attempts to shift Castaneda's assemblage point was to demonstrate the mechanism of Maya – about how the shift of the assemblage point would change the way Carlos viewed his 'ultimate reality'. The Yogis have been doing that since time immemorial, polishing and enhancing the PraNa in the body, meditating to bring about movements of their assemblage points. Moving through Maya to achieve Samadhi.

The ideas I projected here might seem fantastical to you, dear reader. But they answered a lot of my questions. Perhaps, they will do the same for you...or at the very least, they might provide an alternate way of looking at things – a different Maya.

Indic Culture in a Metaphysical Framework

Overview

Rajiv Malhotra's essay on Sulekha (Geopolitics and Sanskrit Phobia) got me thinking about it along the lines of the “Metaphysics of Quality” (Since Metaphysics of Quality is quite a mouthful, I'll refer to it as MoQ henceforth). I had written another article earlier with a brief introduction to MoQ (and a reading – albeit, a non-scholarly one, of Indian Secularism using the MoQ Framework) – Deconstructing Indian Secularism.

Rajiv's article delves deep into the phenomenon of Sanskrit phobia and declining Sanskriti (Culture) of Bharatiya Sabhyata (Indian Civilization). He writes about the apathy of the Indian intelligentsia towards Sanskrit and Sanskriti, and how that is detrimental to building a strong and secure India of the future. In course of the following discussions, he calls for the discussion of “Culture as a shared asset of a nation.”

This essay is my humble effort at answering that call – an attempt at studying Indian culture through MoQ-tinted lenses.

The Phenomenon called Culture

In order to understand the import of Sanskriti in the Indian context, we first have to understand what Culture is all about. Now, I'm not claiming to be an authority on Culture, but here's what I think of, when I hear the term Culture (I have touched upon this topic in a previous article called The Peculiar Case of the NRI Hindu)

i) Culture is the expression of the intellect of a social group (poetry, literature, science, technology, etc).
ii) Culture is the collection of lifestyles that a social group offers to its members – could be several, could be one.
iii) Culture is the philosophy (philosophies) that has originated as a result of that social group.
iv) Culture is the arts and aesthetics of that social group.
v) Culture is the ethical and moral values subscribed to by the social group.
vi) Culture is the spiritual and religious heritage and legacy of the social group.

Culture can also be likened to the “Operating System” of a Social machine – the framework and rule sets which govern the operation of the machine (Of course, the Culture OS is a lot more complicated and has a lot more “fuzzy” levels than a computer OS has). If we were to look at such a model, we could say that the spiritual, philosophical and ethical/moral aspects of the culture form the kernel of the OS. The artistic, intellectual and lifestyle aspects of Culture form its shell and various applications.

Who then (one might be given to wonder) is this all for? Who is the User? This model would say that the user is a “part” of the social machine. In fact, the user of this machine called Society, which runs an OS (and due to an OS) called Culture is also an integral component of the machine. You see (I'll stop my flights of matrixian fancy in a bit), the OS and the Social Machine was built to make the process of living life, and getting better at it easier for the individual being.

What does MoQ have to say about this?

According to MoQ, the primary component/element of this Universe is “Quality” and this “Quality” is differentiated into two main categories - “Static Patterns” and “Dynamic Patterns.” Static patterns are static and unchanging, whereas dynamic patterns are ever changing and mercurial.

Evolution happens in “ratchet-like” steps – each stop in the ratcheting action is a particular checkpoint in evolution (inexact quote from Lila – An Inquiry into Morals by Robert Pirsig)

Evolution is the process of dynamic patterns of Quality, coming together to form static patterns (getting recorded onto some media) and then (these static patterns) getting acted upon by a drive towards dynamic patterns again. Perhaps we could say that Quality patterns tend to be unstable (dynamic), and in order to sustain itself, Quality would therefore require to change itself from an unstable state to a state of stability. But then, there will always remain a dynamic aspect of Quality driving these “stable” (static) patterns towards instability. If Quality were to be a living being, one could say that its life-cycle is an oscillation from Dynamic to Static to Dynamic, over and over again.

So Pirsig's MoQ says that the first collection of Quality (in the process of stabilizing) was recorded into forming “Inorganic” patterns of Quality (static – matter, if you may). These inorganic patterns were then acted upon by “Dynamic” Quality (or the natural tendency of Quality towards instability) to form the next level of evolution – the “Organic” patterns of Quality (microbial organisms, plants, animals, man at various stages of interaction/integration). These Organic patterns then in turn got influenced by Dynamic Quality to form “Social” patterns of Quality and “Intellectual” patterns of Quality. The social patterns are what we call Culture, Civilization (in the human context) and the Intellectual patterns are what we call Intellect (the two interact all the time – sometimes complementing each other, sometimes at loggerheads).

Pirsig's analysis of the American and European Societies (he also touches upon India in the Vedic period) in his book Lila – An Inquiry into Morals is insightful, to say the least. I will attempt to provide a brief narrative of Indian Culture and Society (through its evolving lifetime), while trying to extrapolate his standards.

Indian Society and Indian Culture

Let us look at a brief history and some possible timelines of the evolving Indian Civilization (I know this might be unacceptable to our “scientological friends out there”).

Mehrgarh through Sarasvati/Sindhu Civilization -

Dated around 7000 BCE, this is considered to be among the earliest neolithic settlements in South Asia. Archaeologists divide the evolution of Indic Culture and Civilization into the following phases:

  • Early Food Producing Era (Neolithic – Mehrgarh Period 1 (7000 – 5500 BCE))
  • Regionalization Era (Mehrgarh Periods 2, 3, 4, 5 and Early Harappa to Harappa Period 2 (approx. 5500 BCE to 2600 BCE altogether))
  • Localization Era (2600 BCE – 1300 BCE)
  • Integration Era (2200 – 1900 BCE)

What the archaeologists seem to be saying is that the phenomena of the neolithic settlements and the “Indus Valley” (Sarasvati/Sindhu) Civilizations are not mutually exclusive, but natural progressions of the Indic civilization. Also some indologists/archaeologists have suggested that the Vedic civilization was the same as the “Indus Valley”/Sarasvati-Sindhu civilizations.

Several folks have written extensively about this topic on Sulekha and therefore I will not dwell too much on it. What I did want to impress upon (with this information) is that there is no real “evidence” (save Max Mueller's word) that there was any Aryan Invasion (or Aryan Migration on a large scale). So for the purpose of this essay, I will consider the early Indic Culture to be the same as the Vedic Culture.

As the human population in the Indic region started to evolve, they naturally started grouping into social structures. According to MoQ, this is an integral part of evolution and has to happen to prevent order from disintegrating into a lower Quality of order (or disorder for that matter).

In course of this phase of evolution, the Vedic social structures formed. The various social orders came into existence. Subjective inquiry became the primary method of “scientific methodology” (as opposed to objective inquiry used today) and gave birth to the Vedic material and the early schools of Indian philosophy (actually, more importantly the visionary nature of the early Vedic material). The early Vedic literature reflected this – the emphasis on “Subjective” analysis of Nature, the environment (leading to holistic observations of patterns and an emphasis on such, allegorical and metaphorical descriptions/encoding of these observations and “revealed” truths) and an emphasis on Order and rituals (Strangely enough, ancient Chinese society seemed to mirror this (as did the early Greek world) – with the development of Taoist philosophy and works like the I Ching). The concept of Rta was the embodiment of emphasis on order. Rta means “the course of things” and signified a state of Order – of Moral and Righteous quality. Rta called for observance of ritual ceremony, of yagna, of the right way of living.

The ancient Vedic seers, relying on their five sensory organs, observational skills and deep introspection (and meditation) explained the world in terms of principles such as Rta. This phase of Indic evolution was what MoQ would call “Social order”-centric static patterns of Quality. Although there was intellect involved, the emphasis was on orderly conduct (of social, physical and mental faculties). Sciences such as astronomy (with precision that is mind-boggling even by today's standards) developed as well.

As time went by, natural (environmental) conditions changed the natural habitat of the Indic ancients (possibly with the drying up of the Sarasvati River) and with a mass exodus towards the Gangetic plains (and possibly further south), the nature of the Vedic social structures and cultural nuances changed. The culture and civilization that had developed and flourished on the banks of river Sarasvati was on the verge of extinction, and the survivors of this calamity had to begin the process of rebuilding (probably from scratch). The oral tradition of learning and narration from the early Vedic periods (and the learning tools such as meters, Sanskrit language, inflections) enabled the earlier material to survive. But perhaps the ability to really understand this material was not completely transmitted. As a result, we have the later materials such as the Upanishads establishing a middle ground.

Phenomena such as the extinction (or near extinction) of a culture or civilization are plentiful in recorded history. Some happen due to natural reasons (droughts, floods, etc) while others due to man-made reasons (war, plague, diseases, etc). That evolution is not infallible is evident through such phenomena (sometimes the locked position of a ratchet slips and slides back to a previous state or an intermediary state – to start over again). This time around, the Intellectual patterns of Quality seemed to gain an upper hand. Schools of thought such as sAnkhya, vaisheshika, uttara mimAmsa and nyAya developed. Now, simple acceptance of Rta was not enough – there had to be logic involved – to prove or disprove any specific statement that an ancient seer might have made. In light of this more “Objective” method of Inquiry, Vedic culture (especially the knowledge culture) transformed into Vedantic culture – and “Dharma.”

Jainism, Buddhism and Vedantism

As the primary method of inquiry shifted from “subjective” (meditative, direct experiential) to “objective” (albeit Vedanta still considered shabda pramANa to be superior to inferential or perceptional knowledge – that is anumAna or pratyaksha), the ability to acquire “shabda pramANa” reduced leading to an over reliance on either the ritualistic traditions of the older Vedic or an over-emphasis on logic (nyAya) (either social patterns of Quality superseding Intellectual patterns or vice versa). From that rubble arose Jainism and Buddhism. According to sources, Jain teachings are said to have existed for a few thousand years before their formalization into the Jain Dharma by Mahavira. The core philosophy of Jainism is tied into socially (although tinged in moral idealism) accepted practices that need to be followed in order to attain Siddhatva (permanent release from the worldly cycles). This is identical to the Vedic concepts of Rta (at least from the surface) though the method of adherence is different (rta relied on observance of ritual ceremonies etc whereas Jainism prescribed extreme ascetism and non-reliance on divine intervention, rather a self-reliant dependence on the prescribed method).

Buddhism is said to have been an improvement on Jainism (with the Buddha's middle-path way) in response to the latter's hard and difficult demands. With the focus on the 8-fold path (Right Understanding, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration) – the Buddhist philosophy tried to reconcile the Social Patterns (ethical/moral values, etc) with the Intellectual patterns (logic) and went on to gain immense popularity (and continues to do so to this day).

Although (like every other aspect of Indic history - where ascribing a date to any particular historical figure or event is rife with controversy) ascribing a date to Adi Shankaracharya is controversial, he brought about a revival of Hinduism (call it Vedantism) by appealing to the logical aspect of Indic society (Intellectual patterns of Quality superseding Social patterns). Although he prescribed the supremacy of the Vedas, Adi Shankara changed the philosophical and metaphysical aspect of Hinduism by focusing primacy on reason and logic. He probably had to do so in order to counter the eminence of Buddhism (and its concept of Shunyata). He was a great proponent and representative of the Advaita school of thought and he was perhaps single-handedly responsible for the revival of Hinduism in India.

The transmission of Indic Culture and the interaction with others

Throughout this time, Indic philosophies and culture went through several developments and even spread to other parts of the world through trade links, missionary activities (to Greece, Rome, West, South, Central and East Asia) and migration (to South East Asia). This was evolution in effect -- the spread of philosophical (that is Intellectual) and social values. There might have been cross-pollination as well – perhaps with Greek and Chinese influences creeping into Indic schools of thought and Indic culture.

As India's culture started impacting other cultures, a legend called India was born (from before the times of Alexander of Macedonia, the Greeks knew of India; and this knowledge is what led Alexander to want to invade/conquer her). Greek invasions into India created openings for trade with India and transmission of Indic culture to the Greek territories in Western Asia and Europe.

Until the first millennium of the current era (CE) (and perhaps a few centuries into the second millennium) some aspects of Indic culture grew and certain aspects waned. Mathematics and astronomy (tied with one another) developed and saw several stalwarts come forth -- geniuses like Aryabhatta, Bhaskara, Varahamihira, Baudhayana, Apastamba and Panini. Great medical treatises were written by Charaka and Sushruta.

The grand intellectual and cultural framework left by the Vedic and Upanishadic Rishis helped grow and sustain Indic culture (art forms flourished, mathematics flourished, philosophical schools grew, sciences developed), all the while, also enriching the neighboring cultures and societies. But any commentary on Indic culture is not complete without referring to the infamous “Caste System” and other social degenerations. These phenomena can be attributed to over emphasis and “unreasonable” dependence on scriptural sources that were already so antiquated that most people interpreting them would miss their metaphorical/allegorical values. This is by no means an attempt to justify them, but I consider them to be out of scope of this essay (beyond what I already expressed) and shall refrain from further comment on these topics.

With the rise of Christianity and Islam in West Asia, during the late first millennium and early to mid second millennium CE, the world saw an increase of enforcement of social patterns of Quality – both Christianity and Islam were (and probably still are) highly static and overly social in nature (meaning, the Intellectual Quality of both these entities are secondary in comparison to their social aspects). In comparison with Rta these ideologies were more inflexible and intolerant (they did not have an inclusive philosophy like Rta or Dharma). Unlike Rta, these social systems lacked the synergy between Intellect and Social values. Islamic invasions in India might have started with intentions of loot and pillage, but eventually ended up in occupation. This interaction with Islam saw forcible imposition of Islamic social patterns (for the natural tendency of this static system of Quality is to “bring” everything around it to equilibrium with itself). But not all interactions with India resulted in tyrannical impositions; Sufism, an eclectic blend of Indic mystical traditions and Islam (with an emphasis on direct experience, or interaction with Dynamic Quality) was born.

Interactions with Christianity were no less disastrous for India. The Portuguese unleashed a reign of terror in Goa, all in the name of expanding the good church. (NOTE: Native Americans experienced similar genocides (albeit on a much larger scale) during the Spanish Inquisitions during the Middle Ages of the second millennium.) The subsequent interactions with Christianity (with the arrival of the British) had a more covert and indirect effect on India. In fact, the final crushing blow to Dharmic traditions was delivered by the British, in the guise of spreading the “white man's burden”. The imposition of British education in India, at the expense of traditional schools of knowledge brought this millennia old traditional way of life to a grinding halt. But not all of this was bad – with reforms in degenerate social practices brought about via the interaction between the West and Indic minds. Perhaps this is the nature of evolution – when a particular system or static position does not work any more on the ratchet of evolution, Dynamic Quality affects in unpredictable ways forcing changes. Perhaps it was to be in India's evolutionary destiny – and that's why traditional Indic culture took a relative backseat.

Values arising from Intellectual Patterns of Quality seem to have a natural tendency towards deteriorating into rancid social dogma. We can see that happen with religions – we see that happening with some other ideologies, such as communism and its child socialism (although, capitalism and democracy have their share of dogma too). Indian history went through (and is still struggling against) a struggle against the forces of these dogmatic ideologies. These ideologies might have started off from intellectual quality, but soon solidified into dogmatic rules – astounding in their incredible propensity towards mayhem, tyranny and plain apathy (talk about irony, that's probably the greatest example of it in the modern world – the ideology of the people turning against the people when it was threatened – China, the former Soviet Union and all the other communist nations are good examples). Modern India too was greatly afflicted by this ideology – and in fact we still have two states in India that are ruled by the communists. India's natural ascendancy back to the top of the world's food chain (as a leader in Intellectual, material and spiritual wealth – being a Dharmic nation) was greatly deterred by this ideology (and its offspring – socialism). Instead of allowing a natural resumption of the flow of the national destiny towards Dynamic Quality and higher evolution, it was set back by forcibly retarding (and at times reversing this direction) by the socialist leadership in India. It was only recently, when the natural tendency of humans (as intellectual entities on a journey of evolution) and society (as a social entity on a journey of evolution) was allowed to re-emerge did India start prospering again. A key observation to make (in light of this ascendancy by India) is the rise in the sense of re-acquiring the traditional Indic knowledge systems and philosophical frameworks by several Indians. With this revival of a national (collective) sense of worth, and a renewed sense of pride in one's own traditions (not in all Indians, but many –and fast increasing), a fresh look at the way of the ancients has started. Maybe, this time around, we will be able to revive Vedic wisdom and Vedantic intelligence on our paths to Dynamic Quality.

References
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics_of_Quality

The Artist and the Muse

Art

How can one define Art? A quick search on my online dictionary yielded sixteen results. The one that caught my eye the most was this:

Skill arising from the exercise of intuitive faculties...

How many times have we been awe-struck, seeing a beautiful painting – perhaps a beautiful portrait or a serene landscape or a tumultuous seascape? Or perhaps a piece of music floating in from somewhere, struck our ear and then our hearts and minds? Art has the ability to induce overwhelming emotions – peace, love, sorrow, anger, fear…the options are unlimited. However, perhaps “really good” art is needed to generate such feelings…or maybe not. Who can say for sure?

If you, dear reader, have had the good fortune of seeing such a work of art, then you would know what I am referring to. I don't quite understand why, but listening to a lilting mountain folk melody on an Indian flute moves me immensely, and leaves me with a hollow, empty feeling, yearning for more. But that moment, which creeps up unbeknownst, never quite is replicated again. I tried it too…too many times I'm afraid – ran out to buy a tape or a CD, trying to re-capture, re-play that moment. But it was gone! The heady mix of enchanting melody, throbbing emotions, never quite repeated. These are unique moments – you come upon them, or perhaps they come upon you…and then they are gone. Art can have an effect similar to that of love – leaving one breathless, and pining for more.

The Ethereal Quality

Anyhow, the purpose of this article is not to go on and on about art and its obvious effect on people. I want to write about the “One thing” that's been stuck in my head for a long time – the source of Art. Every artist has (and needs) a Muse – that has always been the way. Usually one thinks of the Muse as a “personified” entity – say an artist's love interest or perhaps his personal deity (or God) or maybe his nation.

It took me a while and lot of puzzlement to get to the “root” of this matter. This personified/personalized muse is but merely a symbol, a motif…the real deal is more ethereal…

Call it what you like – God, Universal Consciousness, Psychic Network – there seems to be something beyond the mere material world in play when it comes to Art. The artist usually works on spontaneous bursts of “inspiration”, sometimes during “non-waking” hours. The most moving (in my humble opinion) works of Art are necessarily those, which are most “inspiration-driven” and spontaneous. For instance, a poet (poetry can be considered a form of art) would sometimes not even know what hit him (to use a gentile phrase) and end up with a poem that moves him no end.

I've read that it is similar with Scientists as well – interspersed within long periods of hard work are moments of inspiration – and the major breakthroughs usually follow these moments of inspiration (the scientists and/or the artists in our midst – please feel free to share your opinions).

So anyway, before I meander onto a completely different plane – here's my take on this Ethereal quality. It is my inference that we (human beings) always have the potential to touch this thing – this Inspiration, but seldom do, because we are caught up in our own make-believe world (inside our heads), constantly trying to uphold and reinforce the Ego. In an earlier article, I had written about Internal Dialogue and what role it has to play in upholding Ego and thus obfuscating our true nature from ourselves. Artists (generally notorious for being extremely temperamental) are in closer touch with this intangible quality than most common people are. They experience Inspiration usually when they are caught unawares (same as the rest of us), but have the ability to translate that into meaningful (or in some cases less meaningful) works of art (music, painting, sculpture, anything).

An artist can be so “into” his art that it can become a painful experience. Why, haven't we all heard of artists, who were such tortured souls, that their only respite was in their art? The paradox of being caught between two worlds is especially true for the great masters of the Arts. They have managed to come to a point where they are more in tune with the Ethereal quality than with everyday reality, but a part of them will not let go. Unfortunate for them, but the creations of such tortured beings are perhaps the most sought after works of Art in the world…

Let's look at this a little more carefully, shall we?

If we were to split human beings into four categories, the first category would be normal people like most of us, with limited access to Inspiration, going on with our even-tempered little lives, constantly chattering inside our minds; rather clueless (in a non-offensive way), might I add?

The next category would be those who are artistically inclined – more in touch with Inspiration, usually more temperamental, creating maybe the occasional, rare work of Art that would move everyone else. The folks who belong in this category are primarily into Arts purely as forms of self-expression.

The third category is that of the Artistic masters, the Raja Ravi Vermas, Rabindranath Tagores, the Pandit Ravi Shankars of humanity – those luminaries of the Arts, who continue to move us even today. These masters are more in touch with the Inspiration, and their work reflects a more bountiful flow of this inspiration – the felicity of expression. But not all the masters are alike – there are those confused beings who are racked by torment (torn between the free-flowing world of direct experience and the material world of everyday life) and their work reflects that. Vincent Van Gogh would be one great example. His work has definitely moved millions of people all over the world, over the years – but there is no tranquility, no unfettered flow of the Ethereal quality there – his work reflects his inner torment (in my humble opinion).

The fourth category is of those limited few, who have transcended Art and are in direct contact with the Ethereal quality. I will only suggest that the great Spiritual masters of this world would belong in this category…

Art and Mysticism

Not as a veritable rule of thumb, but very frequently we come across artists who belong to this aforementioned “third” category – the Artist sages of this world. Rabindranath Tagore was one such being – an author, poet, composer, artist – this sage person was perhaps not the proverbial “Rishi” (in the truest sense), but was someone who definitely experienced the “Ethereal quality” and many of his works demonstrated that. His poetry has an ageless, yet ancient feel to it…

Then we have our ancient sculptures, cave paintings in places like Ajanta, Ellora, Khajuraho, Belur, etc. If there was ever an element of the mystic in any creation of work – these places would be its living testimony. These nameless artists were obviously (again, in my humble opinion) immersed in the Ethereal quality, to be able to reflect beauty and devotion onto sheer rock walls and surfaces.

Finally, our great Rishis, who epitomize Ethereal quality – their poems, compositions, reflect a direct inference, a direct experience of it (Inspiration) and are perhaps the greatest works of art ever known by humanity. Adi Sankara's poem – Atma Shatakam – captures non-dualist philosophy in a few simple verses – but has so much power in it that people are left dumbstruck in awe…

Note: What I've mentioned here must definitely not be mistaken for a list – I'm just referring to things that have had a profound effect on me…

So is it the Artist or the Muse?

The more I think about this – a question that arises in mind is – “Is art then the creation of the Artist or the Muse?” That's a tough one to answer.

After all, it IS the artist who creates the art – if we were to ignore the role that Inspiration (the Ethereal quality) plays in the process, then all the credit definitely goes to the artist's skills. But if we were to consider the fact that the Artist is merely a skillful receptacle of this Inspiration, then how much of the Art actually belongs to the Artist?

And then, we also have the Artist -> Art -> Viewer angle – what I might consider a monumental work of art might seem to someone else to be a monumental waste of time. Would that take away any of that direct experience from the artist or any of the edge from the work of art? Probably not…

Going by the definition of art as we have at the beginning of this article – Art then is a three-way relation – between the Artist, the Muse and the Viewer. The credibility of the Artist lies in “how much of Inspiration” is he capable of experiencing – and how well he can render it onto his medium of expression. Given an average level of sensitivity to Inspiration by us mere mortals – a good work of art would then be the result of the ability of the artist to “move” us into sharing what he could reflect (of his experience of the Ethereal quality; in other words, Inspiration) onto his work of Art.