Art and morality came into existence because morality assist in changing the state of being from selfish to un selfish attitude, which lapses into art, letting us escape empirical reality by providing ideal world. Art experience is something of a realizable experience and it is a synthesis that is, it is unitive, Synthesis comprehensively, compromising attitude. It is in its unitiveness, That it leads to creativity in Indian context, the same truth which is it is such Anand and comprehensive and absolute Brahman in the normal context it is called as: “Satyam Shivam Sundaram” Let us understand the suspect, which is given by philosopher Mysore Hiriyanna.

Philosophers have stated that the ultimate objective of philosophic quest is not knowledge as much as it has been the ultimate freedom. Indian philosophy is a way of life and thought, and like ethics, aesthetics depend majorly on philosophy, aiming at influencing life. He questions as to whether there has been such a kinder kinship relationship between these two aspects. He raises these questions that it could be the case that while knowing what is good, we have ignored what is beautiful, which means that we have neglected the other Indian aesthetics is based on two main views that are as follows:

The soul doctrine of Upanishadic School, that the ultimate reality is not external, but rather Internal to the man’s own self and world of sensory perception is at best appearance of the ultimate truth- Brahman satya, jagat mithya; The second idea is the ultimate goal has to be realized in this world. This marks the highest conception of the freedom and to live a harmony, peace, and a life in which we do not have to distinguish our interest, but rather expand them, we need to have a passion, less purity, and equal love and respect for all of these things. This is influenced Indian theory of art. But how exactly these two things have casted they are impression on the Indian aesthetic theory that is very interesting. So now let us see that.

He give the example of the first poet in the case of “Bahama, vamana, Dandin” And said that the Pracīn School of poetry dealt with dosas, gunas and alamkaras, They believed in the outward expression of poetry, which is the word, and the sense known as, shabda and artha. We had doasa and Gunas What cons of excellence in poetic art is absence of one and presence of the other.
However, in the case of Navīna school, As they have given the instance of Dhvanyāloka, In this, they believe that, Navīna school Pointed out that whatever in sound sub serves the poetic end in view is called as Gunas And whatever does not is called as doasa; It could be argued that they have expanded the definitions which were provided by Pracīn school.

The artistic expression conveys, imaginative or emotive mode, Art represents the spontaneous expression of responsive mind when it is under the influence of imaginative or emotive mood. It was found that there is a peculiar fitness in the emotive mood to convey tea chains, and also to please. Poetry had two aims. The first one was direct, which is giving of a static pleasure known as sadhyaparanvrtti, And the indirect one is of contributing to the refinement of the character, the case of Emotive mood (Rasa) Was that it can do both of these ideas. Fill the poetry with both of these points equally and express. These two identities sign significantly within any poetic material made this mood more important than vastu or alamkara, This is the major change when we have the Sanskrit point, which states that rasa Is the Atman of the poetry” This shows the dependence of this idea on the doctrine of Ātman, which has been leveled by upanishadic school.

According to the view of Vedanta, they say that Rasa has the immediate aim of pure delight and enjoyment, but the beauty is disclosed only to the inward ice as it has been contended by Hiriyanna, That “true beauty is neither expressive words nor noble objectively, it can only be realized.” In the case of Sankhya School, we find that the aesthetic attitude is characterized as forgetting because it is an escape from the natural empirical practical world. The difference could be further pointed out that the one reveals best in nature and the other reveals something better than nature.

The poet ideas the object in depicting them, and it is in this process, they are realized and raised to the level of art and acquire aesthetic significance. By providing the example of kalidasa, bhavabhuti’s Uttar-Rama-caritra, Hiriyanna Attempts to say that the emotional situation portrait has been absorbed by this expression, and it has resulted in the aesthetic pleasure of rasa, i.e. hridaya samvada in tanmayibhavana causing in Rasāmubhava. This has completely concluded the Indian aesthetic theory, which has been Postulated by M. Hiriyanna.

Do share your ideas and thoughts about this article with us! Like, share and ignite the barrel of knowledge with DU Times!

Chaitanya Sharma
B.A Philosophy (Hons.) from Hansraj College, University of Delhi


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here