Selective Moral Discomforts and Outrages of Convenience against Tyagaraja

As someone who has been passionate from early teens about making Carnatic Music socially broad based and initiated pioneering steps for the same in my 20s, I see nothing wrong about anyone finding certain things in the past out of sync in today’s climate. I have definitely found a few things uncomfortable in the works of a few non-digital creators of earlier times. They may have been hailed as progressive in their eras but would come through as regressive today. That said, the majority of their works are palatable for people of any background. 

1. Background: For instance, there could be some who may feel extremely uncomfortable about some segments in Shakespeare’s “Taming the Shrew”. The same holds good for various paintings or sculptures across timelines or regions. 

2. The Issue: It is deeply problematic to shower 21st century views to decry a substantial contributor from another era like Tyagaraja to come across as champions of social justice and equality. This is neither connected to “honest artistry” nor to “mature social thinking”.  In fact it is the exact opposite of both to trash anyone for writing, painting or sculpting things as they saw based on human evolution up to that point in time.

3. Solution: Someone “intellectually” or “morally” finding something wrong with a composition need not sing that particular song.  For instance, if someone finds it abhorrent that there are songs referring to Shiva demanding that a devotee feed him meat from his own son (even if the intent was to highlight the devotee), one need not sing it. What’s “progressive” about tom tomming it and inviting the whole world to pillory the composer or his entire community posthumously? 

4. Intentional Consequences: Another problematic part is that these cards are being played to trigger even more vilification campaigns against some segments of society using selective truths of convenience as examples.  A prolific, multi dimensional composer like Tyagaraja who evolved over time is being nudged to be judged by millions based on the words of attention seekers. Obviously most would never have the time nor energy to make deeper studies of him to get the larger picture.  

5. Balanced Approach: Before forming judgements, one needs to at least study 5-10 of his other works.  For instance, how many people know that the same Tyagaraja also hit out at Brahmin Ritualism in songs like “Yagnadulu”, “Manasu nilpa” and “Teliya leru Rama”?  He critiques hypocrisy in songs like “Kanugonu sowkhyamu” and stresses on the need for scientific approach even in prayers rather than blindly following templates in “Telisi rama chintana”.  Many of Tyagaraja’s messages would be equally applicable to other communities too and valid across generations. 

6. Real vs Pseudo Intellectualism: Any analysis or even judgements can only be accepted as truly intellectual only if backed by reasonable knowledge of another person or his works that comes through in balanced citations. The converse is equally true. 

7. Social Discourses: Media outlets which carry any narrative need to create equal space for counter arguments to be placed by the next day to enable society to make more informed judgments. 

   
   

   In summation, Tyagaraja was a champion reformer who unhesitatingly hit out at any community, when he saw unacceptable trends. His inspiration as a musician, composer and social critique was Purandara Dasa (1484-1564), revered as the Father of Carnatic Music and a stunning counter example to those promoting conspiracy theories about lack of diversity in this system. 

The Prime Mover of the Universe

(Note: This is not exactly a science article though it may cite science to put a few things in context in layman’s terms. I have given a few perspectives regarding this in musical form too in the Tamil composition, Karpanaiye kadavul.) 

The greatest intellects of our species - and perhaps other intelligent beings across the universe - have been grappling with the puzzle of what drives everything. They have tried to understand the phenomenon from philosophical, scientific (or religious) perspectives. But despite making marginal headway, no one has been able to crack the code.

This article attempts to throw a different spin on the Underlying Force behind Everything in the Universe, which is now being postulated to be 27 Billion years old as opposed to 13.8 billion¹ (though both numbers are only based on what little we have managed to observe so far). Clearly, our knowledge is expanding as we have just discovered that over 70–90% of known matter is not contained in the stars, planets or galaxies but in the luminous halos surrounding them².

Basic Q & A in Science and Philosophy

First, a quick overview of a few important questions asked or addressed by Science, Philosophy and Religions so far.

• Is the Prime Mover of the Universe the attractive pull of matter such as the Strong Force - which confines quarks into protons, neutrons and other hadron particles - OR a force that's considered even more immense, the gravity that exists near space-time singularities or black holes³?
• Is it Dark Energy - perhaps the chief anti-attractive force theorised to be the propellant of the expanding universe³?
• Clearly only one of the two would be insufficient to anchor the universe. Something greater has to balance both of these.

Could the Prime Mover of the Universe be:

• Fundamental matter like Bosons?
• Light, Space or Time?
• Consciousness? There is a lot of discourse on this subject but most are centered around understanding what it is at a human level through scientific experiments or intellectual debates. The Consciousness being discussed here is an all-pervading intelligence that is omnipotent and omniscient, as philosophers declare? But consciousness (equated with Shiva in Indian philosophy and Yin in Chinese) is more a static witness to everything. Energy (the universal one that is equated with Shakti in Indian philosophy and Yang in Chinese) which is responsible for dynamism?

But both Consciousness (which can be viewed as potential energy) and Energy (kinetic) need a higher power to function harmoniously. More about this in the latter sections.

• Truth? Or Love? Both of these presume a positive force which is not counterbalanced by an equal negative force and therefore seem to be no more than wishful thinking.
• One or more of the Gods who are worshipped by diverse religions?

But these Gods are revered as larger than life based on attributes which are awe-inspiring to us. Yet none of these religions agree over the form, shape and characteristics of historical or mythological divinities. And Atheists declare that Gods are merely projections of our minds or scams to fool others, while Agnostics are on the wall. With so much disagreement all around, there can be no decisiveness except that the Prime Mover cannot be any kind of physical entity (though one has no right to question anyone about personal beliefs).

The Quest

If the Prime Mover is none of these, is there a phenomenon that checks every box we can (or cannot) think of? Is there an entity that:

• Is beyond every known law of science but is responsible for every one of them?
• Is the very foundational force that gives varying degrees of energy to what String Theorists what String Theorists refer to as dancing filaments within quarks⁴, empowering them to vibrate at different frequencies to create particles of incredible diversity and eventually matter of infinite variety?
• Fits in perfectly with philosophical or spiritual concepts and is beyond religious debates?
• Even atheists cannot deny or agnostics cannot escape from?

Beyond Relativity: Theory of Creativity

I had no perfect answers (and as is my propensity in such situations, I had consigned the entire matter to the back burner) until I was hit by an accidental revelation in December 2022. The Prime Mover of Everything was Creativity — the phenomenon behind but beyond form, space, time, matter, energy, force, and the laws of every known science or descriptions in every religion and philosophy.

The obvious question would be "Whose Creativity?" But that is the very point here. It is not some other entity's Creativity. It is about Creativity itself as the omnipresent, omnipotent entity.

How I received this insight, though interesting, is probably not important here. What's important is to appreciate that Creativity is both the source and force which designs and destroys, contains and sustains, forms or transforms everything, yet transcends them all.

While Einstein's E = mc² implies that energy and matter are inter-transformable, we are far from fathoming the immensity and sophistication of Creativity, which creatively decides which of these two states would evolve or flourish in what form, quantity or quality in which part of the universe, when and for how long, and to accomplish what. More importantly, it creates whole sets of super-immense and sub-micro systems to enable all this to happen.

Undiscovered Dimension?

From a scientific standpoint, is this universal phenomenon of Creativity a fundamental dimension yet to be discovered by humans? Something that is far subtler and far more sophisticated than anything we have currently mapped - yet permeates every corner of the universe every moment? Studies are attempting to showcase the similarities between the universe and the brain cell⁵.

But these are no more than observations at this stage, and there are obvious dissimilarities between the entire universe and brain cells, which are subject to apoptotic or necrotic cell deaths.

The common force in all these is Creativity, which determines when which set of neurons will be triggered, when and why, as well as the consequences of all this. So far, no study comes anywhere close to explaining the million subtle mechanisms behind Creativity and its zillion manifestations.

Creativity vs Creation 

Scholars must also not confuse the phenomenon of Creativity with the act of creation, even at the level of the entire Universe, though the term was definitely associated with divine creation by earlier civilisations (such as Brahma in India, Biblical story of creation in Genesis etc).

But at both the Cosmic and Quantum scale, though Creativity is required to create anything, it is not limited to merely that. What we deem as protection and destruction are as much manifestations of less Creativity as creation is. In short, Creativity is responsible for not only constant creation but also conservation and conversion of matter and energy as well as life and non-life.

Ultimate Decision Maker 

It is Creativity which is behind: 

1. The formation, size, sustenance and destruction (transformation) of everything from subatomic particles to super galaxies and black holes. 

2. Transporting elements like Oxygen, Carbon, Iron and Copper from one part of the universe to another and re-assemble them as life forms in regions like our own planet. Those attempting to create even one simple synthetic living cell would testify to the amount of creativity that went into it. So how does one even begin to grasp the Creativity that is behind the arrival of innumerable life forms across aeons? 

3. But clearly there is much more. Creativity decides everything happening within each one of these life forms and managing the ecosystems around them. 

4. Everything that seems random but is not. Just as Chaos Theory states with respect to sensitive dynamic systems, each sensory experience of every individual creation in each moment is also not random but is creatively brought to it each moment of its existence though we are a long way off from getting to the point of deterministic chaos when it comes to life forms. 

The greatest touch 

But the greatest touch is that this Universal force of Creativity manifests itself through many of the life forms. 

• We are just beginning to appreciate the innumerable examples of creativity in the animal, bird, insect and plant kingdoms. 

• At the subtle level, numerous complex processes that are taken for granted by us like certain types of mutations or DNA replications, responses of bacteria and viruses to evolving threats, highly coordinated responses of cells of larger beings such as ourselves to specific situations or developments, each of which could subtly vary from one context to another are really manifestations of Creativity. 

It can be argued that microorganisms or individual cells of larger life forms are not creative by themselves but are pre-programmed to respond in certain ways to diverse situations. But then, that would merely be a case of every species drawing upon the skills of a programmer with an infinitely superior, sophisticated Creativity. 

Universal Creativity vs Human Ingenuity 

Human creativity was not glorified by many early cultures in the East or in the West. But the last few centuries have focused exclusively on human creativity with studies showing that thought is a physical phenomenon - no more than a bunch of neurons firing together based on prior knowledge and memories. 

This leads to a seemingly weird scenario (which Science may one day be able to establish): are the innumerable stars no more than the neurons in the mental fabric of the Omniscient Creativity, which are firing at different times and transforming the universe every moment? Studies are attempting to showcase the similarities between the universe and the brain cell. 

1. But these are no more than observations at this stage and 

2. There are obvious dissimilarities between the entire universe and the brain cells which are subject to apoptotic or necrotic cell deaths.

But the common force in all these is Creativity which determines when which set of neurons will be triggered when and why, as well as the consequences of all this. So far, no study comes anywhere close to explaining the million subtle mechanisms behind Creativity and its zillion manifestations.

Beyond Space and Time

Even from a micro or human perspective, it is often impossible to:

1. determine where creativity originates from, where it resides or where it goes back to when it unmanifests itself (as in when one forgets a creative idea).

2. weigh or measure the dimensions of Creativity

3. design experiments to determine its exact position, velocity or ascertain its state - as matter or wave.

This is because Creativity neither occupies space nor is shackled by time, to the best of our knowledge.

Transcendental

Creativity is perceivable through various senses like aural or visual but is beyond all of them. It manifests itself as any quality its medium (person/animal) possesses, but is — by itself — beyond attributes. It is completely independent of one's race, region, religion, or language.

Most remarkably, Creativity is independent of one's personal nature or one's good or evil deeds (karma). But, through its manifestation — positive or negative, benevolent or malevolent — Creativity is a reasonable pointer to the nature of a being.

Degrees of Creativity

At a human level, those who populate the artistic and literary world are obviously regarded as most creative. Those like mathematicians and scientists, entrepreneurs, engineers, architects, software developers, doctors, sportspersons, educators, corporate and business employers or employees, researchers and politicians possess obvious Creativity. Studies have shown the differences in brain activity between those involved in creativity as opposed to those that are not⁶.

But even people whose occupations may seem to call for insubstantial imagination (such as elevator operators or those involved in mechanical processes or repetitive tasks), will need to draw upon Creativity at one time or another in their lives, maybe without even realising it. It takes a million micro-creative steps to farm, hunt, be gainfully employed, study and improve oneself, raise children, offer solace, deal with friendly or hostile entities or other species, and to generally get by in life.

Re-creativity

What about musicians who render the same piece of music many times? A true artist is re-creative even if he or she sings or plays the same music several times. Only that will infuse the music with life. This is no different to the same species being created zillions of times in the universe.

Creativity vs Choice

Does all this mean that every action of ours is pre-destined and there is zero role for every created being in the universe? This is where the beauty of Creativity comes in. Many creatures have creatively been endowed with the ability to make choices. Choices are the crossroads of destiny in the highway of existence. Each time one meets such crossroads one can turn right or left. Though one can never turn wholly back and undo the past, there are options to turn to other roads to do better things.

What is Behind Creativity

Consciousness?

It could be argued that consciousness is a prerequisite for Creativity. Both Eastern philosophers and several Western scientists appreciate its fundamental and transcendental nature. As Erwin Schrödinger pointed out, *"Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. It is absolutely fundamental and cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else"*⁷.

But consciousness is not a force. It is merely a state of existence. Or non-existence. Or both these opposites merged into one. One may view it as an all-seeing sarva sakshi. However, it will amount to nothing without Creativity. It takes Creativity to invest consciousness with infinite power and transform it to matter and energy. In Indian philosophical terms, if Consciousness is Shiva, Creativity is Shakti. At best both may be equals, as it can be argued: how can there be Creativity sans consciousness?

That leads to an even more fascinating question: What created consciousness?

Will (Sankalpa)?

The other thing to consider is: "Is Will a prerequisite for Creativity?" Not necessarily. Our own species illustrates this best. We have instances of people spontaneously creating things, as also those who may be desperate to be inventive but unable to find the Creativity to do so. This indicates that Creativity is a spontaneous force independent of Will.

In summation, everything seems to point to Creativity being the Supreme driving force of the universe.

---

Footnotes

¹ The standard cosmological model (ΛCDM) places the age of the universe at ~13.8 billion years, based on Planck satellite measurements of the cosmic microwave background (Planck Collaboration, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 2020). A speculative 2023 paper by Rajendra Gupta in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society proposed ~26.7 billion years via a hybrid "tired-light + ΛCDM" model — this remains a fringe hypothesis, not consensus.

² Tumlinson, Peeples & Werk (2017), Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics — "The Circumgalactic Medium"; Macquart et al. (2020), Nature — "A census of baryons in the Universe from localized fast radio bursts." Both find that the majority of ordinary (baryonic) matter resides in diffuse halos and the circumgalactic medium, not in stars or galactic discs.
³ For accessible overviews of the four fundamental forces and dark energy, see NASA's "Dark Energy, Dark Matter" primer; CERN's public pages on the Standard Model; and Frieman, Turner & Huterer (2008), Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics — "Dark Energy and the Accelerating Universe."
⁴ Brian Greene, The Elegant Universe (W. W. Norton, 1999) — accessible introduction to string theory and vibrating filaments; for the technical treatment, Joseph Polchinski, String Theory (Cambridge University Press, 1998).
⁵ Vazza & Feletti (2020), Frontiers in Physics — "The Quantitative Comparison Between the Neuronal Network and the Cosmic Web." A measured side-by-side comparison of morphology and network statistics; the authors are careful to note the analogy is structural, not causal.
⁶ Beaty, Benedek, Silvia & Schacter (2016), Trends in Cognitive Sciences — "Creative Cognition and Brain Network Dynamics"; Dietrich & Kanso (2010), Psychological Bulletin — "A Review of EEG, ERP, and Neuroimaging Studies of Creativity and Insight."
⁷ Erwin Schrödinger, What is Life? & Mind and Matter (Cambridge University Press, 1958/1967). The quoted line is consistent with Schrödinger's position throughout Mind and Matter on the irreducibility of consciousness to physical description.

The Artist-Instrument Equation in Indian Music

(Almost everyone who have known me well have sooner or later come to (willingly or otherwise) accept that the most endearing and enduring reality of my life is music and the most precious personal equation I share is with my instrument, the chitravina.  From my earliest days, I have been fascinated by its tremendous tone, challenged by its demands and awed by the scope it offers to produce “microtonal shadings reminiscent of the human voice” as a very astute critic observed once in The New York Times. I’ve repeatedly been asked a few questions relating to this by various members of the media and the article below was probably penned in response to an interview in Times of India a few years ago.)

Any artiste of worth takes exceptional care of his/her instrument.  A few develop deep emotional bonds with it, which manifests itself in various dimensions.  For instance, legendary vocalist-composer Harikeshanallur Muttiah Bhagavatar had twin-tanpuras in his house (named Rama & Lakshmana) that would be so well tuned that one would resonate if the other was strummed!  I have seen superbly maintained tanpuras – both visually and aurally - in the residences of Semmangudi Srinivasa Iyer, T Brinda, K V Narayanaswami.  

Coming from a family where our chosen instrument is venerated like God, I had from my childhood, found it fascinating to observe or learn about the special equations iconic artistes had with their instruments.  

An early inspiration was Veena maestro S Balachander, who had built a tranquil room in his lovely house where his instruments would be kept in high comfort!  Balachander sir also used to take every care to ensure that his veena travelled no less luxuriously as he by booking an additional I class berth in the name “Ms Veena”.  When I tried a similar move in some trains in the II class sleepers (a fiscal model appropriate for me then), a subset of ticket inspectors were more bemused than amused arguing (technically correctly of course) that an instrument could not be given berths when there were people lined up in huge waiting lists!  Undaunted, my father-guru Chitravina Narasimhan (who travelled with me everywhere till I was 18) would offer to sleep on the floor of the train, which I could of course never let happen on 99 out of 100 cases!  These days, on the rare occasions that I take the train, I squeeze myself alongside my instrument in the same AC berth, more to its discomfort!  

Another great who was literally close to his instrument was Karaikkudi Sambashiva Iyer, who was reputed to practice till he literally collapsed right under the veena for his power naps!

Pt Ravi Shankar was another model in instrument care too – it was not beyond him to book an extra First Class Airline ticket for his sitar.  If this was not possible, he would have an instrument maker/repairer tour with him even internationally for months.  Great mrdangists like Palghat Mani Iyer and Pazhani Subramaniam Pillai used to host mrdangam makers in their house for weeks on occasions to set their instruments. 

There are counter-inspirations too.  A well-known artiste had carelessly kept a veena out in the car while taking a lunch break in USA en route to a concert, only to come back and discover that all the frets were in disarray as the holding wax melted away!  

There have been artistes who have earned a reputation of having mastered an instrument.  I have always been hesitant to use or even think this term, as I have seen instances of some artistes taking it very literally and end up treating the instrument like an employee!  Seriously, there is a very fine-line between a feeling of control one may have at certain points of life vs a complacence of self-presumed mastery.  Even the greatest geniuses like T N Rajaratnam Pillai (Nadaswaram) or a Flute Mali used to feel humbled in the context of what their minds aspired for and what their bodies delivered.

My grandfather Gotuvadyam Narayana Iyengar, revered by all for his sublime brilliance, used to lament often that he had not even mastered the seven basic notes!  He was also very possessive of his instrument, not even letting his own children near it!  He would carry it himself for miles for concerts in small (though culturally rich) villages, if no transport was available.  Violin stalwart R K Venkatarama Shastry (grandfather of R K Shriramkumar) once told me how he used to insist on helping out for at least a part of the distance.  I never got to see my grandfather but my father instilled in me the only ritual I have followed from age two, till date – prostrating before the instrument at least twice first thing every morning. 

This extreme reverence may not be displayed obviously by artistes handling smaller instruments like the violin or flute - especially the latter who can almost pack their instruments in their pockets!  But I have seen many of them to be attached to their instruments, sometimes visibly manifest in a bit of sandle-wood paste or vermillion applied on them. 

Despite the heavy emotional investment and all possible professional care, instruments are prone to setbacks, especially travel-related.  Though these would occur in about 1/200 trips, I used to get extremely upset with airlines for their lackadaisical approach to handling sensitive instruments (despite fragile stickers pasted on every possible side of the case).  I have tried to anticipate these and learnt to quickly set the instrument right, if the damage is minor! The good news is that almost across the board, well-travelled artistes have started opting for smarter options such as fiber glass case.  One can never forget that it’s the instrument that takes care of its exponents, rather than the other way round!  

The C I D Mantra: Deccan Chronicle Sliding Up Series

The C I D Mantra: Deccan Chronicle 1 July, 2013