Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

The Door in the Sky: Coomaraswamy on Myth and Meaning
The Door in the Sky: Coomaraswamy on Myth and Meaning
The Door in the Sky: Coomaraswamy on Myth and Meaning
Ebook517 pages8 hours

The Door in the Sky: Coomaraswamy on Myth and Meaning

Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

4.5/5

()

Read preview

About this ebook

Ananda K. Coomaraswamy (1877-1947) was a pioneer in Indian art history and in the cultural confrontation of East and West. A scholar in the tradition of the great Indian grammarians and philosophers, an art historian convinced that the ultimate value of art transcends history, and a social thinker influenced by William Morris, Coomaraswamy was a unique figure whose works provide virtually a complete education in themselves. Finding a universal tradition in past cultures ranging from the Hellenic and Christian to the Indian, Islamic, and Chinese, he collated his ideas and symbols of ancient wisdom into the sometimes complex, always rewarding pattern of essays. The Door in the Sky is a collection of the author's writings on myth drawn from his Metaphysics and Traditional Art and Symbolism, both originally published in Bollingen Series. These essays were written while Coomaraswamy was curator in the department of Asiatic Art of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, where he built the first large collection of Indian art in the United States.

LanguageEnglish
Release dateOct 6, 2020
ISBN9780691219332
The Door in the Sky: Coomaraswamy on Myth and Meaning
Author

Ananda K. Coomaraswamy

A highly original discussion of problems of philosophy of religion from the lndian point of view. The exposition shows that the Christian theologian who will take the trouble to study Indian religion seriously, and not merely “historically,” will find in its teachings abundant extrinsic and probable proofs of the truth of Christian doctrine; and may at the same time realize the essential unity of all religions. Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy (22 August 1877, Colombo - 9 September 1947, Needham, Massachusetts) was a Sri Lankan philosopher. He wished to be remembered as primarily a metaphysician, but he also was a pioneering historian and philosopher of Indian art, especially art history and symbolism, and an early interpreter of Indian culture.

Read more from Ananda K. Coomaraswamy

Related to The Door in the Sky

Titles in the series (26)

View More

Related ebooks

Art For You

View More

Related articles

Related categories

Reviews for The Door in the Sky

Rating: 4.3333335 out of 5 stars
4.5/5

3 ratings0 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

    Book preview

    The Door in the Sky - Ananda K. Coomaraswamy

    ________1________

    Mind and Myth

    Some recent discussions in this journal [The New English Weekly] of instinct and intellect, together with various articles on myth and folklore, have prompted me to offer the following reflections.

    Instincts are natural appetites, which move us to what seem to be, and may be, desirable ends; to behave instinctively is to behave passively, all reactions being in the strictest sense of the word passions. We must not confuse these appetitive reactions with acts of the will. The distinction is well known: ‘Acts of the sensitive appetite . . . are called passions; whereas acts of the will are not so called’ (St. Thomas, Sum. Theol. I. 20. I ad I); ‘the Spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak'. Moreover, as Aristotle points out (De Anima, III. 10) appetite may be right or wrong; desire as such always looks to the present, not considering consequences; only mind is always right.

    In speaking of ‘mind’, however, it must be remembered that the traditional dicta always presuppose the distinction of ‘two minds’, the one ‘apathetic’ (i.e. independent of pleasure-pain motivation), the other ‘pathetic’ (i.e. subject to appetitive persuasion); it is only the First Mind (in Scholastic philosophy, intellectus vel spiritus) that, just because it is disinterested, can judge of the extent to which an appetite (instinct) should be indulged, if the subject’s real good, and not merely immediate pleasure, is to be served.

    So, then, Hermes (Lib. XII. I. 2-4) points out that ‘In the irrational animals, mind co-operates with the natural-instinct proper to each kind; but in men, Mind works against the natural-instincts ... So that those souls of which Mind takes command are illuminated by its light, and it works against their presumptions . . . But those human souls which have not got Mind to guide them are in the same case as the souls of the irrational animals, in which mind co-operates (with the appetites), and gives free course to their desires; and such souls are swept along by the rush of appetite to the gratification of their desires . . . and are insatiable in their craving.’ From the same point of view, for Plato, the man who is governed by his impulses is ‘subject to himself’, while he who governs them is ‘his own master (Laws, 645, Republic, 431, etc.).

    The instinctive appetites of wild animals and of men whose lives are lived naturally (i.e. in accordance with human nature) are usually healthy; one may say that natural selection has taken the place of Mind in setting a limit to the gratification of these appetites. But the appetites of civilised men are no longer reliable; the natural controls have been eliminated (by the ‘conquest of Nature’); and the appetites, exacerbated by the arts of advertisement, amount to unlimited wants, to which only the disinterested Mind can set reasonable bounds. Mr. Romney Green is only able to defend the instincts (1) by forgetting that these are really appetites or wants and (2) because he is really thinking of those desires of which his Mind does, in fact, approve. Captain Ludovici, on the other hand, is entirely right in saying that our instincts must be regulated by a higher principle. If we are to trust our instincts, let us be sure that they are not just any instincts, but only those that are proper to Man, in the highest sense of the word.

    I was much interested in Mr. Nichols’ review of Waley’s translation, ‘Monkey’. He is very right in saying that it is characteristic of this kind of literature to ‘give the deepest significance in the most economical everyday form’: that is, in fact, one of the essential values of all adequate symbolism. Where, however, he is mistaken is in calling such a work ‘a mine of popular fantasy’. That is just what it is not. The material of ‘folklore’ should not be distinguished from that of myth, the ‘myth that is not my own, I had it from my mother’, as Euripides said; which is not to say that my mother’s mother made it. What we owe to the people themselves, and for which we cannot be too grateful in these dark ages of the mind, is not their lore, but its faithful transmission and preservation. The content of this lore, as some (though all too few) learned men have recognised, is essentially metaphysical, and only accidentally entertaining.

    In the present case the ‘river’, the ‘bridge’ and the ‘boat’ are universal symbols; they are found as such in the literature of the last three millennia and are probably of much greater antiquity. The episode quoted appears to be an echo of the Mahākapi Jātaka (‘Great Monkey Birthstory’), in which the Bodhisattva (not Boddhi-, as Mr. Nichols writes) is the king of the Monkeys, and makes of himself the bridge by which his people can cross over the flood of sensation to the farther shore of safety; and that is an echo of the older Samhita text in which Agni (who can be equated on the one hand with the Buddha and on the other with Christ) is besought to be ‘our thread, our bridge and our way’, and ‘May we mount upon thy back’) while in the Mabinogion we have the parallel ‘He who would be your chief, let him be your bridge’ (A vo penn bit bont, Story of Branwen), with reference to which Evola remarked that this was the ‘mot d’ordre’ of King Arthur’s chivalry. St. Catherine of Siena had a vision of Christ in the form of a bridge; and Rūmī attributed to Christ the words ‘For the true believers I become a bridge across the sea’. Already in the Ṛg Veda we find the expression ‘Himself the bridge, he speeds across the waters’, with reference to the Sun, i.e. Spirit. And so on for the other symbols; the Tripitaka is, of course, the well known designation of the Nikāyas of the Pali Buddhist Canon, and here stands for ‘Scripture’, taken out of its literal sense and given its higher meaning. The floating away of the dead body reminds us that a catharsis, in the Platonic sense, i.e. a separation of the soul from the body, or in Pauline terms, of the Spirit from the ‘soul’, has taken place.

    Vox populi vox Dei; not because the word is theirs, but in that it is His, viz. the ‘Word of God’, that we recognised in Scripture but overlook in the fairy-tale that we had from our mother, and call a ‘superstition’ as it is indeed in the primary sense of the word and qua ‘tradition’, ‘that which has been handed on’. Strzygowski wrote, ‘He (i.e. the undersigned) is altogether right when he says, The peasant may be unconscious and unaware, but that of which he is unconscious and unaware is in itself far superior to the empirical science and realistic art of the ‘educated man’, whose real ignorance is demonstrated by the fact that he studies and compares the data of folklore and ‘mythology’ without any more than the most ignorant peasant suspecting their real significance.’ (Journal of the Indian Society of Oriental Art, v. 59).

    The truth is that the modern mind, hardened by its constant consideration of ‘the Bible as literature’ (I prefer St. Augustine’s estimate, expressed in the words ‘O axe, hewing the rock’), could, if it would make the necessary intellectual effort, turn to our mythology and folklore and find there, for example in the heroic rescues of maidens from dragons or in (what is the same thing) the disenchantments of dragons by a kiss (since our own sensitive souls are the dragon, from which the Spirit is our saviour), the whole story of the plan of redemption and its operation.

    ________2________

    Svayamātṛṇṇa: Janua Coeli

    John 10:7

    Eine grosse Weltlinie der Metaphysik zieht sich durch aller Völker hindurch.

    J. Sauter

    The coincidences of tradition are beyond the scope of accident.

    Sir Arthur Evans

    The second building (punaściti) of the Fire Altar consists essentially in the laying down of three Self-perforated ‘bricks’ (svayamātṛṇṇā), representing these worlds, Earth, Air, and Sky; the seasonal bricks, representing the Year; and the Universal-Light bricks representing Agni, Vāyu, Āditya (ŚB IX.5.1.58-61). As a part of the construction of the regular Fire Altar, this second building or rather super-structure of the Akar is described in detail in ŚB VII.4.2 ff. and TS v.2.8 ff. Here we propose to discuss only the nature of the three Self-perforates (svayamātṛṇṇā) which represent Earth, Air, and Sky, and with the three intervening Universal Lights representing Agni, Vāyu, Āditya (Fire, Gale of the Spirit, and Sun) compose the vertical Axis of the Universe, the passageway from one world to another, whether upwards or downwards. The three Self-perforates, of which the lowest is a hearth and the uppermost¹ the cosmic luffer, form in effect a chimney, disons cheminée, à la fois caminus et chemin (hearth and way) par laquelle Agni s’achemine et nous-mêmes devons nous acheminer vers le ciel.²

    The Self-perforates are referred to as stones or dry stonesarkare, śuṣkāḥ śarkarāḥ)³ in ŚB vlll.7.3.20 and vlll.7.4.1, and J. Eggeling rightly thinks of them as natural stones, which may have been larger than the ordinary bricks (SBE, XLIII, 128, n. 2). It is evident that perforated does not mean porous,⁴ but rather annular or like a bead, since the Self-perforates are not only for the upward passage of the breaths (prāṇānām utsṛṣṭyai)⁵ but also for vision of the world of heaven (atho suvargasya,lokasyānukhyātyai,⁷ TS v.2.8.1, 3.2.2, and 3.7.4). They are, moreover, the Way by which the Devas first strode up and down these worlds, using the Universal Lights (viśvajotis bricks, Agni, Vāyu, Āditya) as their stepping stones (samyānayah, ŚB vlll.7.1.23),⁸ and the Way for the Sacrificer now to do likewise (SB vlll.7.2.23 and VII.4.2.16), who as a Comprehensor (evaṃvit) "having ascended to the Beatific Spirit (ānandamayam-ātmānam upasaṃkramya), traverses these worlds, ‘eating’ what he will, and in what shape he will" (imān Iokān kāmānī kāmarūpy anusaṃcaran, TU III.10.5; cf. JUB I.45.2 and III.28.4), as in John 10:9, shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture, and Pistis Sophia.⁹ From all this it follows that the Self-perforates of the Fire Altar must have been ring-stones, like the well-known example at Śatruñjava, called a "Door of Liberation (mukti-dvāra)" through which people are still passed, and like the many ring-stones of all sizes that have been found on Indus Valley sites.¹⁰

    The Self-perforates are these worlds (ŚB IX.5.1.58, etc.) in a likeness. What is common to them is the "whole Breath (sarvah prāṇaḥ)," of which the three aspects are that of the aspiration (udāna) proper to Agni, transspiration (vyāna) proper to Vāyu, and spiration (prāna) proper to the Sun (SB VII.1.2.21).¹¹

    We have here to do with the sūtrātman doctrine, according to which all things are connected with the sun in what is literally a common con-spiracy. The Self-perforates, then, are quickened with the Breath of life by the Sunhorse, which is made to kiss them (aśvam upaghrāpayati, prāṇam evāsya dadhāti, TS v.2.8.1, 3.2.2, and 3.7.4);¹² for "That ‘horse’ is yonder Sun, and those ‘bricks’ are the same as all these offspring (prajā); thus, even as he makes it kiss [snuffle at] them, so yonder Sun kisses these offspring.¹³ And hence, by the power of [that solar] Prajapati,¹⁴ each one thinks ‘I am’ (aham asmi)¹⁵... and again, why he makes it kiss [snuffle at]: that horse is yonder Sun,¹⁶ and those Self-perforates these worlds; and even as he makes it kiss [snuffle at], so yonder Sun strings these worlds to himself on a thread (sūtre samāvayate). . . . Now that thread is the same as the Gale (vāyu) ŚB vII.3.2.12-13 and VIII.7.3.10; Verily, he bestows the Breath upon it (TS v.2.8.1, etc.). This, indeed, is the middle term of a large group of texts beginning with RV I.115.1, The Sun is the Spirit (ātman) of all that is in motion or at rest; and continuing, AV x.8.38, I know the extended thread (sūtram) wherein these offspring are inwoven: the thread of the thread I know; what else but the ‘Great’ (mahat, the Sun), of the nature of Brahman?; BU III.7.1-2, He who knows that thread and the ‘Inward Ruler’ (antaryāminam iti),¹¹ knows the Brahman, knows the worlds, knows the Devas, knows the Vedas, knows himself, knows All . . . By the Gale, indeed, O Gautama, as by a thread, are this and yonder world and all beings strung together;¹⁸ JUB III.4.13—III.5.1, Even as the thread of a gem (maṇisūtram) might be threaded through a gem, even so is all this strung thereupon [upon the Sun, Vāyu, Prāṇa, Brahman], to wit, Gandharvas, Apsarases, beasts, and men; BG VII.7, All this is strung on Me, like rows of gems upon a thread."¹⁹

    It can hardly be doubted that the well-known cotton-bale (Figure 1A) symbol of the Indian punch-marked coins (with which may be compared a number of similar forms to be met with on Babylonian seals, e.g., Figure 1B) is a representation of the Three Worlds in the shape of the Self-perforates, connected by a common thread, which is that of the Breath, Sunpillar, and Axis of the Universe.²⁰ The three Self-perforates are, furthermore, manifestly comparable to the naves of wheels; they are, indeed, the navel-centers (nābhi) of the worlds (cakra) which they represent. It is upon their axis that the three-wheeled cosmic chariot of the Aśvins turns. These are the three holes in the naves of the chariot wheels through which Indra draws Apālā, so that her scaly skins are shed, and she is made to be Sunskinned (RV VIII.91, JB I.220, etc.) ;²¹ the Moon, the Gale, and the Sun, opened up like the hole of a chariot wheel or a drum for the ascent of the deceased Comprehensor (BU v.10-11), who, when he departs thus from this body, ascends with these very rays of the Sun. ... As quickly as one could thither direct his mind, he comes to the Sun.²² That is verily and indeed the world-door, a progression for the wise, but a barrier for the foolish (lokadvāraṃ prapadanaṃ vidūṣāṃ nirodho’vidūṣam, CU vIII.6.5).²³ Each of these holes is a birthplace (yoni), whoever passes through such a hole dying to a former and inferior state of being and being regenerated in another and higher; in this the openings answer to the three birthplaces of JUB III.8.9-III.9.6, AĀ II.5, and Manu II.169. Whoever has thus not only been born but born again after repeated deaths and is duly qualified to pass through the midst of the Sun (ādityam arhati samaya

    Figure IA. The So-Called Cotton-Bale Symbol

    As it appears on early Indian punch-marked coins: three Self-perforates or beads are strung on a pole.

    Figures IB-L Related Motifs from Western Asiatic Seals

    Figure IJ. Symbol on a Coin from Hierapolis

    Recalls Figure IA. The Assyrians themselves speak of a symbol, but they have assigned to it no definite name (Lucian, De Syria Dea, 33).

    itum, JUB I.6.1) has either virtually broken out of the cosmos while still in the flesh²⁴ or will for the last time be reborn at death, so as to be altogether liberated through the midst of the Sun (ādityam samayātimucyate, JUB I.3.5); [see also Garuḍa Purāṇa x.56-59, on rebirth from the pyre].

    We shall now consider more especially the uppermost Self-perforate, which is at once the roof of the cosmic house, the crown of the cosmic tree, and the skull of the cosmic Man. It is the hole in this firmament of the sky that chiefly concerns us; this opening is variously referred to as a hole, chine, foramen, mouth, or door (kha,²⁵ chidra, randhra, mukha, dvāra). To have ascended these worlds as one might a ladder or a tree and to have escaped the jaws of Death is to have passed through this strait gate. JUB I.3.5—I.7.5 continues, "That is heaven’s chine (divaś chidram); as might be the hole in the nave of a cart or chariot (yathā khaṃ vānasas syād rathasya),²6 even so is this ‘heaven’s chine.’ It is seen all covered over by rays (raśmibhis saṃchannam). . . .²⁷ Thus ‘through the midst of Him,’ who knows that ? If verily when these waters are all about him, he indeed invokes the Gale,²⁸ He verily disperses the rays (raśmīn . . . vyūhati) for him. . . .²⁹ Thereupon he separates himself from death, from evil. Who knows what is beyond the Sun (yat pareṇādityam), what beneath this homeless atmosphere (idam anālayam antarikṣam avarena)?³0 That is just immortality!"

    In the light of all this it is easy to understand the prayer of Isa Up. 15-16 (and parallel texts, BU v.15.1 and MU VI.35), "The Gate of Truth (satyasya . . . mukham) do thou, O Pūsan, uncover, that I, who am of the quality of Truth³¹ (satyadharmāya), may see [thy fairest form]. . . . The rays dispel (raśmīm vyūha), unify the fiery energy (samūha tejas), that I may see thy fairest form; and possible, too, to understand statements to the effect that it is a sign of death when sun and moon are opened up (yihīyete),³² when the sun looks like the moon, when its rays are not seen (drśyate na raśmayah)³³ . . . when the sun is seen as if it were a chine (chidra ivādityo dṛśyate), and looks like the nave of a chariot wheel" (ratha-nābhir iva, AĀ III.2.4; cf. SA VIII.6.7 and

    Enjoying the preview?
    Page 1 of 1