THE SECOND INTERNATIONAL DRAWING TRIENNALE
(Poland, Wroclaw 1981)

INTRODUCTION

Drawing “discovered” and ennobled by Wroclaw Triennale seventeen years ago made a giddy career both in Poland and abroad. We observe numerous exhibitions, displays, scientific, and para-scientific sessi-ons, more or less deepened discussions. These dispelled activities giving testimony to a significant interest for drawing-discipline make as order our knowledge. Thus, we have invited distinguished Polish scientists who are interested in the subiect in a widely understood philosophical, social, sociological and psychological aspect to take part in the discussion. We are very truly grateful to them for taking pains and preparing papers and we render warm thanks to them. Papers are edited in a volume accompanying II-nd IDT. We do not claim that this collection makes a compendium of cnowledge of drawing but we are sure that according to the theory of one of the authors it releases such resources of ENERGY - FORCE that we may feel safe about the future of our event, International Drawing Triennale.

Andrzej Will Chairman of International Drawing Triennale

CONSCIOUSNESS AND ITS RELATION TO FORM

Marian Wasilewski

All Rights Reserved

Contest:
Consciousness
Consciousness and form
Rules of spatial form creation
Psychological conditioning of art

We inescapably associate every art, understood as an expression of beauty and wisdom, with consciousness, although consciousness has been so far a blurred, ambiguous, and intangible notion. Various philosophical trends attribute to the words c o n s c i o u s n e s s and a r t differend meaning, filling a very wide notional spectrum. The same holds true for self-consciousness. Also psychology, being a science more approximate to empiricism than philosophy, does not explain the essence of these notions.

Therefore it is not easy to treat this, so ambitious subiekt, assumed by the Respected Hosts to be the slogan of the 2-nd International Drawing Triennale: Art as a form of self-consciousness. On the other hand, this is a magnificant chanse of putting forward some unorthodox views, which I dare to present in this paper.

Before I come to presenting my brief view on art and self-consciousness, however, I should deal in more detail with some notions related to consciousness in general, and to a certain psychological conditioning of the creative process in art as well.

Consiciousness

In this part we shall try to define the nature of consciousness, its feature and the manners of its existing. Yet at first, in order to avoid misunderstandings and ambiguities, we shoult temporarily put away the notions we have stood by until now, connected with this word, which has been used in a wider or narrower meaning both in everyday language and in philosophy or psychology.

We shall derive the definition of consciousness from the universally known dialectical l a w o f t h e i d e n t i t y o f o p p o s i t e s. This law can’t hardly be attributed to any contemporary trend in philosophy, for it has appeared in various disguises through history in all the civilizations in the world. Be it the Chinese princyple symbolized by the sign tai-gi-tu, or hindu tantra, which we are going to treat in some detail, or originated in ancient Egypt hermetic principle of the active and the passive, of the male and the female source, or finally the caballistic dyad and triad - they all are connected with a certain dychotomy, duality, shearing apart, which is a binary polarization of all the existence. As a result of this duality there are always formed two opposed to each other poles, which mutually condition their existence, and which cannot exist separately.

In order to explain in the best way the law of the identity of opposites, we can say, in terms of the contemporary vocabulary, that it is based on three principles: c o n t r a r i n e s s, u n i t y, and c o m p l e m e n t a r i n e s s. We shell use the principals in a while, and this will explain their meaning. Now we should only mention that according to our con-vention the principles, when separated from the law, lose their meaning. They are indispu- table generealizations, resulting from the manifesting itself law. This rule is binding on us: if the law occurs, the principles, on which it is based, come true. The principles are, then, tools for an intellectual analysis of the law.

Coming to the definition of consciousness, we assume that there exist a Reality, the Only Substance, unimaginable at our human level of cognizance, from which, as from a common stem, two categories of existence arise; they are contrary to, but mutually condition, each other: consciusness [1] and matter.

One on the above categories, matter, can be partly cognized by senses. It is due to this fact that our ideas of matter come from. Matter manifests itself to the man, the cognizing subject, and demonstrates some of its features, traits. We can, for instance, say that matter is limited. We recognize also the multitude of material objects, their impenetrability. They are located in space, and change in time.

But what can we say about consciousness? After all it is not subject to sensory reception. Let us muster for help, therefore, the principle of opposites. If we can trust the principle, then, in opposition to matter, we will be able to say, that consciousness is unlimited. Besides, unity and penitrability are its traits. It is devoid of shape, is unchangeable in time, and so to say, it is not affected by time and space, through they determine its existence as an attribute of matter.

Generalizing, we can state that the features of consciousness can be described as oppositions of the corresponding traits of matter. They are, as it were, a reversed image of the features of matter after their passing through a “lens”, which is an opposition resulting from the principle of contrariness. This principle, then, discloses to us an inexhaustible source of knowledge in relation to different features of consciousness.

The opposition of a certain universal feature of matter deserves close attention. The feature results a l s o from cognition, and it can be named b e I n g. This opposition is non-being, nothing. So understood nothingness is then a universal feature of consciousness. To this problem we shall return later, for our ability to imagine has undergone a severe trial.

There arise other pestering questions. For instance: how should the p e n e t r a b I l I t y of consciousness be understood, if it is an unlimited entity? What is to penetrate through what?

Now we have to summon, in turn, the already mentioned principle of unity. According to this principle, consciousness forms a unity with every the most minute particle of matter, penetrates it and supports it, conditions by itself its existence.

The principle of unity marks also another characteristic trait of consciousness. The principle as if differentiates it from the Spirit, or in any case - from everything that cannot be opposed to matter, that transcends matter. Consciousness cannot exist where there is no matter, and it cannot be any other than opposed to matter. Certainly, matter should be understood in a wide sens, also in its various subtle, invisible to us aspects. Word s e l f - c o n s c I o u s n e s s in a narrower, psychological meaning.

We should also mention that the law of the identity of opposites defines mutually opposed features I a certain peculiar way. Their opposition is d e t e r m I n e d by the principle of unity. This means that the opposition cannot be held to be a genus category, which which is, or is not. This is a category of degree. It can be said that in every feature there is at least a small amount of the opposite feature. They both are as if two sides of the same coin. We can say that they satisfy the principle of complementariness, well known also in physics in relation to other mutually opposed features or natural phenomena.

Thus, the law of the identity of opposites is the key to understanding the nature of consciousness, it makes possible to investigate into its essence, and also to comprehension of other laws and principles in agreement with which it manifests itself.

The above deductional lineage of consciousness, as a category of being which originated together with matter from the Only Substance, from Spirit, may produce the impression of being a heuristig fiction, despite its intuitional obviousness. Therefore we shall endeavour to discuss the problem of consciousness nature in some other way.

Consciousness, as an object of investigations, cannot be described by psychology in its nature. This is not allowed by a certain principle, according to which no scientific discipline can determine the nature of the object of its investigations. Thus, for example, physics does not explain what electricity is. Physics, on the other hand, deals with several other perceived traits of electricity: current, its voltage and intensity, the induction of current, the intensity and potencial of electric fields,etc. Physicians study the reciprocal relations of these features, they measure their quantity, while technicians empoy practicallythis knowledge. Similary as

it does not explain the nature of elecricity, physics does not enter into the nature of such objects of its research as gravitation, or, finally, matter. These problems are treated by the branch of philosophy called metaphysics, or ontology as it is sometimes called, so, a field of knowledge extending beyond the graps of natural science, for which the only criteria of correctness is the experiment, i.e. an objective test whose results are identified by means of senses.

Using a somewhat remote analogy, we can say that the relation of metaphysics to consciousness resembles the relation of physics to electricity: metaphysics cannot explain the nature of consciousness similary as psychology cannot.

We must agree, thought, that such a view has to meet a lot of objections.We shall take up this burden, on credit temporarily, hoping that we shall succeed in fulfilling our obligations. Let there be no illusion yet that is easy to convince someone at this point, someone who has not come himself to definite views.

Metaphysics then assumes that the nature of being should be the subject of its speculative investigations, so, the subject is everything of which we can say that exist. Formally the same holds true for consciousness. Apparently, then, we can suppose that metaphysics is the most vast field of studies, and that no questions about the nature of being, thus also about the nature of consciousness, not lead us outside this field.

There are numerous philosophical systems,ofen mutually opposed, which find this option true, by the same infringing the principle just put forward. Thus, for example, on the grounds of metaphysics either matter or consciousness is arbitrarily assumed prior, which creates idealistic or materialistic monism. Priority is usually understood in such a way that consciousness (or matter) is taken to be the substance of independent existence, and matter (or consciousness) is then only an attribute, or the manner of existing of this substance. There are also dual systems, which maintain that both the mentioned categories are substance.

We have, however, to oppose the acknowledgement that mutually opposed systems are equal, because logic and intuition hold that truth can be only one. From this the necessity of arbitrary choice results, which is determined not by thinking but by other unconscious psychological factors.

The belief that there are categories of existence which extend beyond the domain of metaphysics is expressed by contemporary thinkers of such high standing as Heisenberg, Weizsacker, Gadamer, among older ones - the eminent Polish philosopher and mathematician Jozef Hoene-Wronski. We can suppose that this idea was known to many an intuitional mind of the Middle Ages, and to the genial thinker, i.e. to Thomas Aquinas. Also the books by H. Ditfurth, the outstanding modern popularizer of natural sciences, should be pointed to.

Assuming that consciousness is a special, distinct category of being, a category whose nature cannot be defined within the limits of metaphysics, we can make an endeavour, to extend these limits. Such an endeavour, though without employing the word consciousness itself, has been undertaken and brought to realization by one of the most distinguished intel-lects of our time, the German philosopher Martin Heidegger. In the extensive quotation from his work we can follow the track of its author’s thoughts, admiring his precision and strict- ness. Heidegger was one of the first to achieve by means of his intellect that what was previously attained by use of intuition and other mental powers. Here follows the mentioned quotation:*

Worauf der Waltbezug geht, is das Seiede selbst - und sonst nichts. Wovon alle Haltung ihre Fuhrung nimmt, ist das Seiende selbst - und weiter nichts. Womit die forschende Auseinenderstezung im Einbruch geschieht, ist das Seiende selbst - und weiter nichts. Aber merkwurding- gerade im dem,wie der wissenspricht er von einem Anderen. Erfor- scht werden soll das Seiende nur und sonst - nichst; das Seiende allein und weiter - nichts; das Seiende einzig und daruber hinaus - nichts. Wie steht es um dieses Nichts? Is es Zufall, dass wir ganz von Selbst so sprechen? Is er nur so eine Art zu reden - und sonst nichts?

Allein was kummern wir uns um dieses Nichts? Das Nichts wird ja gerade von der Wissenschaft abgelehnt und preisgegeben als das Nichtige. Doch wenn wir das Nichts dergestaltpreisgeben, gehen wir es dann nicht gerade zu? Aber konnen wir von einem Zugeben sprechen, wenn wir nichts zugeben? Und geraten wir vollends mit alledem nicht in ein leeres Wortgezank? Muss nicht gerade jetzt die Wissenschaft ernent ihren Ernst und ihre Nuchternheit einsetzen, dass es ihr einzig um das Seiende geht? Das Nichts - was kann es der Wissenschaft anderes sein als ein Gruel und eine Phantasterei? Is die Wissenschaft im Recht, dann steht nur das eine fest: die Wissenschaft will vom Nichts nichts wissen. Und dies ist am Ende die wissen- schaftlisch strenge Erfassung des Nichts. Wir wissen es indem wir von ihm, dem Nichts,nichts wissen wollen. Die Wissenschaft will von Nichts nichts wissen. Aber ebenso gewiss bleibt bestehen: gerade wo sie ihr eigenes Wesen auszusprechen versucht, ruft sie das Nichts zu Hilfe. Was sie verwirft, nimmt sie in Anspruch. Welch zwiespaltiges Wesen enthult sich da? Bei der Besinnung auf unsere faktische Existens - als eine durch die Wissenschaft bestimmte - sind wir mitten in einem Widerstreit hineingeraten. In disem Streit hat sich schon ein Fragen entfaltet. Die Frage verlangt nur eigens aus- gesprochen zu werden: W i e s t e h t e s u m d a s N i c h t s?

And later (7, p. 12):

Gibt es dar Nichts nur, weil es das Nichts, d.h. die Verneinung gibt? Oder lieght es umgekehrt? Gibt es die Verneinung und das Nicht nur, weil es das Nichts gibt? Das ist nicht entschieden, ja nicht einmal zur ausdrucklichen Frage erhoben. Wir behaueten: das Nichts i ursprünglicher als das Nicht und Verneinung.

Nothingness understood in this way encourage to be experienced by man. The questions arise: if and how nothingness can be experienced? Heidegger’s reply is as follows: Die Angst offenbart das Nichts … Das Angst verschlagt uns das Wort. Weil das Seiende im Ganzen entgleitet und so gerade das Nichts andrangt, schweigt im Angesicht seiner jedes

“Ist - Sagen” (7, p. 16). Heidegger, and also, as it seems, Hegel [2] calls nothingness b e I n g (das Sein) of a being (das Seiende). A being is not, then, being, but is something unlimited, transcendental, something which extends beyond the domain of metaphysics, beyond any premises and limitations.

Before we go on with our reflections on nothingness, let us read how the experience of nothingness is presented by an American naturalist and writer Carlos Castaneda. He lived many years with Mexican Indians, where he was an apprentice of a certain wizard Juan Matus. The practical knowledge acquired from Matus was supplemented by the theoretical one, astonishingly analogous to the just commented idea of Heidegger. Being is called here tonal, nothingness - nagual. Castaneda describes the experience of nothingness through which he passed during his initiation in company of another of Matus’ disciples, a boy named Pablito [3]:

Finding myself above the cliff, I did not notice anyone, and started to hop at the place, breathing deeply. I calmed down after a while. I stood motionless with my back to the cliff, when suddenly I saw a silhouette of a man in front of me. He was sitting with the head hidden in his arms. I felt a moment of intense fear but quickly explained to myself that the man must have been Pablito. I imagined that he had probably not recognized me, and that he had frightened so much that he hid his face not to see anything. Before coming closer to him I was taken by an irrational fear. I stiffened at the spot, my hand put forward. The man raised his head. He was not Pablito. His eyes were like two giant mirrors, like tiger’s eyes. My body leapt back like a spring, without any action of mt will. I took a leap backwards so quickly and so far that it would be impossible in normal conditions. I was so frightened that I would flee from the place at once if someone did not keep me back by the arm. The feeling that someone was keeping my arm drove me into a total panic. I screamed. My outburst was not an ordinary scream but a long terrible howl.

I turned my face towards the attacker. It was Pablito, who was trembling even more than I. My nervousness reached the summit. I could not speak, my teeth chattered, and there were shivers down my back, so that I cowered automatically. I had to breathe through the mouth.

In trembling voice Pablito told me a nagual was lying in wait for him. As soon as he was out of his claws he jumped into me, and I nearly killed him with my screech. I started to laugh, letting out the most ludicrous sounds. After I had regained self-control I told Pablito that apparently the same had happened to me. In effect my tiredness vanished and I felt a flush of strength. Pablito clearly felt alike. We started to giggle nervously.

Such an intense experience of fear is undoubtedly a unique phenomenon. The encounter with nothingness, meaning living through irrational emotions, is of some interest for numerous lay students of religious experiences. Thus, for instance, the famous German expert in religion, Rudolf Otto, depicts experience of nothingness in his book Das Heilige, calling it mysterium tremendum.

Returning, however, to the earlier mentioned idea we can try to consider nothingness experienced in this or that way to be the experience of consciousness, which appears to man as being of a being (seiende Sein). Consciousness, then, is described as a category of existence trans-

cending the domain of metaphysics. It is something other than being, other than matter. Together with matter consciousness originates from the All-Being, from the Only Substance, whose existence has been confirmed by various, already mentioned writers of antiquity and of modern age.

Consciousness and Form

Consciousness, then, occurs together with matter as its inseparable, second pole. Together with matter it springs from a common stem - the Spirit.

Matter is limited. To its attributes belongs the abundance of various shapes, of individual forms, changing or one passing into another with the flow of time. Form is an inseparable attribute of matter.

Consciousness is devoid of form, does not change in time, and feels itself to be a whole, a unity. Yet an individual material being, shown as a form, wallows in consciousness, is as if immersed in it. Consciousness adheres to, unites with form, identifies itself with it. Thus united consciousness begins to feel itself to be a part of a whole, to be a form. It experience any change, or destroying, of the form as a loss of its existence. On the other hand consciousness has a sense of its unchangeability, eternality. Here is a germ of conflict. The loss of the form appears to the identifying with it consciousness as dread.

There arises the question: what happens to an individual being, to a material form, when consciousness dissociates from it? We can suppose that the form ceases to exit then, that it returns together with the lost consciousness to the arch-matter, or to the maternal Spirit, from where it has emerged, and where our imaginative capacities do not reach.

Let us suppose, however, that there exists something which we can call divisibility of consciousness. We venture to say this despite its apparent contradicting the indivisibility, or the unity, understood strictly, of consciousness. We are allowed to do that, however, due to the principle of complementariness. [4]

Let us imagine, then, that not all of consciousness dissociates from form but only its part. Maybe some forms, of a special structure, may bind with themselves a certain surplus of consciousness, which can be dissociated without losing its identification with form. The existence of such a surplus can underlie the fundamentals of the secret of life, for it gives peculiar chance s for development to an individual being. Consciousness united with form can, so to say, emerge in its part from form, then to return to it. This mechanism is a source of the perception and cognition of the world, it also sets a boundary between that what is subjective or between the subject and the object.

When, however, the consciousness surplus is satisfactorily great, and its part not only dissociates from form but also ceases to identify with it - then the consciousness experiences dread, or identifies itself (temporarily or permanently) with another form. This has to cause certain definite experiences, which are, as a matter of fact, described by mystics, and others, those who perform practices connected with a change of consciousness state. Christian mystics undergo the experience of bliss, yogins and buddhists - samadhi or satori. There are states of bliss in which the dissociated consciousness identifies itself with a higher, more perfect form. Identification with a lower, less perfect form is possible as well. There are known, for example, spontaneous experiences of identity with the nearest surrounding, even with an concentrated attention is focused (3, p. 18).

So, in every form of visible or invisible being, also organic or inorganic, matter and con- sciousness appear together, as if in various proportions, building up copious rich structures and forms. We could say that the participation of consciousness in matter is demonstrated as an in matter to organize itself. Depending on which of the categories of existence prevails in an examined object, this object is more or less subject to objective laws, which always act in the same way whenever the conditions in which the laws are valid are identical.

The isolation of natural sciences resulting from the rigorous care for their objectiveness is a natural consequence of dualism, or of materialistic monism, deeply rooted in our culture. We accept the minutest examination of matter, done in s e p a r a t I o n from consciousness, treating matter as a different, independent element of being. This attitude, based on the obviousness of the macroscopic experiences, is a kind of dogma in science, and, like every dogma, it puts in order and facilitates comprehension of some problems, being yet an impediment for understanding other ones. Only after we bring the dogma to the status of hypothesis it is possible to change the hypothesis, and to remove the impediment.

Let us take the contemporary theory of gravitation as an example. The gravitation field is one of several kinds of field known to contemporary physics. It differs, however, signi- ficantly from those fields (what is, maybe, an obstacle in working out a unified field theory) because it is, in a way, unipolar. In gravitation state of the bodies being in reciprocal quiescence there is only attraction, without any repulsion. Both Newton and contemporary physicians take this incompleteness of the theory of gravitation for granted, in consequence they accept the impossibility of changing, or of screening off from it, or overcoming, the gravita- tional field in any other way without dynamic use of centrifugal force.

Maybe, however, the other pole of the field of gravitation resides in consciousness, so, in the domain ignored by physics? We can suggest this on the basis of experiments with a change of human body weight resulting from altered consciousness states. This sort of investigations is being carried out in Western institutes of parapsychology. Thus, for example, in 1977 the results of the studies on the influence of changed consciousness states in the so-called transcendental meditation were made known, and their influence on physiological and physical processes in human organisms. The phenomenon of man’s levitation (hovering in the air) was also demonstrated, (Fig. 1) [5].

Fig. 1

The phenomenon of man’s levitation, investigated at MERU laboratory in Switzerland.

It is obvious that if natural sciences were taking into account the factor of consciousness, then it would lead to basic changes in the long established theories, so, this cannot be undertaken without opposition and without overcoming multiple difficulties. It has been said that beauty is an expression of the bliss descending from the power of Spirit over form. Maybe this power results exactly from an ability to identification and to dissociation of consciousness from form? Certainly it is so, yet probably it is not its source.

We could suppose that consciousness possesses some other properties, namely some decisiveenergetic capacities. The capacities appear as Will and Might in the process of creativity and of form change. These are factors which condition every being and motion, without them nothing would happen and exist. The Hindu m a n t r a, for instance, usually expressed by a definite sound, is a symbol of might and motion; the way in which mantra appears in its dual aspect, singularity and plurality, together with the appropriate articulation and structure - is a word, a controlling instruction which expresses an act of creative will.

What is, however, the source of these properties, of these factors? Can we attribute them to consciousness? Maybe it exist outside any manifestation?

If we were careful, we should abstain from any hurried answers to those questions. We could only, using again our imagination, presume that a memory of definite creative structures may be preserved in some very subtle form, with which all the cosmic consciousness identifies in its unificationary aspect. It would be Impersonated God, Brahma, Father, who, in accord with the principle of complementariness, includes in himself a “background” of the arch-matter, of Arch-matter with whom he has united. Otherwise - he would depart to the incomprehensible bosom of Spirit.

If this proposition is not true, then the source of will and might be consider in the domains extending beyond the two categories of being, i.e. beyond consciousness and matter. This source can be the Only Substance, Spirit, that, in all, is the source of everything. Irrespective of, however, according for the source, both will and might manifest themselves as the properties of consciousness. We learn this from the law of the identity of opposites, for both the properties are either complementary or opposite to the properties of matter. In general, we can observe that the more subtle matter is, the greater its sensitivity to influence of consciousness, and the greater consciousness surplus can be bound with it. Thus, the development of consciousness, although in its essence not subject to any changes, can be understood as a process of change in material forms, with which consciousness identifies itself. In this context we ought to speak only of the development of self-consciousness.

We can claim that consciousness, in relation to material form, takes on itself various syntax. It can appear in a quantity indispensable only for creating and preserving the form. This quantity, or property, we should call the 3-rd aspect of consciousness. It does not undergo dissociation, neither does it stop to identify with the form.

A certain surplus of consciousness, which in fact dissociates itself, but which cannot lose the identification with form, should be called the aspect 2-nd. Finally, we will call aspect 1-st that sort of surplus which can cease to identify with form. In order to make it possible, however, the aspect has to adjust accordingly its form, to change and develop it. As soon as this is done, and it stops to identify with the form, then it can maintain its unification with this form, or develop a union with another one. It can also attain something which we have named the gain of power over the form, l I b e r a t I o n.

Now we can observe that the three aspects of consciousness correspond to the so-called the three manifestations of Logos, which have been accepted by various schools of esoteric knowledge [6]. They are: Mother (or the Holy Spirit 3), the Son (2), and the Father (1). They bestow form,

life, and human dignity on matter.

The rule of constructing spatial forms

We shall undertake now a description of a heuristic rule of the manifestation o the law of the identity of opposites, according to which spatial forms can be created. We can carry out the following mental experiment.

Fig. 2.

The creation of light space: A - anisotropic quasi space | B - bipolar light space

Let us imagine a transparent sphere of unequal density (Fig. 2A). Let the density at the centre of the sphere be the highest, unlimitedly great theoretically. We can assume that the density decreases in some defined and continuous way when we move farther from the centre of the sphere. In the figure, circular isolines are drawn, which join the points of equal density. We are dealing, then with an area central anisotropy.

Let us put a source of light S in the centre of the sphere. The beams of the light will radiate vertically to the isolines of density. For an observer outside the sphere should shine. Let us move now the source of light S in any direction at the distance e away from the centre of the sphere N. In this new situation the light beams will bend in the known way, demonstrated in the Fig. 2B, forming a figure similar in shape to magnetic field. Incidentally this similarity is not only optical, but is deeper, since the tracts of the curved beams are described mathematically in the same way as the tracks of magnetic field lines [7].

If the radius of our transparent sphere is long enough, then no light beam (except one, directed in the direction NS) should leave the sphere. At this we can finish our mental construction.

We can name now, by means of terminology taken from Sanskrit, the transparent sphere - as j a n t r a or anisotropic quasi-space with the center N, the light source - m a n t r a or the emitter S, and the generated light sphere - t a n t r a or space T. Let us assume that there is a close relation between the amount of energy (of light) radiated by the mantra S and the distance e of the poles N and S, and the range of the mantra (the radius of the sphere) R. With an increase of the generated energy these simultaneously increase: the distance e and the radius R. If the impulse of energy which forms the light space (the Tantra) is repeated cyclically, then maybe some features of elasticity occur: the mantra S approaches the pole N in every cycle, becomes identical with it ( at that moment the Tantra disappears completely) and moves to the opposite side of the pole N, again creating the Tantra. By moving in this way, e.g. by harmonic movement, mantra, and by the same the space calling Tantra, undergo a peculiar dynamic vibration.

While expressing my regret for this introduction of alien notions and for the possibly hard to read part connected with our mental experiment, I would like to point out that it illustrates a certain rule of creation, i.e. that of forming an anisotropic space - through splitting. According to this rule, as we have already mentioned above, the law of the identity of opposites may be manifested. The rule is largely based on imagination and on historical analogies. By employing Hindu words we suggest its correspondence to some ancient views of oriental philosophy. This rule is also employed by the so-called Tantra art, but this is a separate, interesting problem.

The described rule has not been described, nor verified, by means of contemporary research technics. This subject probably awaits its scholarly discoverer. Despite all this, however, we can take a step forward and imagine, having the demonstrated rule in mind, what cosmological repercussions could result from questioning the space isotropicity in g e n e r a l.

It seems that apart from intuitional feeling, based on sensory experiences, there are no grounds for believing that space is isotropic. On the contrary, contemporary investigations in quantum physics field theory shown that the nature of elementary material particles has the field an anisotropic quality. If space is an attribute of matter and cannot exist beside it - then would it be not natural to consider space to be anisotropic as well? It would be also in agreement with Aristotelian understanding of space.

It is hardly necessary to stress how its opinion is unpopular. It amounts, after all, to a revision of the fundamentals of physics, or at best to a re-working of the theoretical assumptions of some of its branches. We have to notice, all the same, that there are eminent investigators, e.g. the Brasilian physician Cesar Lattes, among contemporary scientists, who raise some objections against space isotropicity, against constant light velocity, thus, they threaten the very foundations of relativistic physics. Also the latest discovery of the longitudinal component of light wave vibration, made by excellent physicians L. de Broglie and Vigier, may lead to the acception of space anisotropicity.

Let us imagine that space is anisotropic, and that there is the center of anisotropicity in our Solar System somewhere near the Sun (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3

The tracks of beams in the Solar System between the Earth and the anisotropicity centre

(cross-section I-I through mantra, according to Fig 2B) NS - the poles of the light space, Z - The Earth

The light velocity at the Earth orbit is c. 300,000 kilometers per second, yet, in these conditions, it decreases when coming closer to Sun, and as we go away from it - the velocity increases. In whatever direction we would send a beam from Earth - it will unavoidably come to the center of anisotropy. Thus, all the Solar System will be kind of a monstrous microscope, foused on the anisotropic center. The “elementary” material particles, confined in the center, of magnitudes relative to the length of light waves when the velocity of light is decreased, will be interpreted as s t a r s. Manifold running of beams through the whole space of the Solar System will show to the viewer distant galaxies. If we, giving vent to our fantasy, imagined a journey to stars, it could turn out to be a journey into the depths of matter inside the Solar System.

The fantastic picture of the Solar System shown in this way has to cause understandable protest. We do not have to assume, however, that the anisotropy center is located in our System. We can situate it also at, for instance, the center of our Galaxy, or we can suppose that there are a great number of spaces of central anisotropicity in the universe. There can be taken into account some other kinds of fields as well, not all of which have been probably discovered. I only wanted to show how far-reaching consequencies in the interpretation of the world can result from a change of certain, maybe too arbitrarily approved, collective suggestions in science.

Coming back, however, to the described creation rule, we can act the wizzard and imagine that somewhere, where the attributes of time and space are possibly manifested in some other way, in some unknown to us although accesible dimension, there exist the mentioned rule as anarchetype. It duplicates in the manifested sphere of being in various temporal-spatial relations of unimaginable diversified scale - from the minutest material particle to a planet or a star. The scale of manifestation of each Tantra may depend upon the magnitude of the portion of the stimulating energy, virtually appearing (in presently unknown, not observed way) in the respective points of the quasi-space. The areas of tantras may be included one inside another, or may form resultant superior tantras and other complicated patterns [8].

Fig. 4

The configurations of balls whose centres from regular solids (view from above)

A - tetrahedron , B - cube, C - octahedron

We can imagine that there is a definite sequence of Tantra building and their organisation into still more complex forms. Let undifferentiated tantras be build first, the ones of very small portions of the stimulating energy, which can be united with, for example, gravitons, the particles of gravitation field. We are dealing, then, with a set of something of the sort of extremely small “bubbles”, or balls of the same diameter.

Let us suppose that balls get together in groups of several, thus building various possible systems, as shown in Fig. 4.

Fig. 5

Platonic solids

A - tetrahedron, B - cube, C - octahedron, D - dodecahedron, E - icosahedron

Joining together the centres of the balls in every of these systems makes a regular geometric solid. Four balls form tetrahedron, eight balls - cube, six balls, differently arranged - octahedron. If the mentioned solids were completed with a dodecahedron and icosahedron regular, we would have a whole set of Platonic solids (Fig. 5). For Plato is reported to maintain that the structure of matter is based on regular solids.
The mechanism of grouping together of these elements and their building still more complex spatial forms is of the supreme interest. First let us consider the simplest groups, which consist of two or three balls (Fig. 6). Joining together by a straight their centres cannot form spatial solids,

but merely flat geometric elements: a segment of the line or the triangle. Nevertheless the groups form, so to say, tantras of the second rank, the ones of two or three elements. Subsequently the tantras of the second rank can form tantras of the third rank by means of union, etc. Maybe tantras of different ranks can be united, too.

Fig. 6

Second rank Tantra of two and three elements

What, however, unifies, supports the component tantras? We can also turn our attention to the three elemental tantras and imagine that every one of the three component tantras gives a part of its energy (a part of the mantra) to the mantra of the higher rank. Because of this, somewhere, e.g. in

the center of gravity of the three component tantras, there forms the “founded” by them Tantra, which is one of a higher rank. Although the manner of energy transmitting from the component tantras to the resulting one is unknown to us, we can suppose that it happens due to a phenomenon resembling the resonance of vibrations similar to each other.

Let us assume next that the amount of the energy transmitted to the resulting mantra from the component ones can increase, by which the durability of the Tantra of a higher rank is prolonged, and its mantra has some abilities to form tantras of a still higher rank. In this way various complicated forms can be built. The structure of these forms is, as it were, remembered, although the mantras belonging to the tantras of a lower rank give a considerable part of their energy to the tantras of a higher rank, building thus still more solid material forms.

There arise some questions: what rules govern the creative energy of mantras? What causes the fact that tantras group together and break down in this and not the other way? From where does the purposefulness and the beauty of originating forms come from? What is the source and the nature of life? This is another set of questions which cannot be answered on grounds of rational thinking, whose correctness is verified only by sensory, external experiences.

We can suppose that everything depends upon the will, which determines every being and every creation. The will puts its stamp on, marks with itself every form, every living creature with which the aspect 3 or 2 of consciousness has been united. The creative processes occur in these spheres almost spontaneously, for the forms have no apprehension of their own individuality, of their being the subject capable to make any creative decisive acts.

From among all the creatures known to us it is man only, gifted with the aspect 1 of consciousness, who is able to manifest the will, which is in him brought to consciousness. The will is manifested together with this s e l f - c o n s c I o u s n e s s, sensed as the ” I “.

Psychological conditions of Art

Before we start our discussion of psyche in relation to artistic creativity, I would like to point to certain matter building patterns, disreputed some time ago and disapproved in natural sciences as unscientific. What I mean is the occult, or theosophic conceptions, held to be esoteric ones, which have originated because of the employment of that psychic phenomenon which is called clairvoyance.

According to these concepts, our Solar System is coded by the number seven. There are seven degrees of the density of matter, of which the familiar to us physical degree is the most rough, the least subtle. The subtle matter is comprised in the less subtle one, just like sand grains come between larger grains of gravel, or like water particles which fill the space between sand grains.

In the light of esoteric learning, psyche is a material formation, and is made up of some matter more subtle than the physical one: of emotional, i.e. astral matter and of cognitive, mental one. Psyche is built by various forms, quite probably formed in accord with the above described rule. Particular forms retain a certain degree of autonomy, nevertheless they bind in a peculiar unit inside the human being, called p s y c h e in the psychology of depth.

Out of numerous forms which build psyche one is distinguished, the one created of the most subtle cognitive matter in which the image of cosmic consciousness, of cosmic I, similar to the reflection of the sun in a dew drop is reflected. This image is a sense of ” I “, it is the self - consciousness of our individual being. Psychologists call this form the e g o. Ego has a privileged function in the whole psyche, for it can govern the centres of perception and expression. This consists in receiving desires and sensations, also in the ability to satisfy the desires to the degree allowed by external conditions. Desires carried by libido, the psychic energy, come from deeper regions of psyche. They contain a definite meaning, i.e. ideas, which are mirrored in the mental, they are expressed as appropriate subtle forms.

The attention of ego is directed at the external world in everyday conditions. We usually do not think about the source and the nature of our thoughts and desires but we identify with them, we

regard them to be ours, to be ourselves. Man, however, in a certain period of his life has a chance to pay attention to his own psyche, to his internal world. He gradually starts to comprehend and to perceive that his emotions, desires, thoughts are something other than he is himself, he begins to treat them rather like external objects. For ego, this means the beginning of I n d I v I d u a t I o n, of an intense development of self-consciousness. Experiencing of this process should be considered to be the essential condition for all authentic artistic creativity, for art making.
The individuation of the artist can be then understood as the capacity for losing the identification of ego with flowing into it images of psychic forms, which come from the depths of psyche. The union with the forms, (or rather with their images) is preserved in the process. This is supported by the fact that ego becomes aware, perceives the forms [9].

We ought also to admit that ego has some amount of libido at its disposal, subjected to its will, this libido is the m I g h t of ego. The might can form its own ideas and manifest them, usually through mental forms, least energy-consuming.

Let us turn our attention now to two of man’s psychic powers: intellect and wisdom. Without entering into details about the powers we can observe at the moment that they occur together in different proportions, so to say; yet, they differ significantly.

Intellect functions in this area of psyche which is made conscious, that is, it functions among the forms reflected by ego, i.e. those with which it has united. Depending upon the amount of libido available to ego, less or greater skill and scope of intellect are manifested. The scope limits a certain area, which is the r a t I o n a l sphere of psyche, called knowledge. It is also the area of forms which are made as if edge. It is also the area of forms which are made as if socially conscious, one

in which language and other means of communication work. Those means of expression which art is compelled to use also belong to this region. Art uses them by attributing to them a deeper, sym-bolic significance, to which we shall return later.

Wisdom is a sign of the lack of ego identification with the psychic forms which are made conscious. As in the case of intellect, a certain set of these forms is also determined socially. It occupies a definite region of psyche, surrounding ego. The region is considerably enlarged whenever man starts the process of individuation. Owing to the loss of the identification of ego with the brought to consciousness region of psyche, a certain amount of libido is liberated. The liberated libido can be directed at the process of bringing to consciousness still deeper psyche regions. Also, it enhances ego’s sensitivity to the transmissions coming from the not conscious forms, which make the I r r a t I o n a l sphere of psyche.

Due to the individuation, then - men transcends the area of forms which are socially conscious, penetrates with his consciousness into the irrational sphere of psyche, obtains knowledge, and experiences states which cannot be expressed by conventional means of social communication.

The knowledge and the experiences produce a certain potential which makes the artist express them. The accessible means of expression remain, however, totally in the rational sphere of psyche. Therefore the artist enriches them, imposing upon them symbolic meanings, which make it possible to express also those of the sensations, borrowed from the irrational sphere of psyche, which can be admitted and made conscious, or experienced by a social perceiver.

Drawing, as the field of art which is the subject-matter of this Triennale, is undoubtedly a means of expression particularly apt for imposing deep symbolic meaning. It is, then, an excellent way of creative expression in art.
In the conclusion of this rather long statement on consciousness and form I would like to mention that certainly much of what I have put forward can be greeted with scepticism, for these are not matters which could be successfully defended on rational grounds. It is easy to use a label in relation to them, as for instance, the views can be called hinduism, neoplatonism, augustinism, or holism. Any of the labels would be right to some degree. Yet, it is significant that truth is not made but discovered.

In all the times and in all countries truth, often hidden, has emanated to man. It is hard to think that it could be otherwise. There is, however, danger in using any labels. When we do it, a certain mechanism of speech works. Precisely, when we utter a word we suppose that everything is known on the object to which the worth refers, and that is usually not true. It is a psychological habit which makes us do it, the

habit that has been fixed after the evolution process. It often causes severe errors, but it is not easy to liberate from this trap, set by language. Using, however, our imagination and moderately correct thinking we have a chance, maybe, to develop in ourselves those faculties which will enable us to comprehend unconscious, important issues, and, what is most important, to understand ourselves.

Carl Gustav Jung, after a long severe illness, wrote: The only healing power which acts upon us is the act of getting to know ourselves in the light of complete truth. Somewhat later he remarked: Psychoneurosis is after all a sickness that the soul has been suffering which has not found a sense of its existence (10, p. 11).

All Rights Reserved
Translated by Tadeusz Piotrowski

top ^