OVERCOMING THE ANTINOMIES OF HUMAN EXISTENCE : ONTOLOGY OF TRICKSTER

The purpose. This paper aims to study the ontological status of a trickster character in ―Panchatantra‖ and its receptions. Methodology. The author has used analytical methodology of C. Levi-Strauss, C. Jung’s theory of archetypes, and hermeneutical methodology. Theoretical basis and results. Perception of the world in the form of a narrative is inherent in the very specifics of the human thinking. Among the most famous literary narratives that structured cultural experience of different nations are the framed story ―Panchatantra‖ and its receptions ―Kalilah and Dimnah‖ and ―Stefanit and Ihnilat‖. The framework of the analyzed text is the story about two jackals Karataka and Damanaka, Lion, and Bull. ―Panchatantra‖ is deeply rooted in the animal epos, which is based on the totemic myth. Myths were created by primitive thinking that sought to systematize the world, to give it order through binary oppositions. Their hard core is ―Life Death‖ opposition. A myth deals with oppositions and seeks to neutralize them. Thus, a myth serves as the logical tool to overcome the fundamental contradictions. This is carried out by introducing a mediator. Two poles, two extreme points are unambiguous; ambiguity ―occurs‖ at an intermediate stage only. Shift from one point to another is impossible directly for this we need a mediator. In the given narrative the binary opposition ―Life Death‖ is replaced by its metaphor Bull and Lion, herbivore (metaphor for life) and carnivore (metaphor for death). These oppositions are mediated by Jackal (Karataka&Damanaka) that feeds on carrion and has a dual nature. A mediator, which overcomes or at least mitigates the binary opposition, is seen as a compromise between herbivores and carnivores that embody the antinomy of life and death. This mediator is a trickster bipolar character (good and evil at the same time). A trickster freely acts in unordered world of Chaos without Life Death limitations. Scientific novelty. The breaking of cyclical time of the myth and deploying it into linear time gave rise to characters-doubles: the only one mythological image disintegrated and turned into different actors. A phenomenon of events became the basis of narrative storytelling. ―Panchatantra‖, ―Kalilah and Dimnah‖, ―Stefanit and Ihnilat‖ have a dialogical form, which can be seen as a dialogue within one personality, i.e. at a certain stage one single mediator is splitting, and we get two characters Karataka and Damanaka, Kalilah and Dimnah, Stefanit and Ihnilat. They represent opposing views and wisely defend their positions. This dialogue-dispute has neither beginning nor end. Karataka and Damanaka are the bifurcation of one single synthetic character the manifestation of bipolar worldview that combines the opposing principles of life. Conclusion. The true nature of a trickster opposes any restrictions: it is open to everything. A trickster is free to move from one pole to another, he constructs reality and plays with it metaphorically overcoming the antinomy of life and death.


Introduction
Incorporation of cultural patterns in the narratives contributes to the formation of the cultural space within the more general field of social space and allows the participants of a certain culture to understand the diverse contexts of their own life experience [11].Narrative acts as a set of rules that includes commonly agreed and successfully operated patterns within a given culture.It is an open and flexible model of the world and a model of the individual -I‖ by means of which people construct themselves as a part of their own world [9].Narrative stories reflect the perception of the world that is always filled with interesting and surprising stories.Perception of the world in the form of a narrative is inherent in the very specifics of the human thinking.Among the most famous literary narratives that structured cultural experience of different nations are the framed story -Panchatan-tra‖ and its receptions -Kalilah and Dimnah‖ and -Stefanit and Ihnilat‖.

Literature review
For a long time researchers were interested in the phenomenon of the extreme popularity of -Panchatantra‖ and its receptions.In the 1830s this problem was investigated by N. Makarov and I. Snegirev, in the mid-19th century -by A.N. Pyipin.Later, these interwoven series of fables were studied by T.Benfey and A.N.Veselovsky.Many researchers paid attention to -Panchatantra‖ and its versions.I. Hertel, M. Gepener, A. Kryimskiy, D. Chizhevskiy, A. V. Ryistenko, S.K. Smirnov, I.M. Filshtinskiy, Ya. S. Lurie, O.P. Lihachova, P.A. Grintser were among them.According to outstanding orientalist S. Oldenburg, -Panchatantra‖ is one of the most popular books in the world (after the Bible).
However, these studies were mainly conducted in the field of philology.The linguistic features of texts were analyzed, their genre specificity and structure were traced back, the historical roots of these scripts and the ways of their transplantation were found, and similarity of plots in different versions of the text was revealed.But still now -Pan-chatantra‖, -Kalilah and Dimnah‖, -Stefanit and Ihnilat‖ have not been sufficiently studied within a philosophical discourse.
Thus, it seems important to study a wide range of issues.Among them it is necessary to figure out a philosophical sense of a trickster character as one of the most important archetypes in the history of mankind and as a metaphor for overcoming the antinomy of life and death.In mythology a trickster (cheater, dodger) is a deity, person, or animal who plays tricks or otherwise disobeys conventional rules and behavior.His actions do not fit into -Procrustean bed‖ of morality.The term -Trick-ster‖ was probably first used in this context by American archaeologist and ethnologist D. Brinton in 1885 [12].The mythological image of a trickster was analyzed by P. Radin, C. Levi-Strauss, K. Kerenyi, C.G. Jung, E.M. Meletinskiy.

Purpose
This paper aims to study the ontological status of a trickster character in -Panchatantra‖ and its receptions.

Methodology
The author has used analytical methodology of C. Levi-Strauss, C. Jung's theory of archetypes, and hermeneutical methodology.

Theoretical basis and results
-Panchatantra‖ is deeply rooted in the animal epos, which is based on the totemic myth.Totemic -first ancestors‖ are the heroes of the archaic mythology, -... they are undivided animal-human mass....Myths willingly emphasize that animals once were human beings and only later have got the animal image‖ [2, p.27].Activities of totemic ancestors did not determine the entire world, but only its specific locuses.When myths were grouped into cycles, totemic ancestor became the cultural hero, the demiurge.He manifests trickster's essence − he wins (using tricks) or loses.
The framework of the analyzed text is the story about two jackals, lion, and bull.It is the basis of the first chapter of Indian -Panchatantra‖ (3-4th centuries) [5], Arabic -Kalilah and Dimnah‖ (8th century) [1], Greek version (11th century) and some Slavic versions named -Stefanit and Ihnilat‖ (15-17th century) [6].In the forest ruled by Lion, two jackals Karataka (Kalilah, Stefanit) and Damanaka (Dimnah, Ihnilat) lived.They were suspended from governance, therefore, they had no possibility to show their talents of courtiers.One day a Bull appeared in the forest; his voice scared all inhabitants including king Lion.Then tricky Damanaka proposed to reconcile Lion and Bull and engender friendship between them.He implemented his plan, but something unexpected has happened: Lion became very close to Bull and jackals left out in the cold again.Seeing that this friendship brought him no benefit, Damanaka provoked Lion to kill Bull.It is the animal tale, which is based on the myth devoid of etiologization and sacralization, the myth created by primitive thinking that sought to systematize the world, to give it order through binary oppositions.Their hard core is -Life -Death‖ opposition.
With the decline of the archaic consciousness that perceived any object as not equal to itself but as a part of the other objects [3], narrative structures emerged.Shift to logical thinking was cha-racterized by creation of narrative stories.Focusing on them, people organized and comprehended their experience, their place in the world − the world where -life‖ was a desirable goal and -death‖ was something to be escaped at any cost.Human consciousness deeply perceives life -death opposition and wants to overcome or at least mitigate it.In the given narrative instead of the binary opposition -Life -Death‖ we see its metaphor − Bull and Lion, herbivore (metaphor for life) and carnivore (metaphor for death).In nature they meet only when hunting and fighting.In our stories they live in harmony and mutual understanding for a long time.It is not a narrator's dream of the -eternal peace‖, it is a desire to overcome the antinomy of life and death inherent in human consciousness.
A myth deals with oppositions and seeks to neutralize them [10].Thus, a myth serves as the logical tool to overcome the fundamental contradictions.This is carried out by introducing a mediator.Two poles, two extreme points are unambiguous; ambiguity -occurs‖ at an intermediate stage only.Shift from one point to another is impossible directly − for this we need a mediator.Prominent French anthropologist and philosopher C. Levi-Strauss revealed the nature of trickster character.If direct transition from one extreme point to another is not possible (like -Life -Death‖ opposition), they can be replaced by the other two − plant and animal kingdom, herbivores and carnivores.These oppositions are mediated by a zoomorphic creature that feeds on carrion and has a dual nature.A mediator is seen as a compromise between herbivores and carnivores that embody the antinomy of life and death.
Thus, the mediative structure arises [4].This mediator is a trickster -bipolar character (good and evil at the same time).The ambivalence of a trickster is due to his mediative nature that must be overcome.C. Levi-Strauss studied the myths of South American Indians, where raven or coyote act as a trickster.In Indo-European epos jackal (in our case) or fox plays this role.This is confirmed in the script: jackal Damanaka acquainted Bull (herbivore) with Lion (predator) and his friend Karataka noticed that Damanaka joined -the grass eater and the Lord‖ [5, p.58].
Instead of a binary opposition -Life -Death‖ we have got a ternary model -Bull -Jackal -Lion‖.Herbivore Bull and carnivore Lion act as the metaphor of Life and Death.Jackal is -a mitigation of this and the related antinomies.He eats carrion, and this is a compromise between herbivores and predators (metaphor for life and death)‖ [2, p.34].Thereby the function of jackal is the reconciliation of antinomies of human existence.
Mediative structure makes it possible to determine the ontological status of the narratives' characters.Lion and Bull are poles, extreme points, jackal is a mediator.When the story opened, jackals Karataka and Damanaka were away from the royal court because there was the only one member of a binary opposition -Lion.Since each member of a binary opposition gets its meaning in the contrast with the other member, jackals cannot perform their mediative function: it does not exist ontologically (there is no opposition).When Bull appeared, this function was actualized and ternary structure that mitigated polarities came to light.Damanaka initially promoted interaction between Bull and Lion: it was profitable for him.This created a balance of forces, natural ontological situation.But Lion's behavior became unnatural, being Bull's friend he -behaved like herbivore‖ [5, p.71].Two extreme points coincide and the mediator is no longer needed.A union of life and death as the implementation of the principle coincidentia oppositorum suddenly emerged.This is difficult to comprehend through the lens of binary oppositions inherent in human thinking.It is a violation of the order of being.Jackals are -out of business‖, the opposition has been overcome without them.Hence, it's necessary to destruct this unnatural friendship and to restore the usual order of being.However, Bull died through Damanaka's intrigues.There are no more oppositions and the mediator is not needed again.This is the end of the story about Bull, Lion and jackals in Indian -Panchatantra‖ − the oppositions do not exist and there is nothing to mediate.In Arabic version -Kalilah and Dimnah‖ its author Ibn al-Muqaffa added a chapter devoted to the trial of Dimnah (Damanaka).It was borrowed by Greek and Slavic versions of -Stefanit and Ihnilat‖.As a result, both jackals died because they had nothing to mediate.Ontologically they are useless within the destroyed mediative structure and from the ethical point of view they should be punished.
It is rather difficult to extract the moral evaluation from binary oppositions themselves.Binary opposition is the background of the myth.We have to remember that the mythological morality does not coincide with the traditional, thus it would be premature to extract a conventional moral interpretation from the myth.Moralization arises in the process of desacralization of the myth and its transition into the animal tale.The emergence of the -tale time‖ contributes to deetiologization, and moral evaluation becomes particularly important.Moral of the trickster's stories is ambiguous, it depends on certain life situations.It can be adapted to each individual case.This -moral syncretism‖ is derived from the mythological triksterdom (triksteriada) wherein positive and negative evaluation of heroes is secondary to most of their actions.There is no clear delineation of the categories: the notions of good and evil have preserved archaic syncretism.Such stories describe the variety of the human characters giving the listener a chance to highlight key points.Such narratives liberate a person from the strict moral duties as far as a trickster -throws‖ morality.This manifests the internal autonomy of human life.Mythological mediation largely determines the peculiarity of narrative forms.In -Pan-chatantra‖ and its receptions jackal's actions destroy the friendship of other animals and they are evaluated as meanness and ingratitude.Etiological explanations are replaced by moral precepts.This opens the way to the fable − a popular narrative form in both Asia and Europe.
A trickster is the archetypal psychological structure that displays an undifferentiated human consciousness, which had just come out from the animal state.According to C.G. Jung, the trickster is a -collective image of the shadow, the totality of all the lower traits in humans‖ [8, p. 354].As far as individual shadow is a component of any personality it can create the -collective image‖, which is reflected in myths and later narrative forms as a trickster character.Thus, a trickster appears to be a collective personification and is perceived by a person as something familiar.This personification stands in a compensatory or complementary relationship to the -Ego‖ personality.With the devel-opment of society and consciousness the collective shadow is pushed deeper into human unconscious and exists there in a latent state.It is actualized at the moment when consciousness finds itself in a critical situation.Shadow is filled with energy and person comes face to face with the world of primitive Chaos.In this world everything is possible, because a trickster freely acts in this unordered world without Life -Death limitations.In such situations trickster narratives can perform a kind of psychotherapeutic function reminding individuals of low moral and intellectual level of human development [7].

Scientific novelty
The breaking of cyclical time of the myth and deploying it into linear time gave rise to characters-doubles: the only one mythological image disintegrated and turned into different actors.A phenomenon of events became the basis of narrative storytelling.-Panchatantra‖, -Kalilah and Dim-nah‖, -Stefanit and Ihnilat‖ have a dialogical form, which can be seen as a dialogue within one personality, i.e. at a certain stage one single mediator is splitting, and we get two characters − Karataka and Damanaka, Kalilah and Dimnah, Stefanit and Ihnilat.They represent opposing views and wisely defend their positions.This dialogue-dispute has neither beginning nor end.Karataka and Damanaka are the bifurcation of one single synthetic character − the manifestation of bipolar worldview that combines the opposing principles of life.Karataka, who embodies the protective principle, which sometimes coincides with morality, and Damanaka, who embodies the principle of activity, are two types of personality.Moralization that corresponds to rules and principles of any given culture can be introduced into open structure of the narrative, that is, a certain ethical -above-text‖ can be attached to it.

Conclusion
Archetypal image of one unified mediator − synthesis of Karataka and Damanaka -cannot be correlated with any morality at all: archetypal images are ambivalent, they are -beyond‖ moral conventions, good and evil.The true nature of a trick-ster opposes any restrictions: it is open to everything.A trickster is free to move from one pole to another, he constructs reality and plays with it me-taphorically overcoming the antinomy of life and death.