Question

Given below are two statements: one is labelled as Assertion (A) and the other is labelled as Reason (R).
Assertion (A): The origin of Tabla is considered from Tripushkar.
Reason (R): Tripushkar instrument is divided into two parts.
In the light of the above statements, choose the most appropriate answer from the options given below:

• A. Both (A) and (R) are correct and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)
• B. Both (A) and (R) are correct but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)
• C. (A) is correct but (R) is not correct
• D. (A) is not correct but (R) is correct

Hint:

Pay close attention to etymological prefixes in ancient music terminology: Tri-pushkar literally indicates three drums, allowing you to instantly identify any statement claiming it has two parts as factually incorrect.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

Concept: The analysis of classical musicological texts requires evaluating historical lineage theories regarding instrument evolution. Assertion-Reason problems test your knowledge of both factual truths and logical causal relationships.

Step 1: Evaluate the validity of Assertion (A).
Assertion (A) states that the historical origin of the modern Tabla is traced back to the ancient drum system called Tripushkar. According to traditional musicological scholarship and descriptions in ancient texts like the Natyashastra, the performance techniques, physical construction, and structural application of the skin-loading paste (Marjana) used in the Tripushkar directly laid the technical framework for the development of the modern Tabla. Therefore, Assertion (A) is completely true.

Step 2: Evaluate the validity of Reason (R).
Reason (R) claims that the Tripushkar instrument is divided into exactly two parts. The prefix "Tri-" explicitly indicates "three." The ancient Tripushkar was actually an integrated three-headed ensemble system consisting of three separate drums: the Vamaka, the Haritaka, and the Urdhvaka. Because it comprises three structural pieces rather than two, Reason (R) is factually incorrect.