|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
PART B Indian art the person of the Buddha is not represented, not only in his last existence on earth but also in the immediately preceding period of his stay in the Tushita heaven. That is proved by the relief in the middle of the so called Ajātaśatru pillar (Cunningham Pl. XVI). But it is doubtful whether this practice has been followed in our particular case, for here the Bodhisattva does not appear in human form but in the disguise of an animal. Another consideration is perhaps still more weighty. The representations in Bhārhut follow the standpoint of the Hīnayāna. The Hīnayāna, however, accepted the dream as a prophecy of the birth of a future Buddha, but not the supernatural immaculate conception. This is still maintained with all emphasis in the Sakish (Khotanese) poem of instruction 14, 54-56 and Aśvaghosha adheres to this standpoint. In the Nidānakathā a hint at the historification of the dream is to be found, but only in the appendix mentioned above on p. 89. In the popular belief, however, the historification was apparently already made a fact in the 3rd cent. B.C. At the end of the sixth edict of Aśoka in Dhauli we find seto, ‘the white one’, which refers to the figure of an elephant, and on the rock of Kālsī we find gajatame, ‘the best elephant’ under the figure of an elephant. On the rock of Girnār too, an elephant must have been carved out once. For below the thirteenth edict we find: (sa)rvasveto hasti sarvalokasukhāharo nāma “ the completely white elephant named ‘ the bringer of happiness to the whole world’ ”. These inscriptions do not leave any doubt that the carvings of the elephant referred to the Buddha, or to speak more exactly to the Bodhisattva. In this case it seems only possible to relate the representations to the persons of the Buddha, and not to a dream prophesying the birth of a Buddha.
Under these circumstances it seems to me more probable that the representation of the conception was intended as a reality. If one likes to consider the gesture of the female attendants as meaningless it would indeed be possible to make the following suggestion: the relief, as the inscription says, depicts the entering of the Bhagavat, but the artist did not know how to express it in some way others than by representing a dream which, at least according to the stories in the Mvu. and the Lalitav., took place at the same time as the conception[1]., That seems to the view of Foucher, who sees (L’art Gréco-bouddhique I, 291 ff.) Just in such representations the basis of the Historification of the original dream. An altogether sure decision of the question is scarcely possible.
In some other point, I believe, I am more justified in deviating from Foucher. The
queen in the relief lies on her right side[2], as she does also in the relief of Sāñchi[3], in a relief
in Amarāvatī[4] and on the frieze of Boro-Budur[5], whereas in the art of Gandhāra she
is depicted always as lying on her left side. Foucher[6] is of the opinion that this is due to an
inadvertency or unskilfulness of the old artists. But this reproach is not justified if it can
be proved that at their time the dogma of the entering of the Bodhisattva into the right side
of the mother did not exist at all. Indeed in the Mvu. as well as in Lalitav. It is stated
that the Bodhisattva was conceived in the right side of the mother’s womb (mātur dakshiṇe
kukshāv upapannaḥ, Lalitav. 60, 16), that after entering he remained in the right side of the
mother’s womb (dakshiṇe pārśve paryaṅkam ābhuñjitvā tishṭhati, Mvu. II, 16, 12, also I, 213, 8; abhyantaragataś cha bodhisattvo Māyādevyāḥ kukshau dakshiṇe pārśve paryaṅkam ābhujya nishaṇṇo
[1]The possibility of this explanation has already been thought of by Oldenberg, ɀDMG., LII, p. 642. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|
