North Indian Inscriptions

PART B

‘bhut Lalitav, 59, 22 f.). Therefore it is said also in the Latitav. 55 that he descended into the right kukshi : dakshiṇāyāṁ(sic) kukshāv avakrāmad avakrāntaś cha sa dakshiṇāvacharo’ bhūn na jāve vāmāvacharaḥ. The entering into the right kukshi and the stay of the embryo there is quite in accordance with the Indian belief that a male child develops always in the right kukthi^[1], A clear hint at the supernatural entering into the right side of the mother occurs only in the Nidānakathā (J. I, 50, 22 f.), where it is said that Māyā dreamt that the elephant was walking three times from right to left around her bed and went into her womb having his her right side: mātusayanaṁ tikkhatuṁ padakhiṇaṁ katvā dakkhiṇapassaṁ tāletvā^[2] kuchchiṁ paviṭṭhasadiso ahosi. The author of the stanza in the Mvu. (I, 203, I f.) certainly did not Know of an entering from the right side. He says expressly that the queen lay down on her right side:

sa dani dakshiṇena pārśvena parinyāse śarīravaraṁ |
kusumalatā va drumavarnaṁ śayanaṁ parivelliyāśyatā^[3] ||

  The old artists therefore did not have any reason to represent the queen lying on her left side, the less so as this position would have been totally improper for her. According to the Buddhistic view, as it is handed down in A. II, 244 f.^[4], the human beings devoted to sensual pleasures sleep lying on their left side. This position called kāmabhogiseyyā is opposed to the position styled sihaseyyā which owes its name to the belief that the lion takes such position while sleeping. In the sīhaseyyā the person lies on the right side, placing one leg upon the other. This is the position taken by the Buddha while lying down: thus D.II, 134:137: atha kho bhagavā dakkhiṇena passena sīhaseyyaṁ kappesi pāde pādaṁ achchchādhāya; found shortened also in J. I, 119, 10 f.; 330, 27 f.; DhA. I., 357 etc. The sihaseyyā is also prescribed for the monk (A. IV, 87), especially in the middle watch of the night (A I, 114; II, 40). Therefore strictly speaking just the artists of Gandhāra are guilty of a mistake when representing Māyā in kāmabhogiseyya.

   Cunningham says that the artist tries to depict the tusks of the elephant by some strokes as consisting of three teeth on either side. He may be right in this respect, thought I cannot find anything of it in the photograph. The relief here conforms with what is said in the Mvu. and the Lalitav. (shaḍvishāṇa, Mvu. I, 205, 3; II, 8, 17; Lalitav. 55, 7; 56, 14; shaḍḍanta, Mvu. I, 207, 8; II, 11, 19; shaḍdanta, Lalitav. 39, 17; 55, 3). Neither Aśvaghosha nor the Nidānakathā mention this attribute. The decoration of the head of the elephant has been added by the sculptor on his own. In the Mvu. and the Lalitav. it is only mentioned thar he was red-headed (suraktaśīrsha, Mvu. I, 205, 3; II, 8, 17; Lalitav. 39, 17; 55, 7; indragopakaśiras, Lalitav. 55, 3). That the elephant was carrying a white lotus in its trunk is a speciality of the Nidānakathā. In the relief the elephant does not carry a lotus.

B 20 (814); PLATES XVIII, XXXII

ON a gateway pillar, now at Pataora. Edited by Cunningham, StBh. (1879), p. 143, No. 3, and Pl. XX and LVI; Hultzsch, ɀDMG. Vol. XI (1886), P.60; IA. Vol. XXI (1892), p. 233, note 52, Barua-Sinha, BI. (1926), p. 54, No. 153; Barua, Barh. Vol. II (1934). p.
_______________

^[1]See the literature given by Windisch l.c., p. 19
^[2]The Singhalese manuscript C^[s] reads, However, phāletvā ‘having split’ which is possibly the right reading.
^[3]Senart reads in the first line parinyāse; the manuscripts, however, read saṁnyase. The original reading of the first half of the verse was probably sā dāniṁ dakkhiṇena passena saṁniyāsi salīlavalaṁ. In the second half of the stanza stood, as shown by the metre, originally dumavalaṁ. The meaning is are changed by these reading.
^[4]Cf DA., 574 f.