|
The Indian Analyst
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA I may add that in Mathurâ we often find a cluster of lotus flowers between the feet of the image. Dr. Bloch noticed between the feet of the Śrâvastî image “ a peculiar object of uncertain meaning.” It has already been noted that the image is curved on the back. Unlike mediæval images it is in the round and not in relief. This circumstance makes it probable that it never stood in a temple, but was placed in the open, sheltered only by its umbrella,[1] a probability that is strengthened by the discovery of all the fragments of the image and of the umbrella in the open space between the Aśôka pillar and the vihâra excavated by Mr. Oertel. The Sârnâth image, though an important addition to our materials, only complicates one of the problems of Buddhist iconography. Had it not been inscribed, no one would have hesitated to call it a Buddha image. Both the royal dress and ornaments which were hitherto thought to characterise the Bôdhisattva[2] are absent, and the figure wears only the plain attire of a Buddhist monk, such as is invariably associated with statues of the Buddha. But the inscriptions alike on the umbrella post and, as will be seen presently, on the image itself, are quite explicit in designating it a Bôdhisattva.
What then are the distinguishing features of the Bôdhisattva ? Can it be, as Dr. Bloch holds, the bare right shoulder ? Such a theory seems hardly tenable. For there are numerous bare-shouldered images which represent Śâkyamuni at the moment of the Bôdhi, and we find among Gandhâra sculptures[3] the uncovered right shoulder regularly combined with that position of the hands which expresses ‘ the turning of the wheel of the Law ’ (dharmachakra-mudrâ), and which can only indicate an omniscient Buddha. To decide on this point, it would be necessary first of all to compare the two image of Anyor and Kâman, which belong to the same period and designated by their inscriptions as Buddha images.[4] That of Kâman (Bharatpur State, Râjputâna), as noted above, must be 71 years posterior to the Sârnâth statue, assuming that the date is expressed in Kanishka’s era, which in the light of its palæographical evidence seems most plausible. The Anyor Buddha image must be nearly contemporaneous with the Bôdhisattvas of Sârnâth and Śrâvastî. This is evident from the similarity both in the script and language and in the wording of their inscriptions. Unfortunately no photographs of either of these two statues are at present available. Of the Kâman image I only find the statement that it represents Buddha seated.
Anyhow, these four are among the earliest Buddhist images hitherto found in India proper ;
or more correctly I should say that no image has been found, which on epigraphical evidence can
be assigned to an earlier period. The fact that it was thought necessary to indicate the subject in
the inscription makes it indeed highly probable, that at the beginning of Kanishka’s reign statues
of Śâkyamuni─ either as Buddha or Bôdhisattva─ were a novelty, at least in Gangetic India.
We noticed, however, in describing the Sârnâth Bôdhisattva certain features which seem to be
borrowed from the Graeco-Buddhist school of Gandhâra. This fact not only confirms the theory
that the practice of making Buddha images originated from the north-west, but also indicates
we should be led to the conclusion that the Graeco-Buddhist school of Gandhâra flourished, not
under the Kushana kings, but under the earlier Yavana and Śaka rulers. This conclusion,
[1] This practice was also known in Gandhâra. Compare Foucher, L’art Grêco-bouddhique, Vol. I. p. 191 : “Il
faut dire cependant, pour être tout-à-fait exact, que quelques-unes d’entre elles se contentaient, comme, abri,
d’un parasol.”
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|