Indian Art: A History of Indian Art from the Earliest Times up to the Third Century A.D. c13.s5: Origin of the Buddha Image
Indian Art: A History of Indian Art from the Earliest Times up to the Third Century A.D. c13.s5
- Language
- English
Origin of the Buddha Image
c13.s5.1
The question of the origin of the Buddha image is a significant one from the stand-point of religious and art history. The emergence of the Buddha image was the outcome of long drawn preceding movement of devotional theism or *Bhakti*. The image was not an isolated event which happended all of a sudden without its predisposing causes. Opinions have differed as to the place of origin of the Buddha image whether in the Gandhāra school or in the Mathura school of sculpture. This question must be examined independently against the background of religious history and secondly with reference to the various elements of Buddhist iconography as they can be explained in the context of India's religious and art symbolism.
c13.s5.2
Let us take the religious background first. There can be no image unless there is a definite religious movement advocating the worship of the image. The evidence from inscriptions and sculptures found at Mathura and in the adjoining centres is abundant on this point. In the first century B. C. we have inscriptional evidence of the *Bhakti* cult of Vāsudeva amongst the Bhāgavatas prevalent in Mathura which inspired the followers of Buddhism. On a lintel fragment of the reign of Mahākshatrapa Shoḍāsa there is mention of the Mahāsthāna of the gods Saṅkarshaṇa and Vāsudeva. In another inscription found at Mora and also belonging to the reign of Shoḍāsa (1st century B.C.) there is clear reference to a shrine dedicated to the Five Heroes of the Vṛishṇis (*Vṛishṇīnām pañchavīrāṇām*). According to the Vāyu Purāṇa Vṛishṇi heroes were Balarāma, Kṛishṇa, Pradyumna, Aniruddha and Sāmba. In the Nārāyaṇa Vāṭaka inscription found at the ancient site of Majhamikā (*Madhyamikā*, modern Nagari near Chittor) reference is made to god Saṅkarshaṇa and Vāsudeva who were given the title of Bhagavān and also spoken of as *Sarveśvara*, i. e. pre-eminent among all deities. In the Besnagar inscription of Heliodoros there is reference to the Bhāgavata *Bhakti* cult and for the worship of Bhagavān Vāsudeva a shrine was also discovered during the excavation. This evidence proves beyond doubt that Mathura was the nucleus of a circle of the Bhāgavata movement whose radius covered an area of about 200 miles towards the southwest and southeast. In the region of Mathura itself several images of Balarāma have been found pointing to a cult of *Bhakti* to Balarāma as a deity. Special mention should be made of an image of Balarāma found at the village of Junsuṭi about six miles from Mathura which on stylistic ground should be assigned to about the late second century B.C. [Fig 145]. We may also point to the representation of the various Brāhmanical deities like Indra, Agni, Vishṇu, Śiva, Bhūmi (the earth goddess) and even stars like Phālguni on the Panchala coins of Ahichchhatrā.
c13.s5.3
All this evidence indicates that the emergence of the Buddha image was the outcome of a movement amongst the Buddhists for worshipping the Master in a human form in response to the same religious impulse as characterised the followers of the Bhāgavata cult. When the Vaishṇavas developed a psychological background and a religious emotion suitable for image worship the Buddhist could not long remain unaffected. They felt the need of a visual human symbol to whom they could pay homage and religious worship. This culminated in the representation of the Buddha in an anthropomorphic form.
c13.s5.4
Even in Buddhism the urge to render devotional worship to Buddha had existed long before the actual making of image but then he was represented by means of symbol. For example, instead of making the human image the artists depicted him in the form of some symbols well known like the Bodhi-vṛiksha, Dharma-chakra, Stūpa, Triratna, Chūḍā (head-dress), Bhikshā-pātra (Alm bowl) etc. Religious authority was clear in this matter, viz., that devotional worship in the manner of the Bhakti cult, could be offered to the Buddha depicted in a symbolic form but there was no sanction to make the image. Some great decision was required to get over this interdiction. The formulation and execution of image were significant problems which could only be disposed of at a very high level. It was not a question to be summarily settled by the ingenuity of some local artists working either in Mathura or in Gandhāra as some scholars have suggested. We may clarify the position in greater relief with reference to what happens within the orbit of those religious denominations who are opposed to image worship, e. g. Islam or Āryasamāja. These religious orders are definitely opposed to the making and worship of images and none of their followers will touch it with a pair of tongs nor is it possible to find a single image in any of their religious places. A similar situation must be envisaged in the early history of Buddhism.
c13.s5.5
Of the hundreds and thousands of Buddha images found at Mathura, in Gandhāra and in other places not one antedates the reign of Kanishka. Confused suggestions have been made as to the existence of a Buddha-like figure on the coins of Vema Kadphises, or Azes, or Maues. But none of them stands critical scrutiny and none of them has the value of a proven hypothesis. We have therefore ultimately to fall back upon the firm position that the earliest Buddha images are those that bear dates in the reign of Kanishka. Wheeler also writes, "It is a point on which most authorities agreed that the palmy days of Buddhism and Buddhist art coincide with the reign of the great Kushāṇa kings, and more specially with that of Kanishka."
c13.s5.6
When we examine the archaeological evidence we find that most important dated image is one found at Sarnath, viz. the colossal standing Bodhisattva dated in the third year of Kanishka and dedicated by Bhikshu Bala of Mathura. After the discovery of this particular image another one, dated in the second year of Kanishka, and made of the same kind of Mathura red sand-stone, was found at Kauśāmbī.
c13.s5.7
Subsequent to these two images may be arranged a large number of dated images in several other years of the reign of Kanishka and his successors, viz. Vāsishka, Huvishka and Vāsudeva.
c13.s5.8
When we look to the productions of the Gandhāra School we find a different story. We have no evidence up to now of the spread of any Bhakti cult in the area round about Taxila and Peshawar. About the images of this school Sir John Marshall has observed, “No one of the thousands of known images bears a date in any known era.”
c13.s5.9
As against the religious prohibition against the making of the Buddha image, it may be imagined that the Buddhists coming under the influence of the Bhāgavata movement of image-worship and temple-building had been wishing for some time past to depict the Buddha in human form. The force of the traditional prohibition was very strong and no one would dare easily transgress it. Therefore in the earliest stages of it to begin with a decision on the part of the highest patron of the faith was required in the matter. Archaeological evidence points to the fact that such a forward step was taken by Kanishka. Secondly in the beginning it was not the image of the Buddha but that of the Bodhisattva with which they started, and in which it was considered that no or the least violence to the belief or scriptures was involved.
c13.s5.10
The natural inference is that up to the time of Kanishka’s coming to the throne the tradition of not representing Buddha in human form was strictly observed. To break this convention there was need for a supreme decision at the highest level. Public opinion must have been raged for some long time past itself on the side of those who wanted to see the Buddha depicted in human form. In the context of the Mahāyāna thought such an urge on the part of the people must have been a very natural one and can be understood easily. The arrival of Kanishka on the scene with his far-flung authority and particular religious attitude was a significant event in a history of not only Buddhism but also Zoroastrism. He was responsible for the supreme decision in regard to the representation of a vast and varied pantheon on his coins. In the reign of his predecessor Vema Kadphises only the figure of Śiva with his Nandī was depicted on the imperial coinage. Kanishka decided that the figures of the Zoroastrian deities (Yazatas whose number is 27) should be represented on his coins. It seems to be a natural corollary to this decision, that Kanishka should have thought of including the Greek, the Brāhmanical and Buddhist pantheons also in his scheme of religion. So far as Brāhmanism was concerned he continued to include the figure of Śiva on his coins under the name of Oesho. As regards Buddhism it quite fits into this context that Buddha was selected as the most suitable representative figure in Buddhism to be adopted on the coins.
c13.s5.11
There was, of course, the age-old interdiction against the depicting of the Buddha in human form. Very naturally such a position could not be maintained any longer in the face of the emperor's decision to broaden the scope of the religious motifs to be adopted on the coins which was an exclusive royal prerogative. None can argue that the decision to depict the Iranian deities came from any other authority except that of the emperor and the same should be conceded as an undoubted fact for the image of *BODDO* on Kanishka coins. The convention regarding the representation of the Buddha through symbols was then relegated to the background. And, thus the way was thrown open for the representation of the Buddha in human form. Why the Buddha figure was not carved before the time of Kanishka should not be attributed to any want of capacity on the part of the sculptors. As the available statuary shows that the Mathura artists were quite competent to fashion the statues of gods and men in any shape of form. Something else was restraining them so far as the Buddha image was concerned. The urge of the people to see Buddha in a concrete shape could no longer be satisfied with the mere sight of symbols but demanded to visualise the Master in all his resplendent glory as the *Mahāpurusha* whose body was radiant with 32 marks (*dvātriṁśata-mahāpurusha-lakshaṇa*). Such seems to be the whole position with regard to the origin of the Buddha image. This explains the emergence of the image in its full context of religious, social, political and art conditions. All of which became integrated in the new creation of the Buddha image. It cannot be accepted for a moment that the creation of the Buddha image would be the result of the vague caprice of an unknown artist in the Gandhāra school. It may be specially observed that none of the three factors in relation to the Buddha image existed in Gandhāra, e.g. there was no background of any Bhakti movement there as has been shown above for Mathura, secondly no representation of the Buddha on any coins or sculpture has been preserved prior to Kanishka in the Gandhara school, and thirdly none of those elements which contribute to the making of the Buddha image by combining Chakravartī and Yogī ideals had any meaning or background in the Hellenistic tradition in Gandhāra. To become acceptable to the people for whom such images were meant, the Buddha statue could only be the fruit of a purposeful design intended to satisfy the needs of a religious aspiration of the people in the form of the Bhakti discipline which was now an established fact at Mathura. The Brāhmanical sculptures and the images of the Jaina Tīrthaṅkara and, of course, also the figures of Greek and Iranian gods and goddesses on the coins were there but none of them would be complete and ideal for the representation of the Buddha. If we analyse the various elements of the Buddha's iconography we have to fall back not on one single image type but generally on the whole statuary that had been evolved during the course of centuries up to about the first century A.D. To trace the complete formula of the Buddha image to its various sources alone can furnish an adequate answer to the much debated problem of the origins of the Buddha image.
c13.s5.12
Buddha images may be divided into two principal types, viz. standing and seated. These types are distinctly different in artistic conception from each other. Whatever be the source of these two main types from the point of view of art, when we take into account the elements of the Buddhist iconography we find that both are outcome of the single iconographic formula which was basically conceived as combining the ideal of a Chakravartī and the ideal of a Yogī. Buddha as well as Mahāpurusha was endowed with the thirty-two marks of the great man. These lent themselves easily to the iconographic conception of the Buddha figure. For example, the hump of wisdom on the top of the head called Uṣṇīsha, spiral hair between the two eyebrows called ūrṇā, elongated ear-lobes (pralamba-karṇa-pāsha), long arms up to the knees (Ajānubāhu), broad chest (viśālavaksha), palms of the hands and soles of feet marked with the Dharma-chakra (chakrāṅka-hastapādau), webbed fingers of the hands (jālāṅguli-kara) etc.¹ All these features are present in the human image of the Buddha and directly based on Indian tradition of an Ideal Great Man. Then there are certain features contributed by the Yogī ideal of the Buddha figure, e.g. the gaze fixed on the tip of the nose resulting in the half-closed eyes (nāsāgra-dṛiṣṭi), cross-legged posture (padmāsana or dhyānamudrā) with hands either placed in the lap or the right-hand raised to shoulder (abhayamudrā) etc. The conception of a Chakravartī also was responsible for some of the elements in the making of the Buddhist iconography, e.g. the two chaurie-bearer attendants who were invariably associated with royalty. The chhatra also was an indispensable symbol for royalty as seen in the Sarnath image of Bhikshu Bala and in the case of the Maholī Bodhisattva. They accepted halo round the head as the suitable sign of the glory of the Buddha. The conception of the halo was borrowed from Zoroastrian deities on coins, round whose head it depicted the divine glory hvarr (Skt. svara-maṇḍala) of Ahura Mazda. The Kushāṇa artists who were also called upon to represent the figures of the Iranian Yazatas (deities) on the coins of Kanishka obviously drew upon the original figures of Ahura Majda for the halo. The idea fitted very well with Indian conception of the divine figures being surrounded by a radiant orb (prabhāmaṇḍala); although no earlier representation of this feature can be traced at Sanchi or Bharhut. Gradually the halo became Indianised. Its Iranian origin was forgotten and during the Gupta period it was believed that the halo represented the shadow of the chhatra held on the head of the king. Kālidāsa mentions this conception in case of Raghu and Pārvatī. It suited very well the form
c13.s5.13
१. चक्राङ्कपादं स ततो महर्षिर्जातवन्नद्धाङ्गुलिपणिपादम्।
सोर्णभ्रुवं वारणवस्तकोशं सविस्मयं राजसुतं ददर्श॥७०॥
Buddhacharita of Aśvaghosha, 1. 60,
c13.s5.14
of the halo in the Gupta period which was now decorated as the blooming lotus with open petals and therefore known as *padmātapatra prabhā-maṇḍala* (halo of the form of lotus parasol).
c13.s5.15
The genesis of the Buddha image should be traced to the religious attitued that had been evolved amongst the various Buddhist sects as we know from the religious history of Buddhism. The followers of the Sarvāstivādī sect were in the ascendency at Mathura and also in Gandhāra. They were realists who believed in the value of the worldly ideas in the service of humanity and selfless action for the relief of human suffering and sorrow. It means that they placed higher value on the ideal of the Bodhisattvahood so much so that they declared that lord Avalokiteśvara would condescend to go to the Avīchī hell if he could make man happy by his presence there. This was a very powerful point of view which stirred deeply the feelings and emotions of all who listened to the new ideal. It appears that the Buddhists were divided into two camps, the traditionalists or Thervādins who were adherents of the Nirvāṇa ideal, viz. attaining Nirvāṇa by following the ascetic path; there were others the Sarvāstivādins who did not withdraw from the exacting struggle of the world but took utmost joy in sacrificing themselves for the happiness of all beings. This was in essence the ideal of the Bodhisattvahood in the palmy days of Mahāyāna Buddhism. The Bodhisattva ideal proved as of supreme attraction and it provided a new inspiration of positive service and devotion and endowed with social virtues and conscience. The effect of this bifurcated attitude was best seen in the case of the Buddha image. The followers of the Buddha ideal continued with their old restrictions on the image of the Buddha and most probably they confined themselves to the continuation of symbolical representation of the Master as was known in the art of Sanchi and Bharhut. On the other hand the Sarvāstivādin monks were getting more dynamic and powerful spreading of their activities from Taxila to Mathura and declaring fearlessly their faith in the tangible worship of the Buddha in a human from, for then the image was as real an element of religious worship as faith in the doctrine. We, therefore, find the earliest images were those not of the Buddha but of Bodhisattva which agreed with the Sarvāstivādin ideal.
c13.s5.16
The word Bodhisattva literally means one who is destined or worthy of attaining the *Bodhi* or enlightenment, i. e. a being on the path of *Sambodhi*. The Buddha himself was a Bodhisattva up to the age of thirty-five years, i. e. before his enlightenment at Bodhgaya. After the great enlightenment he became entitled to the epithet Buddha i. e. ‘the Enlightened One.’ The first part of his life of thirty-five years is also divided into two portions, viz. his palace life as a prince up to the age of twenty-nine when he was dressing himself in the robes and ornaments worthy of royalty, and when he became a recluse at the age of twenty-nine he gave up his costly dress and jewels and donned the *trichīvara*. The question which must have presented before the monks and the artists alike was whether the Buddha should be represented with or without royal dress. Here the evidence of the earliest sculptures is of value to us. The several early sculptures in the Mathura school throw significant light on this point. Whether they are standing images of muscular built and big size as the Sarnath Bodhisattva of the year three of Kanishka or the Maholī Bodhisattva, or slender seated type like the Katra Bodhisattva and Anyor Bodhisattva (both of which are undated but by the consensus of opinion of all scholars are among the earliest images made in Mathura school). [Figs. 146-7]. We find that it is the later phase of Gautama as Bodhisattva wearing monk's dress that was accepted for representation. It may be imagined that after sometime the urge to represent the Buddha in human form also must have become irresistible then it was found necessary to reorient the two types of images, the one without ornaments was chosen for that of the Buddha and the other with ornaments and royal dress became the type of the Bodhisattva image. When the artists were called upon to evolve a formula of the Buddha image they were not without a precedent, in the form of earlier examples of divine images.
c13.s5.17
Fig. 139 c
c13.s5.18
Fig. 140
c13.s5.19
Fig. 139 d
c13.s5.20
Fig. 139 g
c13.s5.21
Fig. 138 a
c13.s5.22
Fig. 139 h
c13.s5.23
Fig. 139 e
c13.s5.24
Fig. 143
c13.s5.25
Fig. 139 f
c13.s5.26
Fig. 141
c13.s5.27
Fig. 142
c13.s5.28
Fig. 144
c13.s5.29
Fig. 146 a
c13.s5.30
Fig. 145
c13.s5.31
Fig. 146 b
c13.s5.32
Fig. 147
c13.s5.33
Fig. 147 a
c13.s5.34
Fig. 148 a
c13.s5.35
Fig. 148 b
c13.s5.36
Fig. 149 x
c13.s5.37
Fig. 148 c
c13.s5.38
Fig. 149 a
c13.s5.39
Fig. 149 b
c13.s5.40
First in importance come the Yaksha images of the colossal standing type like that of Parkham. The Parkham Yaksha is rightly spoken of as the grand ancestor of all early Indian statuary. The standing Bodhisattva type was directly indebted to it. Both are freestanding and carved in the round, both of a colossal size, both have a muscular built, both impressive by their sheer volume, in both the divine chatacter of the image is sought to be conveyed by means of its size and dominant physical force. Both have their right hand held in *abhayamudrā*. In both the drapery is of simple character, consisting of a *dhotī*, a girdle and an upper covering (*uttarīya*) passing on the left shoulder (*Ekāmsika*). As Coomaraswamy has shown in his famous essay on ‘the origin of the Buddha image’ the colossal standing Bodhisattvas in the Mathura school were undoubtedly derived from the Parkham Yaksha type. Stylistically there is a closest resemblance between the Parkham Yaksha and the Sarnath Bodhisattva which are parts of the same art cycle.
c13.s5.41
It has been sometimes pointed out that the Buddha figure is represented on the coins of Maues, Azes or Vema Kadphises but none of these is free from doubt. The very poses of their hands indicate that they were hardly intended to represent the figure of the Buddha. For example, on the coins of Azes the figure has its right hand stretched horizontally outwards which is against any possible *mudrā* of the hands of the Buddha image. In the lap of the figure also there is a staff placed parallel to folded legs and projecting outwards which is meaningless in the case of a Buddha figure. In the case of the coins of Maues there is a similar object and the posture of the legs can hardly be said to be a true Padmāsana. The figure on the coins of Kadphises is very distinct and can in no way be said to be that of the Buddha. It holds in the uplifted right hand a full-blown lotus with a long stalk, a feature not found in any of the early Buddha images. Moreover none of these three figures seems to have had a halo round the head which was an invariable feature of all Buddha images as we see on the coins of Kanishka. [Figs. 148-9].
c13.s5.42
We should also, while considering the formula of Buddha images, have a look back into Maurya-Śunga art in quest of the various elements constituting the images in order to find out whether any of them was recognised as such in the early Buddhist art prior to Kushāṇa period. While the standing Bodhisattva was modelled after the standing Yakshas the seated type of the earliest Bodhisattvas like Katra and Anyor requires to be traced. Our attention is directed to the Aśokan Lion-capital of the Sarnath pillar. We find here a Dharmachakra as the topmost symbol surmounting the heads of the four lions. In this case it is possible to recognise the presence of the Buddha in the form of Dharmachakra, the four lions represent the lion-seat or Simhāsana. The lion seat stands for the Chakravartī aspect of his dominant personality. The symbolism of the Lion-capital clearly stands for the combination of the Yogī and the Chakravartī ideals which inspired the religionists and artists in formulating the personality of the Buddha. If we compare the Lion-capital and the Katra Bodhisattva image we find them to be the products of a single formula with only a slight modification. The Dharmachakra is replaced by the actual human figure of the Buddha holding his hand in *abhayamudrā* and the four lions carved in the round are replaced by the royal throne supported on the heads of two or three lion figures carved in relief. The search for the formula for the Buddha image must have been a very intensive one and the religious teachers as well as the artists must have gone all out with their resources both in the matter of traditional motifs and representations as well as religious traditions and beliefs in order to perfect an iconographic from which would be acceptable to all. The type of image that we find in the shape of the Katra Bodhisattva at Mathura does represent a synthesis and commingling of several strands that were available in the eclectic religious atmosphere of Mathura.
c13.s5.43
An analysis of the Katra Bodhisattva acquints us with the following features :-
c13.s5.44
(1) Buddha seated on lion-throne under a bodhi tree which gives a realistic touch to the presentation of the Master shown as he would have been in actual life.
c13.s5.45
(2) Seated in Padmāsana, with two legs crossed, which was a typical yogic posture, known from earlier times in Indian art and religion.
c13.s5.46
(3) The right hand is held in abhaya-mudrā and left hand placed on the left leg. This is an adaptation of the pose of hands, already seen in Yaksha images. The abhayamudrā is also entirely an Indian conception.
c13.s5.47
(4) The hands and feet are marked with Dharmachakra and triratna symbols. They form part of the conception of an ideal superman.
c13.s5.48
(5) On the top of the head, Uṣṇīṣa or raised spiral locks of hair (kaparda) which are believed to have left over on the Buddha's head when he cut off his hair. The hair on the head does not show any curve, as is the case in all images of Gandhāra school. This types of hair has been called as that of a monk with a shaven head. There is an Ūrṇā between the eye-brows a circular small whorl of hair.
c13.s5.49
(6) There is behind the head a plain undecorated halo with a scalloped margin.
c13.s5.50
(7) The drapery consists of a cloth fastened by a girdle as in the case of early Yaksha figures. The bust is covered with a saṃghāṭī which leaves the right shoulder bare. Only a few folds are shown on the left arm and the shoulder.
c13.s5.51
(8) Buddha is attended by a chowri-bearer on either side. These chowri-bearers are dressed like the householders. They can not yet be identified as Indra and Brahmā or Avalokiteśvara and Maitreya.
c13.s5.52
(9) In the upper two corners are shown flying Devas, throwing flowers on the Buddha. [Fig. 148].
c13.s5.53
Each one of the above features, perhaps with the only exception of the halo, is derived from Indian religious conceptions, associated with a Yogī or Chakravartī in general and the Buddha in particular.
c13.s5.54
In the early iconography, in case of the standing figures a chhatra or parasol is shown over the Buddha's head, which also was included in the paraphernalia of the Chakravartī. The feature of the two chowries and the chhatra was already the sign of royalty in early art as seen at Bharhut, in the figure of Māndhātā at Bhājā and at Sanchi. The formula of Buddha's image seems to have evolved by combination of the ideal Yogī seated in meditation and the ideal Chakravartī seated on a siṃhāsana with two chowri-bearer attendants with a chhatra held above. In the case of the seated figures, the chhatra seems to have been replaced by the halo.
c13.s5.55
The presence of the Bodhimaṇḍa or raised platform on which the Buddha was seated at Bodhgaya at the time of his enlightenment was accepted without question. It was easily transformed into a raised siṃhāsana borrowed from the Chakravartī iconography. From the outset the Buddha was believed to be a lion amongst the Śākyas, Śākyasiṃha, who was destined to sit on a lion-throne and, therefore, this association of a *siṃhāsana* with his image was taken to be appropriate. This formula of Buddha's image being seated on a lion-throne—supported on the heads of the four-lions—is not necessarily borrowed from anywhere else or even invented in the Kushāṇa period. As a matter of fact, this formula of lione-throne consisting of four lions and supporting the symbolic form of the Buddha is alealy present in the most explicit form in the Sarnath lion capital. In the later case, four lions seated back to back supported a Dharmachakra which symbolised the Dharmakāya of the Buddha or which is the same thing as Buddha being identified with his Dharma.
c13.s5.56
It thus appears that on the strength of the comprehensive basic formula comprising a good number of traditional Indian elements the seated and standing types of Bodhisattva images were perfected in Mathura school of sculpture. Naturally there were variations in the main types due to the intensive fervent of religious thoughts and beliefs amongst the Sarvāstivādī and the Mahāsaṅghika teachers whose activity was primarily responsible for the origin of the Buddha image.
c13.s5.57
The Katra type, wearing the monk's dress was accepted as the normal form of the seated Buddha image; although in its earliest stages even this type, as it is seen in the case of the Katra image itself, was designated as Bodhisattva. Besides, special forms of Bodhisattva and Buddha images began to be made in the Mathura school.
c13.s5.58
There are some other types of images to be noted. For example, (1) Bodhisattva Maitraya (future Buddha) of whom several examples are found in the Kushāṇa art, is represented in a standing posture, holding his right hand in *abhayamudrā* and an *amṛtaghṭa* (nectar flask or monk's bottle) in the left. For all practical purposes its iconographic formula is as that of the main type of the standig Bodhisattva images but the images are generally smaller in size and not very heavily built. [Fig. 149]. (2) Images of Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara are very rare in Mathura art. (3) Images of Kāśyapa Buddha have also been found. He was one of the seven Mānuṣī Buddhas but depicted independently of his companions. [Fig. 150]. Seven Mānuṣī Buddhas have already been depicted in the art of Sanchi, each having his distinct Bodhi tree. That tradition was continued in the Kushāṇa art of Mathura.
c13.s5.59
The important life scenes of the Buddha depicted in Mathura art include Birth (*Jāti*), First Bath, Great Renunciation, Temptation by Māra, Enlightenment, Descent from the heaven of thirty-three gods, Visit by Indra, First Sermon, Mahāparinirvāṇa.
c13.s5.60
It should be stated to the credit of the great masters working in the Mathura school, that they were alive and receptive to the influences from outside. Hellenistic motifs were accepted and welcomed by them for the purpose of their general stock of motifs both for decorative and representational art. For example, we have the following :—
c13.s5.61
(1) Bacchanalian scenes
c13.s5.62
(2) Hercules fighting the Nemean lion
c13.s5.63
(3) Rape of Ganymede
c13.s5.64
(4) Decorative motifs like the garland-bearing Erotes (*mālādhārī deva*)
c13.s5.65
(5) Vine leaves
c13.s5.66
(6) Corinthian capital,
c13.s5.67
and some other Hellenistic motifs which were freely borrowed by the Mathura sculptors and made a part of their own repertoire. [Fig. 151].
c13.s5.68
Our attention is divereted to a class of Buddha images made of the usual Mathura red sandstone but which show such features that are typical of the Gandhāra school. For example, there are some Buddha images having moustaches and amulet string (*rakṣāsūtra*) and being seated on a high cane chair, shown wearing Greek sandals. The presence of the moustaches on the face of the Buddha does not fit in with the Indian tradition. It seems to have been a feature borrowed from the Hellenistic images. The presence of the amulet string again points to the borrowing from the west, viz. Iran. There the goddess Atargate was endowed with a conspicuous amulet string. With the growth of Tantrism and the belief in the magical mantras in Buddhism even during the Kushāṇa period, it seems reasonable that in some of the images of the Buddha, which were most probably developed or formulated under the auspices of the special Buddhist sects or schools, the amulet string became a prominent sign in the iconography of the Master's figure. For example, the Bodhisattva image found at Ganesrā village in Mathura district is for all practical purposes identical with the Katra Bodhisattva image. But the former had also an amulet string on the chest. [Fig. 152].
c13.s5.69
In the Bacchanalian scenes Bacchus is replaced by Kubera seated on mount Kailāsa. He himself is depicted as pot-bellied and wearing a *dhotī*, but his attendants are shown with Hellenistic dress. It should be remembered that the Gandhāra motifs are only a very small fraction of the total output of the Mathura school of sculpture. Only about a dozen sculptures out of five thousand show these foreign features. The genius of the master artists at Mathura developed in its full bloom in accordance with their own traditions and they have blazed a trail of glory that was hardly excelled and that served as the model for the succeeding generations.
c13.s5.70
There were a number of Buddhist establishments at Mathura during the Śaka-Kushāṇa period as known from the inscriptions, e. g. Guhāvihāra of Kshaharāta- Śakas built in the time of Shoḍaśa on the banks of the Yamunā (Lion capital Ins.), Āpānakavihāra (No. 1612), Khaṇḍavihāra (No. 2801), Kraushṭikīyavihāra (No. 2740), Hārushavihāra (No. A 2), Śirivihāra (No. 461), Yaśaḥvihāra, Suvaṇṇakaravihāra, Chutakavihāra (1350) etc., through which the four great sects, viz. the Sarvāstivādins Mahāsāṃghikas, Sammitīyas and Dharmaguptakas were functioning with vigorous activity. The earliest to appear on the scene were the Sarvāstivādins followed closely on the heels by the Mahāsāṃghika teachers both of whom established their Stūpas under the patronage of the Khaharāta Kshatrapas. The Sarvāstivādins were interested more in symbol worship but seem to have taken interest also in image worship as shown by a seated Bodhisattva image on which the title Kshatrapa and the name Sarvāstivādin (Śavathivādiyanaṃ) appear together, but the main initiative in formulating the image came from the Mahāsāṃghiyas who were decidedy of Mahāyāna persuasion and were responsible for the installing of a large number of images, e.g. A 65, 1612, 2740. The Mahāsāṃghikas were giving a lead on several fronts, being liberal in their Mahāyānic outlook and patronising other subsidiary cults in the service of Buddhism.