Indian Art: A History of Indian Art from the Earliest Times up to the Third Century A.D. c13.s5.10

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.