Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Development of Hindu Iconography c19.s6: Syncretistic Icons

The Development of Hindu Iconography c19.s6

Language
English

Contents

Syncretistic Icons

c19.s6.1

It has been shown briefly in Chapter I of this book how extant images belonging to various cults illustrate a feeling of rivalry and jealousy among their respective followers. One or two groups of such images have also been noticed in some of the chapters dealing with the cult icons, which belong to this category. Many are such Brahmanical Hindu images which emphasise this sectarian ill-feeling, and many are also the Vajrayāna Buddhist icons of the mediaeval period, which are blatant examples of morbid sectarianism. One among the numerous forms of Avalokiteśvara or Lokeśvara in the Vajrayāna pantheon is known by the curious name of Hari-Hari-Hari-vāhanodbhava Lokeśvara; it depicts Padmapāṇi-Avalokiteśvara, the spiritual son of the Dhyānī-Buddha Amitābha, riding on the shoulders of Viṣṇu (Hari) who has Garuḍa (Hari) as his mount, the divine bird-man again being mounted on the back of a lion (Hari). Advantage was thus taken of some of the various synonyms of the word hari by the sectarian iconographer in order to formulate such a type of icon in which the principal object of worship of the followers of one of the major Hindu cults was shown as a mere mount of a Buddhist divinity.

c19.s6.2

This is, however, only one side of the picture. Attempts at reconciliation and rapprochement between the rival creeds were being made even from a very early period, when some of them had not come into being, and others that had originated were being systematised. The sentiment so beautifully expressed in the famous couplet of the Dīrghatamas hymn (R.V., I, 164, 46) long before the evolution of these cults never lost its force in subsequent times, and it must have exercised its deep influence on many of the exclusive worshippers of subsequent times. The Ṛgvedic Ṛṣi rightly emphasised that the sages call the one eternally existing principle (in this context the Sun god) in various ways (ekam sat viprā bahudhā vadanti), and the names denoting this principle may be different, such as Indra, Agni, the celestial sun-bird Garutmān, Yama, Mātariśvā, etc. Many of the intellectuals among the followers of different cults, especially those with a liberal bent of mind, knew that the respective gods of their choice were but different aspects or names of the one absolute god who, by himself, was beyond the ken of speech and thought (avāṅmanasagocaraḥ). The spread of Vedāntic teachings among the worshippers of the various creeds was also not a little responsible for the growth of a liberal religious outlook.

c19.s6.3

The general trend of the guidance given in the Smṛti-śāstras for the proper control and regulation of the lives of the sectarian Indians was also an important factor in encouraging this feeling among the different groups of these worshippers or upāsakas. Approved Smṛti works like some of the Dharmaśāstras of the pre-Christian and early post-Christian periods, and the Manu- and Yājñavalkya-Smṛtis did not advocate the cause of any cult in particular. Ideas inculcated in some epic passages like those in the Bhagavad-gītā (VIII. 21; IX. 23, etc.), though extolling the greatness of Vāsudeva-Kṛṣṇa, in a way helped the growth of this mentality among the sectaries. Thus was developed among numerous persons belonging to different sects, who also followed the injunctions laid down in the authoritative Smṛti works, a liberal attitude towards matters of religious faith. Many of these persons of higher order, usually belonging to the order of Brahmans known as Smārtas, evolved a kind of worship described as Pañcāyatana pūjā in which the principal deities of the five approved Brahmanical Hindu cults were the objects of veneration. The principal object of worship in it was usually in the form of an aniconic emblem which symbolised all the five cult deities. It will not be possible to fix definitely the period when this custom came into vogue among the Smārtas, but clear archaeological evidence will be produced here, which will show that syncretistic tendencies were at work from a fairly early date. But before this is done, it will be useful to mention briefly the characterisation of the Pañcāyatana pūjā as given by a distinguished and keenly observant Western scholar and Sanskritist of the nineteenth century. Monier Williams describes the ceremony as he saw it being practised by some of the Hindus of Central and Southern India in this manner: ‘ Five stones or symbols believed to be permeated by the essences of the five chief deities are, (1) the black stone, representing Viṣṇu; (2) the white stone representing Śiva’s essence; (3) the red stone, representing Gaṇeśa; (4) the small piece of metallic ore, representing the wife of Śiva; (5) the piece of crystal representing the sun . . . . . . . . . . All five symbols are placed on a round open metal dish, called Pañcāyatana, and are arranged in five different methods, according to the preference given to any one of the five deities at the time of worship ’ (Religious Thought and Life in India, pp. 411-12). It should be noted that the particular mode of placing in the centre the symbol of any one of the five cult deities in the Pañcāyatana arrangement (thus giving special importance to him or her) may indicate the cult affiliation of the Smārta worshipper. Thus, the tolerant mentality of these Smārtas did not stand in their way of associating themselves to one or other of these cults. The Pañcāyatana pūjā of the Smārtas is also illustrated by many extant early and late mediaeval temples of India, in which the central shrine housing the principal deity is surrounded by four smaller shrines on the four corners of the quadrangle containing the figures of the four other deities.

c19.s6.4.1

Another important contributory factor to the growth of cult-syncretism was the mental attitude of the early foreign immigrants into India, the Śakas, the Pahlavas, the Kuṣāṇas and the Hūṇas. They were presumably less cultured than the Indians, and were very prone to be influenced by the latter, especially in matters of religion. But from the beginning they showed a proneness to pay equal homage to gods and goddesses of more than one creed. This eclectic tendency among them is very interestingly illustrated by the extant coins of these early alien rulers of India. The kings often used as devices on their coins the figures of deities belonging to different pantheons, and it can be presumed that they had some feelings of respect and veneration for at least some of the originals of these devices. At first most of the deities were recruited from the Greek pantheon, and this was natural, for the Saka-Pahlavas succeeded the Greeks in the sovereignty over parts of Northern and North-Western India, and imitated many of their coin devices. P.

c19.s6.4.2

Gardner, while commenting on the devices appearing on the coins of these alien kings, observes, ‘When we reach the issues of king Maues, we find a wealth of most remarkable and original barbaro-Hellenic figures, a figure resembling Tyche, holding in one hand a patera, in the other a wheel, who seems to be the original of the still more outlandish figure of Azes’s coins.’¹ Another instance of syncretism is to be found on a coin-device of Azilises, successor of Azes. Whitehead, while describing it in the *Punjab Museum Catalogue* (Vol. I, p. 136, Pl. XIII, Fig. 336), draws our attention to the syncretic panoply of the deity and characterises it as ‘a decidedly pantheistic type’. The syncretism at first lay no doubt in the fusion of Hellenic and non-Hellenic elements (*cf.* the use of the word ‘barbaro-Hellenic’ by Gardner in the extract quoted above). A great part of the latter was undoubtedly Indian, though it is very difficult to sort it out. But from the time of the Indo-Parthian king Gondophares, in some of whose coins the Indian deity Śiva has been recognised (in Chapter IV it has been conclusively shown by the present writer that Śiva appears for the first time on some square copper coins of Maues), the Indian element came to predominate by stages.

c19.s6.4.3

It has also been shown in Chapter IV that the great Kushan king Wema Kadphises was a votary of Śiva, for it was this god and his emblems, the bull and the trident-battleaxe, that were invariably present on his coins (in his Prākṛt coin-legends he is almost always described as *Mahīśvara*, i.e., Māheśvara, an exclusive worshipper of Śiva). His successors, Kanishka and Huvishka, introduced the somewhat novel feature of the extremely ‘varied reverse devices’ on their coins, the deities there being recruited from such widely divergent religious pantheon as Zoroastrian, Brahmanical Hindu, Buddhist, and rarely Greek. Kanishka’s affiliation with Buddhism is sufficiently established by Chinese literary data, but in this sort of medley of the devices on his coins, many scholars recognised his eclecticism in religious matters. But it can be proved with the help of some of the little known coins of Huvishka, that he paid his homage to more than one deity. Cunningham reproduced some copper coins of this king in his *Coins of the Indo-Scythians and Kushans* (Pl. XXII, Figs. 21-2), on one side of which he is shown standing in a suppliant attitude either before Nana or Umā (on a few of his coins Śiva is once shown accompanied by Nana and at other time by Umā). It is in one of the coins of this very king that the first attempt at cult syncretism may be clearly recognised, and the device may be the earliest representation of the composite cult-god Hari-Hara (*cf.* supra, pp. 123-24).

c19.s6.4.4

The device on the seal of the Heptalite Huṇa chief has already been noticed and commented on by the present writer; it stands for a syncretistic deity, combining in it Viṣṇu, Śiva and Mihira, two of the constituents being Hindu, the third Zoroastrian by name, but very probably Indian in the present set-up (*cf.* pp. 124-25, Pl. XI, Fig. 2). Reference has already been made in Chapter XI to the introduction of the East Iranian Sun cult into India at a fairly early period, and here is a syncretistic figure containing in it the Indianised adaptation of the Iranian Mithra or Mihira. The period to which this intaglio belongs marks an age during which the three cults of Vaiṣṇava, Śaiva and Saura had developed to a great extent. Side by side with the growth of the separatist tendencies evidenced by their formation and systematisation, a substratum of rapprochement and reconciliation was present.

c19.s6.5

¹ P. Gardner, *B.M.C.*, Introduction, p. lviii.

c19.s6.6

Such a syncretistic tendency is very interestingly illustrated by a fairly large number of mediaeval sculptures, one or two of which have already been noticed in Chapter I of this book. The latter may again be mentioned and described, and many more of this nature may be utilised here for the purpose of emphasising this trait of Indian mind in matters of religion. The Pañcāyatana pūjā of the Smārtas has just been mentioned, and its emblem used in more modern times, described. But a Pañcāyatana Śivaliṅga, originally found in a part of Bihar and now in the collection of the Indian Museum, which is being illustrated here, characterises in a very interesting manner the religious belief of a mediaeval Śaiva of Eastern India belonging to the order of the Smārtas. It is inaccurately described in the Museum records as a Caturmukha Śivaliṅga, but it really shows the four cult deities, Gaṇapati, Viṣṇu, Pārvatī and Sūrya on the four sides of the central Śaiva emblem, all of which taken together symbolise the five Brahmanical Hindu cults (Pl. XLVI, Fig. 2; only Gaṇapati and Viṣṇu are shown in the reproduction). Several such sculptures are known to me, a comparison of which with many miniature shrines of the mediaeval period lying derelict in the river bank at Banaras will be fruitful. These tapering shrines of about 3' or 3½' in height show niches on four sides, inside which are carved Umā-Maheśvara (Umā seated on the left lap of Śiva), Viṣṇu, Sūrya and Gaṇapati. These may also be called another mode of symbolising the Pañcāyatana worship of the Smārtas. A very interesting stone plaque hailing from Kaveripakkam (Southern India) to which my attention was drawn by my friend, C. Sivaramamurti of the Archaeological Department of India, may be described and illustrated in this connection. It is of oblong size and it contains the somewhat indifferently carved figures of such Brahmanical Hindu divinities as Gaṇapati, Brahmā, Narasiṃha, Śivaliṅga (?), Viṣṇu and Lakṣmī (?), Umā-Maheśvara with Nandī below, the Śrīvatsa-Śrī symbol and Durgā-Mahiṣamardinī. The sun appears to be absent in this medley of divinities, and thus this plaque cannot be described as the cult-emblem of a Smārta practising Pañcāyatana pūjā. But there can be no doubt that whosoever might have used it for his cult rituals in mediaeval times was actuated by a spirit of liberalism in which many of the cult deities and some of their aspects (cf. the Narasiṃha aspect of Viṣṇu and the Mahiṣamardinī aspect of Durgā) along with even Brahmā were simultaneously his objects of worship (Pl. XLVII, Fig. 1).

c19.s6.7.1

It will be of interest now to notice some of the mediaeval sculptures which in a very characteristic manner illustrate the fusion of, or rapprochement between, two, three or even four rival cults. The Hari-Haramūrti (or Haryardha aspect of Siva to a Saiva) emphasises the reconciliation between the two major cults of Vaiṣṇavism and Śaivism. One of the earliest stone reliefs representing this composite divinity is to be found at Badami, and is illustrated here (Pl. XLVI, Fig. 3). The four-armed god stands erect facing front, his back right and left hands holding a battle-axe with a snake entwined round it and a conch-shell (the respective emblems of Śiva and Viṣṇu), his front right hand is broken, the front left being in the kaṭihasta pose. The clear line of demarcation between the left (Hari) and the right (Hara) halves is emphasised by the treatment of the crown (the right part of it shows a jaṭāmukuṭa, while the left part a kirīṭamukuṭa), the two different ear-rings (a sarpa-kuṇḍala in the right ear, and a nakra- or makara-kuṇḍala in the left ear), the already noted emblems in the back hands, and the presence of the bull-faced Nandī and Pārvatī on the right, and that of the slightly pot-bellied dwarfish Garuḍa and gracefully standing Lakṣmī on the left. On the lower section of the panel are to be seen the dwarfish figures of the Śivagaṇas, some dancing and others playing on musical instruments.

c19.s6.7.2

A mediaeval sculpture from Bihar (now in the collection of the Indian Museum) does not contain all these elaborate features, but the right and left parts of the combined image stand for Hara and Hari, and the Hara aspect is emphasised by the ūrdhaliṅga sign not always present in such images. In such composite icons, the left side is invariably assigned to Hari or Viṣṇu. Viṣṇu was Mohinī, the beautiful female form assumed by him while distributing nectar churned out of the ocean by the Devas and the Asuras to deprive the latter of their share of it by bewitching them with her beauty; Śiva fell in love with this aspect of Viṣṇu. Another very interesting composite sculpture from Bihar (now an exhibit in the Gupta Gallery of the Archaeological Section of the Indian Museum) shows the four-armed Hari-Hara in the centre, the back hands carrying a trident and a conch-shell, and the front hands a skull-cup (?) and a discus; he bears the other usual features, and there are some attendants by his side. But what is unique in this sculpture is the presence of standing Buddha and Sūrya in the right and left sides of Hari-Hara. The halos round the heads of Buddha and Sūrya (the former stands on a double-petalled lotus and the latter on his seven-horsed chariot driven by Aruṇa) and the separate sections of the pedestal allotted to them prove that they are no mere attendants here, but are really cult objects for worship.

c19.s6.7.3

Thus, this unique sculpture demonstrates in a striking manner not only the combination of Hindu deities of Śiva, Viṣṇu and Sūrya, but also that of Buddha with them (PL. XLVIII, Fig. 1). The direct association of the Bodhisattva Lokeśvara (Padmapāṇi, Avalokiteśvara) with Brahmanical Hindu cult deities is further emphasised by two unique sculptures in the collection of the Asutosh Museum, University of Calcutta, both hailing from Eastern India. The beautifully carved brass figure of Śiva-Lokeśvara shows the composite two-armed ithyphallic god standing in the samapādasthānaka pose, on a double-petalled lotus, his right hand holding a kapāla and the left a triśūla; he is very sparsely ornamented, bears the tiny seated figure of the Dhyānī-Buddha Amitābha on the top of his jaṭāmukuṭa, and has two standing male figures on his either side. The śiraścakra with superposed ‘umbrellas’, the gracefully carved oblong prabhā with stylised swans dancing on the transom ends, the small figures of the donors and an unidentifiable miniature figure on the top left corner of the prabhā, the plain and simple triratha pedestal, and the delicate carving of the main figure and its two attendants endow the whole sculpture with a quality and character not usually met with in such hieratic sculptures. The sculpture hails from Barisal (East Bengal) and is a striking object of art of the early mediaeval period (PL. XLVI, Fig. 4).

c19.s6.7.4

A fragmentary relief from Eastern India (only the head and upper part of the torso with multiple arms, some intact, others broken, are preserved), probably from Orissa, now in the collection of the Asutosh Museum, shows also in an interesting manner the combined representation of Sūrya and Lokeśvara. The composite god appears to have been ten-armed, six of whose hands are gone; of the remaining four hands, two right hold a noose (?) and a full-blossomed lotus flower by its stalk, the two left holding a similar full-blown lotus by its stalk and another indistinct object. The tiny figure of the Dhyāni-Buddha Amitābha seated on the top of the raised coils of jaṭāmukuṭa indicates the Lokeśvara character of the god, while the full-blown lotuses held by his two parallel hands on either side in a manner in which they are shown in the hands of a North-Indian Sun-icon emphasise his solar nature; the lower portion of the god being gone, we cannot be sure whether there were boots in his legs or seven horses being driven by Aruṇa carved on the pedestal, and such other characteristics of a north-Indian Sūrya figure. The sculpture with its pointed torus-prabhāvalī can be dated in the late eleventh century or early twelfth century A.D. (Pl. XLVIII, Fig. 3).

c19.s6.8.1

Before some notice is taken of the other extant composite Hindu icons in which Mahāyāna Buddhist influence is clearly discernible, it will be useful to discuss the iconographic features of some syncretistic images where the constituent elements are all Brahmanical Hindu in character. Features of the Sun god are traceable in the representations of many of the cult deities. This is naïvely explained by the myth-maker by saying that from the ‘parings’ of the resplendent body of the Sun (the effulgent body of the god had to be trimmed by his father-in-law Viśvakarmā in order that his daughter Saṃjñā, the principal consort of Sūrya, could bear her husband's company) many characteristic traits by way of weapons, attributes, etc. were made for the other Brahmanical Hindu deities. The Gāyatrī mantra itself is conceived by orthodox Brahmans as Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Siva, in the morning, midday and evening respectively, each of which deity shines resplendent within the flaming solar orb. The close connection of Sūrya with Viṣṇu, or Viṣṇu as Nārāyaṇa, has already been commented on in Chapter X of this book. Images of Sūrya-Nārāyaṇa hailing from different parts of India are well known. But the composite icons combining in them the features of Sūrya and Śiva are comparatively few. One such can be recognised in the description by Hiralal of a six-armed composite image found by him at Madhia in the old Panna State in Bundelkhand region.

c19.s6.8.2

The figure holds in two of its left hands a triśūla, a padma, the third hand being in the varada pose; one of the right hands is broken, the other two holding a lotus and a mṛgāṅka (a deer symbol). Its legs are clad in shoes, and it is likely that the seven horses with their driver are present below (though this is not found in Hiralal's description). The boots on the legs and the two lotuses in the hands are unmistakable solar features, while the trident and deer symbols indicate the Śiva part of it. Bull carved in the left corner (evidently of the pedestal) and Garuḍa in the right corner may further emphasise that it combines in it along with Śiva element, the element of Viṣṇu. This figure is carved in the centre of the door (lintel) of a ruined temple, figures of various other deities of the Hindu pantheon being carved in the other sections of the door; the central position assigned to it proves that the temple was originally dedicated to the worship of the composite god.¹ But a very unique syncretistic image in which Sūrya and Śiva are the constituents is in the collection of the V. R. S. Museum, Rajshahi, which has been tentatively identified as ‘Mārttaṇḍa-Bhairava’ by K. C. Sarkar. It is a three-faced and ten-armed image of the 12th century A.D., found at Manda (Rajshahi), containing the usual accessories noticeable in a well-developed type of Sūrya figure of this part of India. Its central face is placid, the side ones being fierce;

c19.s6.8.3

its front two pairs of hands are broken, but the full-blown lotuses in one pair are visible; the back hands, which are preserved, carry, from the right side onwards, a khaṭvāṅga, a triśūla, a śakti, a *nīlotpala*, a *ḍamaru*, and a *sarpa*, flames issuing from its heads and shoulders (the Śivaite character of most of these emblems should be noted). The *dhyāna-mantra* of a particular variety of Sun (Mārttaṇḍa) appearing in the *Śāradātilakatantra* conforms to a great extent to its iconographic features, and the text says that such a variety of the Sun god is 'half' (a part) of Śiva (*Ballabhārddha*).¹ A composite representation of Brahmā and Sūrya can be recognised in the beautiful image of the 11th century A.D. acquired from Mahendra (Dinajpur, Bengal) and now in the collection of the V. R. S. Museum. It is similar in many respects to the usual two-armed Sūrya figures of this period, but its notable difference from them lies in the fact that the number of its arms is six. Its natural hands hold the usual full-blown lotus flowers, while the four additional hands show *varadamudrā* (with lotus mark on the palm), *akṣamālā*, *abhayamudrā* and *kamaṇḍalu*. The Dhātṛ aspect of the Sun god, the first in the list of the Dvādaśādityas, as described in the *Viśvakarmāvatāra śāstra*, holds lotuses in its two natural hands, a lotus garland (or a fillet of lotus seeds) in its (back) right hand, and a water-vessel in its (back) left (*Dakṣiṇe pauṣkarī mālā kare vāme kamaṇḍaluḥ |

c19.s6.8.4

Padmābhyāṃ śobhitakarā sā Dhātṛ prathamā smṛtā*). This North Bengal relief has no doubt much in common with the Dhātṛ aspect of the twelve Ādityas, but the increased number of its hands, its solar features and rosary and water-vessel (two of the well-known emblems of Brahmā) in two of its hands bring it in line with the groups of syncretistic icons being noticed here. Dhātṛ is no doubt one of the Ādityas, but Dhātā or Vidhātā is also one of the synonyms of Brahmā Prajāpati, and both these characters appear to be symbolised in this interesting sculpture (PL. XLVII, Fig. 3).

c19.s6.9

¹ Hiralal's description of this image as well as other images of a somewhat similar character found in the Bundelkhand region is evidently wrong. He refers to all of them as Trimūrtis, the constituent elements being described by him as Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva. But they are really the combined forms of Sūrya, Śiva and Viṣṇu, the Brahmā element being not shown there; for his article, cf. I.A., 1918, p. 137.

c19.s6.10

¹ I.H.Q., Vol. VI, 1930, pp. 465-70 and Plate.

c19.s6.11

Clear connection of the individual members of the triad with the Sun god can be demonstrated by many more interesting image types of a composite character of the mediaeval period hailing from different parts of India. The Mārkaṇḍeyapurāṇa invokes Sūrya in this manner: ‘Brahma’s, Śiva’s and Viṣṇu’s bodies are the same as the body of the resplendent Sun whose real nature is three-fold indeed, may he be gracious’ (Ch. 109, v. 71: Brāhmī Māheśvarī caiva Vaiṣṇavī caiva te tanuḥ | Tridhā yasya svarūpantu Bhānorbhāsvān prasīdatu). The Pīṭhamantra of one aspect of Sūrya described in the Śāradātilakatantra means ‘Adoration to Saura (an unusual way of calling Sūrya) who is the base of meditation, and who is one with Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva’; this mantra also emphasises the syncretic character of the worship of the Sun god.¹ The three-headed and eight-armed standing Sūrya in the Chidambaram temple illustrates this syncretism in an interesting manner. Its natural hands are in the abhaya and varada poses, the rest holding a discus, a noose, a trident and a stone mason’s chisel. It stands barefooted (it is a south-Indian sculpture) on a pedestal on which are carved Aruṇa and seven horses and is attended by two of his consorts.² A somewhat similar composition, but a seated one, is carved on the west face of the small shrine dedicated to the Sun god in the south-eastern corner of Limboji Mata’s temple at Delmal (Northern Gujrat). Of the three faces, that on the proper right may be of Brahmā, the one on the proper left, of Śiva, the central face being that of Sūrya (Viṣṇu or Sūrya-Nārāyaṇa); two hands (partially broken) hold two lotuses, the other hands, partly preserved, showing a trident, a triple-headed cobra, a water-vessel and varadamudrā. These emblems are peculiar to Sūrya, Śiva and Brahmā, the remaining two hands of the image, which are totally gone must have carried the emblems of Viṣṇu. The figure is seated on Garuḍa below which are marked the swan and bull (not ‘ a seven-headed horse ’ as alternatively suggested by Burgess), the respective vehicles of Brahmā and Śiva. Though the seven horses and their driver Aruṇa are not carved in the pedestal, the boots on the legs of the main figure, its prominent waist-girdle (*avyaṅga*) and the two lotuses typify its solar character. Burgess’s remarks about this interesting sculpture are worth-quoting :—‘ in one figure the four divinities, Viṣṇu, Śiva and Brahmā, or the Trimūrti—with Sūrya, appear blended; or shall we rather say it represents a Vaiṣṇava Trimūrti, with Sūrya-Nārāyaṇa as the central figure, seated on his *vāhana* Garuḍa.’¹ There can be no doubt that syncretistic ideology was fully at work in the construction of this image. Another eight-armed seated image of this type is carved on the western side of the central *Bhadra* (structure) of the Śiva temple called Dula Deo at Khajuraho. Some of its hands are broken, but the two full-blown lotuses, the trident, the rosary, the water-vessel, emblems of Sūrya, Śiva and Brahmā, are discernible, those of Viṣṇu being lost. The god is seated in the *vaddha-padmāsana* with the mutilated figure of Aruṇa and three of the seven horses carved on the pedestal; his body is partially covered by a coat of mail.²

c19.s6.12

¹ Śaradātilakam, Chapter XIV, vv. 41-2: Vadetpādam caturthyantam Brahmā-Viṣṇu-Śivātmakam | Saurāya yogapīṭhāya namaḥ padamanantaram | Pīṭhamantro’yamākhyāto Dineśasya jagatpateḥ. In verse 7 of the same chapter a description is given of the Ballabhārdha variety of the Sun image, in whose hands are to be placed such attributes as khaṭvāṅga, padmas, cakra, śakti, pāśa, śṛṇi (an elephant-goad, known also as aṅkuśa), akṣamālā, and kapāla; we can easily recognise in this assortment many of the emblems of the members of the Brahmanical triad, and those of Sūrya.

c19.s6.13

² H. Krishna Sastri, South Indian Gods and Goddesses, p. 236 (Fig. 144).

c19.s6.14

¹ Archaeological Survey of Western India, Vol. IX,—Architectural Antiquities of Northern Gujrat, pp. 88-9, Pls. LXIX and LXXI, 7.

c19.s6.15

² Stella Kramrisch, Hindu Temple, Vol. II, pp. 373-74, Pl. VI. Kramrisch says, ‘ Such an image is a support of a meditation on Sadāśiva, and has its place of special importance on a temple of Śiva.’

c19.s6.16

The Ardhanārīśvaramūrti of Śiva in a way symbolise the syncretic ideology, for they apparently emphasise the union of the principal cult deities of Śaivism and Śāktism. It is true that the ideological union of Śiva and Śakti, the primaeval parents of the universe, has been delineated by many early and late texts, but that sometimes, though rarely, separatist tendencies lurked in the minds of exclusive worshippers of the two deities is also testified by literary data. Gopinath Rao relates a story about this Ardhanārīśvara form of Śiva, which seems to suggest the presence of such a tendency. On one occasion the Devas and Ṛṣis circumambulated Śiva and Pārvatī at Kailāsa (the abode of Śiva), but the Ṛṣi Bhṛṅgī being an exclusive worshipper of Śiva went round the god of his choice alone, neglecting to go round or pay homage to the Devī. She grew angry at this insult to her and reduced the sage to a skin-covered skeleton, and Bhṛṅgī was unable to stand erect on his two skinny legs. Śiva took pity on him and provided him with a third leg, which act of grace was thankfully acknowledged by the sage. But to save also Pārvatī's honour, Śiva united his body with hers, in order that Bhṛṅgī would be compelled to pay homage to the goddess, while paying his respects to him. Thus originated this Ardhanārīśvara form, but such was the pugnacious tenacity of this sectarian sage that assuming the form of beetle he cut a hole through the composite body and circumambulated the Śiva part only.¹ The story is no doubt naïve, but in a way it lays stress on the exclusive tendencies of sectarianism, which have been finally overcome (in the case of Bhṛṅgī of the story this was still present) according to the Purāṇic myth-maker by such a composite form of the god and the goddess. The iconic motif of Ardhanārīśvara, however, was evolved at a fairly early period, long before such explanatory myths came to be fabricated, and glyptic and sculptural evidence regarding the existence of such motifs in Northern India as early as the Kushan and Gupta periods has been cited in Chapter V of this book (*supra*, pp. 181-82). Two south-Indian reliefs of the Chola period are being reproduced here to illustrate this composite form, one from the Bṛhadīśvara Temple, Tanjore, and the other from Darasuram. The one from Tanjore shows the three-armed god standing reclining in a slight *tribhaṅga* pose on Nandī, his right half being male, and the left half, female. Of the two right arms, the back hand holds a *triśūla*, the front one being in the *varada* pose; the one hand of the Pārvatī half holds a *nīlotpala* flower. The dress and ornaments of the two halves of the body are different inasmuch as they are made to befit a male and a female (Pl. XXXVIII, Fig. 4). The composite god shown in Darasuram relief has many novel features such as three faces, eight arms, a big halo behind its three heads, and he stands in the *samapādasthānaka* pose without Nandī behind him; some of the eight hands hold an *akṣamālā*, a *khaḍga*, a *pāśa*, a *darpaṇa*, the objects in the other hands (one left hand is broken) being indistinct. The male and female halves are clearly demarcated as in the other relief (Pl. XXXIX, Fig. 4). Rao remarks about this exceedingly interesting and extraordinary piece of sculpture, ‘In no Sanskrit work that has been examined do we meet with a description of Ardhanārīśvara which agrees with this image . . . . . . .’ (*op. cit.*, Vol. II, p. 332). The multiplicity of hands and faces of this image cannot be satisfactorily explained, but the faces may emphasise the *ugra*, *saumya*, and Umā aspects of the god already noticed in the Elephanta and Gwalior Museum sculptures (*supra.*, pp. 476-77). But one thing worthy of note in this connection is that in none of these reliefs the *ūrdhaliṅga* feature of the composite god is present, which is very often found in such figures of Northern and Eastern India.

c19.s6.17

¹ Rao, *op. cit.*, Vol. II, pp. 322-23. Rao has not given the source of this story, but he has evidently taken it from one of the Purāṇas, which has extolled the creed of this god.

c19.s6.18

Śiva-Lokeśvara, Sūrya-Lokeśvara and Hari-Hara-Sūrya-Buddha icons have been noticed earlier, which show syncretism between Brahmanical Hinduism and Buddhism. Varieties of multi-armed images of syncretistic type hailing from different parts of Eastern India, mainly Bengal, are known, in which Vaiṣṇava and Mahāyāna Buddhist elements have combined, the former being more prominent. Such images may be conveniently described as Viṣṇu-Lokeśvara, and such a one from Surohor in the district of Dinajpur (Bengal) may be noticed first. The four-armed god stands erect under a canopy of seven serpent-hoods, the *gadā* and *cakra* are placed on full-blown lotuses which are held by their stalks by the right and left hands of the god; two Āyudhapuruṣas (identifiable as such on account of a tiny lotus and a conch-shell placed on *nīlotpalas* held by their left hands) stand on either side of the god instead of the usual Śrī and Puṣṭi.

c19.s6.19.1

A miniature figure of the Dhyānī-Buddha Amitābha is placed just above the central snake-hood, and a six-armed dancing figure of Śiva is carved inside a medallion on the middle face of the pañcaratha pedestal below. The figure of dancing Śiva on its pedestal also introduces some Śaiva element in it, and the snake-hoods remind one of Balarāma; the sculpture is of about the twelfth century A.D. (Pl. XLVIII, Fig. 4). Another very interesting image of this type in the same Museum (Exhibit No. 661) originally procured from Kalandarpur in the district of Bogra, North Bengal, though similar to the above in some respects, has some differences. It belongs to the sub-variety of Viṣṇu image named Śrīdhara (according to the Agnipurāṇa and Rūpamaṇḍana), as the cakra and gadā are placed on full-blown lotuses on the back right and back left hands respectively, while the front right and front left hands hold a lotus-bud and a tiny conch-shell. The snake-hoods are absent, and there are two tiny kneeling figures on the lowermost corners of the stele, whose identity is uncertain; other iconographic features (Dhyānī-Buddha on the top and dancing Śiva on the bottom etc.) are the same as in the Surohor relief.¹ It will be interesting to compare these two sculptures with some multi-armed images, generally in stone, which have been described by R. D. Banerjee as Lokeśvara-Viṣṇu images (E.I.S.M.S., pp. 94-6, 125, Pl. XXXVIII).

c19.s6.19.2

The much-mutilated twelve-armed figure originally found in Ghiyasabad in the district of Murshidabad (Bengal) and now in the collection of the Indian Museum, shows the central deity standing erect between two plantain trees with several snake-hoods (probably seven, most of them are broken) spread behind his head (broken); some of the twelve hands are gone, but those which are preserved hold stalks of lotuses, on the double-petalled flowers of which are placed tiny figures of a Garuda, a rat, a ploughshare, a conch-shell on the left, and a manuscript (?), a bull, a cup (?) etc. on the right. The figure has usual ornaments including the *vanamālā* or *vaijayantīmālā* of the Viṣṇu images; one hand on either side is placed on two attendant figures in the manner of Viṣṇu's two hands being placed on the heads of the Āyudhapuruṣas. A ten-armed figure hailing from Garui, district Burdwan (Bengal), has great affinity with the Ghiyasabad sculpture from the point of view of its iconography, but many of its details are gone. A well-preserved twelve-armed image of this type originally found at Sonarang (Dacca) and now in the collection of the Bangiya Sahitya Parishat Museum, Calcutta, has the tiny figure of Amitābha over the central hood of the snake-hood canopy, and Garuda is shown with his hands in the *añjali* pose on the right side of the *triratha* pedestal;

c19.s6.19.3

the right hands that are in tact show a makara, a bird and *varadamudrā* (the others hold indistinct objects), while the left ones hold the tiny figures of a kūrma, a hastin, a Garuda, a cakra and a lāngala (the remaining left hand is broken). M. Ganguly identified this image as that of Avalokiteśvara, and remarked that this form of the Mahāyāna god was very rare, and that brief reference to such twelve-armed Lokeśvaras might be found in *Kāraṇḍavyūha*; but although he did not fail to notice some of its Viṣṇuite features, he did not understand the real character of these images.¹ The six-armed bronze figure from Sagardighi (Murshidabad, Bengal), and now in the same Calcutta Museum, appears to belong to this class of syncretistic images. It was described by Ganguly as Hṛṣīkeśa, a sub-variety of Viṣṇu, on insufficient data. The god stands under a canopy of seven three-headed Nāgas; the attributes of the image in its right hands are a staff surmounted by an elephant, a discus, the front hand being in the *varada* pose with the lotus mark on the palm, while a club, a conch-shell and a long staff surmounted by a Garuḍa are held by the left hands. The two attendant figures on the right and left are undoubtedly Padma- and Cakra-Puruṣas, for they hold lotus flower with long stalks, on which are placed a lotus bud and a discus respectively; a lotus is carved in the centre of the pedestal, a figure of Garuḍa being again carved on its left corner.

c19.s6.19.4

The image can be dated in the 11th century A.D., on the basis of stylistic grounds, as well as of the palaeography of a short inscription engraved on its back.¹ The twenty-armed Viṣṇu image in the V. R. S. Museum (No. 1492) tentatively named as Viśvarūpa and described earlier in this book (Chapter X, p. 426, illustrated in Pl. XXVI, Fig. 2) evinces also these syncretistic traits. The pose of the two pot-bellied attendants of the god and a few other general characteristics appear also to emphasise the blending of Brahmanical Hindu and Mahāyāna elements. These and similar other images leave little doubt about the fact that their worshippers were making definite and conscious efforts to rise above the well-defined limits of sectarianism, while they were using them in their religious rituals.

c19.s6.20

¹ N. G. Majumdar, ‘A New Type of Viṣṇu from North Bengal’, Modern Review, February, 1929; Appendices to Annual Report of V. R. Society, 1928-29, pp. 15-7 and plate. K. C. Sarkar suggested that this type really represented a Bodhisattva; V. R. Society’s Monograph, No. 4, pp. 18-23 and plate. But none of them is correct; the figure really stands for a syncretistic image of Viṣṇu-Lokeśvara or a Viṣṇu-Śiva-Lokeśvara.

c19.s6.21

¹ M. Ganguly, *Handbook to the Sculptures in the Bangiya Sahitya Parishat Museum*, pp. 32-3, Pl. VII. R. D. Banerjee rightly pointed out that 'the presence of the Dhyānī-Buddha Amitābha over the head of this figure along with some of the emblems held in the hands proves the affinity of this class of images between Vaiṣṇava images proper and Lokeśvaras' (*E.I.S.M.S.*, p. 95).

c19.s6.22

¹ M. Ganguly, op. cit., pp. 139-40, Pl. XXVI; Ganguly's description of this image is open to criticism. Banerjee's observation about such images quoted below explains their real character: ‘This particular class of specimens, therefore, indicates a blending of the older Bhāgavata class of Vaiṣṇava images and the Lokeśvaras of the later Mahāyāna school of Buddhism’ (op. cit., p. 96).

c19.s6.23.1

Arising out of the topic of syncretistic icons and partly allied to it is the theme of inter-relation between Brahmanical Hindu iconography on the one hand and Buddhist and Jaina iconography on the other, and a few words about the latter topic may not be out of place in the end of this book. If a careful analysis is made of a good many of the images associated with the developed phases of Buddhism and Jainism, it can be shown how they are close adaptations of Brahmanical Hindu cult icons. Grünwedel, while speaking about the genesis of the ‘rather superfluous creations of the northern schools of Buddhism’, the Bodhisattvas associated with the Mahāyāna schools, observes that with the spread of Buddhism, ‘the converts naturally carried into their new religion much of their reverence for the old Hindu gods.’ The Hīnayāna sects introduced little change in the nomenclature and iconography of these deities, and Viṣṇu, Brahmā, Nārāyaṇa and others were accepted under their Hindu names, but they were almost invariably regarded as mere acolytes or attendants of Buddha.

c19.s6.23.2

‘But with the Mahāyāna schools, whilst these gods were received, they were made to fit into an elaborate system of nomenclature and myth by which each was assigned a place in the illimitable aeons of their cosmogony.’ Then he comments on the transference of the attributes of Indra or Śakra to Vajrapāṇi, of those of Brahmā to Mañjuśrī, of those of Viṣṇu to Avalokiteśvara, of the attributes of Śiva to Virūpākṣa, one of the four Mahārājas or Lokapālas in the Mahāyāna pantheon.¹ A comparative study of many of the Brahmanical Hindu icons and the corresponding groups of Mahāyāna or Vajrayāna Buddhist images will enable us to throw more light on this subject. Numerous varieties of the Dhyāni-Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara (Padmapāṇi) have been described in the Sādhanamālā. Their iconographic traits enumerated in these texts, and some of their names mentioned in them, easily help us to find their counterparts or rather prototypes in the Hindu pantheon. The general form of Padmapāṇi-Avalokiteśvara appears to have been derived from Viṣṇu, but there is no doubt that such aspects of the Bodhisattva as Siṃhanāda, Nīlakaṇṭha, Halāhala, Padmanartteśvara, etc. were mere adaptations of Śiva. The sādhanas describe Siṃhanāda as nirbhūṣaṇa (‘without any ornaments’), wearing a jaṭāmukuṭa and a tiger-skin, having three eyes and a trident entwined by a white snake (sitaphaniveṣṭitaṃ triśūlam) by his side.

c19.s6.23.3

These features are all peculiar to Śiva, and inspite of the additional traits like his lion mount, lotus emblem, etc., there is no difficulty in recognising in him one of the most prominent members of the Brahmanical triad. The ideology behind Siṃhanāda is explained in the *dhāraṇīs* in this way; he is the ‘healer of diseases’ (one of the traits of Śiva is also this). The names and iconographic traits of the other three varieties of Avalokiteśvara mentioned above leave little doubt about their being the Mahāyānist or Vajrayānist adaptations of the Hindu god. The fierce god Heruka, whose two-armed figures have been found in Eastern India, is usually shown as dancing on a corpse with *vajra* and *kapāla* in his hands, a *khaṭvāṅga* placed along the left part of his body, and with a garland of skulls (*muṇḍamālā*) on his breast; these features emphasise his Śaiva association. Yamāri, another fierce Vajrayāna deity, as its name indicates, is derived from Kālārimūrti of Śiva described in Chapter XI of this book. Some of the iconographic features of Yamāri, however, were adopted from the very god of Death, whose enemy he was supposed to have been. Like the Hindu god Yama he has a buffalo for his mount, and a mace with a skull painted on it with a *vajra* on its top, and a noose (*pāśa*) for his emblems; like Śiva he wears a tiger-skin and snake-ornaments.

c19.s6.23.4

Mañjuśrī might have had some concrete human base (his human original is said to have been instrumental in the introduction of civilisation into Nepal from outside) unlike the Buddhist deities mentioned above, who had abstract ideological background; but his principal emblem, the book of knowledge (*prajñā*), seems to show that he was in a way the Mahāyāna counterpart of Brahmā and Sarasvatī of the Hindu pantheon. The Saptaśatika Hayagrīva, an emanation of Amitābha, and Jambhala, an emanation of Akṣobhya, have their prototypes in Hindu Hayagrīva and Kubera. Hayagrīva, according to the Purāṇic mythology, was primarily a demon, to kill whom Viṣṇu assumed the form of a horse-headed man. The special cognisance of Saptaśatika Hayagrīva is the scalp of a horse over his head. Another aspect of the same god, this time associated with Akṣobhya, is three-faced and eight-armed, and the number of arms as well as the attributes placed in his hands clearly associate him with Viṣṇu. The iconographic peculiarities of Jambhala distinctly connect him with Kubera-Vaiśravaṇa.

c19.s6.24

¹ Buddhist Art, pp. 182-83.

c19.s6.25

Like the latter he is a god of wealth and prosperity, and like him he is pot-bellied, though the bag of treasure in his prototype's hand is replaced by a mungoose vomiting jewels. The early mediaeval relief of the two-armed Jambhala reproduced here (Pl. XLVII, Fig. 2) characteristically portrays his Kubera-like features, and his association with wealth is demonstrated by the carving of eight jars full of coins (the third from the left is overturned, from which coins are pouring out) beneath his lotus seat on which he is seated in the *ardhaparyaṅka* pose. The number of the jars, eight, proves that they stand for Aṣṭanidhis (‘eight treasures’), one of the earliest representations of which in a different manner is found in the ‘banyan capital’ recovered from Besnagar by Cunningham (cf. supra, pp. 104-05). In the Brahmanical Hindu mythology, Kubera is associated with Śrī or Lakṣmī, the goddess of fortune and prosperity, who is the presiding deity of the Aṣṭanidhis; in the Mahāyāna adaptation of him, on the other hand, Vasudhārā (another name of Vasundharā, Bhūmi or Pṛthivī, the mother Earth) appears as his consort. Separate representations of this Buddhist goddess have been found in Eastern India, and one such figure of the mediaeval period is being reproduced here (Pl. XLVIII, Fig. 2). A look at it will convince one that she is a proper consort of Jambhala; she is seated like her lord in *ardhaparyaṅka* pose on a double-petalled lotus-seat, her right leg resting upon an upturned jar by the side of which there are seven more inverted jars. Her fore-arms are broken, but there are enough indications to show that she held by her right hand an ear of corn (this object is present in well-preserved images of Vasudhārā), emphasising in this manner her association with plenty, as the cornucopia in the hand of the Roman goddess Abundantia (Ardochso in its Kushan set-up) does in a similar manner.¹

c19.s6.26

¹ Instances are not unknown where Mahāyāna or Vajrayāna goddess concepts seem to have influenced the iconography of some goddesses belonging to Hindu pantheon. Tārā, a great object of veneration in the Hindu Tantras, appears to have been a direct borrowal from Buddhism. Vajrayogini's iconographic traits clearly remind us of the Tāntric goddess Chinnamastā held in great veneration by the Śāktas of Bengal (Chinnamastā was one of the ten Mahāvidyās

c19.s6.27

The Vajrayāna goddess Māricī, especially her general aspect, can be distantly associated with the Brahmanical Sun god on account of some of her peculiar iconographic traits. Like the god she rides on a chariot drawn, however, not by seven horses but by seven pigs, and is attended by female figures shooting arrows. Unlike Sūrya she is multi-armed and holds all sorts of attributes, and when she has more than one face, the added ones are those of sows (she is described in this aspect as Ubhaya-varāhānanā-Māricī). What sort of esoteric symbolism underlies this predilection for sows and pigs is not clearly understandable. But her very name Māricī shows her solar association (Sūrya is Maricīmālī, i.e., ‘one endowed with a large number of rays’).

c19.s6.28

In the hierarchy of the Jaina deities, especially in its broader outlines, many of the subsidiary members of the pantheon were direct copies of the Brahmanical Hindu divinities. The Jaina texts like Ācāra Dinakara, Uttarādhyāyana Sūtra and Abhidhāna Cintāmaṇi classify the secondary Jaina deities under four heads,—Jyotiṣī, Vimānavāsī, Bhavanapati and Vyantara, and long lists of similar and other divinities are also found there. But the deities whose images (beside those of the Jinas) are usually found in Jaina iconographic art comprise the Navagrahas, the Dikpālas, the Yakṣa and Yakṣiṇī attendants of the twenty-four Tīrthamkaras, usually described as their Upāsakas and Śāsanadevatās. Besides these there are the sixteen Śruta- or Vidyā-devīs (the presiding deity of which is Sarasvatī), the Aṣṭamātṛkās, the Bhairavas, the sixty-four Yoginīs, Śrī or Lakṣmī, Gaṇeśa, Kṣetrapāla and others. The names and iconographic features of most of them are similar to those of their Brahmanical counterparts, though occasional reorientation in the mode of their representation in early

c19.s6.29

whose worship was prominent in Bengal). The fierce Vajrayāna deity Nairātmā clearly resembles Kālī in her iconography. In late mediaeval times, the Tāntric aspect of Śakti worship seems to have adopted much from the Mahāyāna-cum-Vajrayāna cult, and there is much that is common between many of the deities associated with both.

c19.s6.30

and mediaeval Jaina art is also met with. The very interesting image-type of Hariṇegamesi or Naigameṣa, a general of Devarāja Indra according to Jaina tradition, distinctly reminds us either of the goat-headed Dakṣa-Prajāpati, or the Chāgavaktra (‘goat-faced’) companion of Skanda-Kārttikeya of the Hindu mythology, and one of the various names of Kārttikeya is Naigameya according to early and late lexicons. The Brahmanical Hindu origin of many of the Upāsakas and Śāsanadevatās of the Jinas can be easily demonstrated. Thus Gomukha, the Yakṣa or Upāsaka of Ṛṣabhanātha, the first Tīrthaṃkara, must have been derived from Śiva, as his bull mount, and such of his attributes as battle-axe, noose, etc., prove; his bull face is reminiscent of a mode of representing Nandī, really Śiva himself in his hybrid theriomorphic form. The name and iconography of Yakṣa Brahmā, the Upāsaka of the tenth Jina Śitalanātha, show that he was a Jaina adaptation of Brahmā-Prajāpati of the Hindu triad; he has four faces and a lotus seat, and holds such attributes in his hands as a rosary, a citrus, a noose, a club, etc. Some of the attributes, it is true, are not those of the Hindu Brahmā, yet the name, the number of faces, the lotus seat and the rosary are significant. Similarly, Īśvara and Ṣaṇmukha Yakṣas, the respective Upāsakas of Śreyāṃśanātha and Vimalanātha, the eleventh and thirteenth Jinas, can be definitely associated with Śiva and Subrahmaṇya (Kārttikeya) on the basis of their names, mounts, emblems and other specialities. But such association in the case of some other members of the Jaina pantheon is not sufficiently clear, though their names are taken from Brahmanical Hindu mythology. The iconography of Yakṣas, Kumāra, Garuḍa, Kubera and Varuṇa, the respective Upāsakas of Vāsupujya, Śāntinātha, Mallinātha and Munisubrata, the twelfth, sixteenth, nineteenth and twentieth in the list of twenty-four Tīrthaṃkaras, will prove this. But even in such cases the extant images of these deities show partial similarity with their Brahmanical counterparts. As regards many of the Śāsanadevatās, their names alone may not always emphasise their Brahmanical association, though in some cases the names, emblems and mounts of them indicate this to a great extent. Ambikā or Kuṣmāṇḍinī, the Śāsanadevatā of Neminātha (the twenty-second Jina) and consort of Gomedha, comes under the latter group, and her iconographic features leave little doubt that she is a Jaina adaptation of the Hindu goddess of the same name. But the Jainas have a mythology of their own about this goddess, which has very little in common with the stories associated with her Hindu original. Ambikā in Jaina iconographic art rides a lion and holds in her four hands a bunch of mangoes, a noose, a child and an elephant goad, and she is thus the Jaina opposite of Durgā, one of whose early appellations is Ambikā; Kuṣmāṇḍinī, another name of the Jaina goddess, appears also to have been derived from an epithet of Durgā, which is Kuṣmāṇḍī or Kuṣmāṇḍa. Sometimes she is shown accompanied by seven dancing female figures, and they may be the Jaina adaptations of the Saptamātṛkās in this context. Padmāvatī, the Śāsanadevatā of the twenty-third Jina Pārśvanātha, is like him associated with snakes, and there is little doubt that her Hindu counterpart is the folk-goddess Manasā, one of whose names is also Padmāvatī or Padmā.

Linked texts (8)