The Indian Buddhist Iconography, Mainly Based on the Sadhanamala and Other Cognate Tantric Texts of Rituals c23: Chapter XIV

The Indian Buddhist Iconography, Mainly Based on the Sādhanamālā and Other Cognate Tāntric Texts of Rituals c23

Language: English

Chapter XIV

c23.1

The foregoing is an account of the iconography of Buddhist gods and goddesses as reconstructed from Sanskrit texts of the Buddhist Tāntric literature. The study confines itself to the iconography of gods and goddesses only, excluding all other favourite themes of the Buddhists carved on stone or painting, such as the scenes from Buddha’s life, the Jātaka stories, the Avadānas and others, representations of which, are available from Bharhut, Sanchi, Amaravati, Gandhara or even the cave temples of Ajanta. This book does not refer to them nor makes an attempt to identify them by hunting out the original Sanskrit texts which are illustrated on stone in the form of stories. It is a practical handbook for the guidance of Museologists who have to handle large number of images of gods and goddesses with strange faces, weapons and poses. It is a work giving indications as to how such images should be studied, analyzed, and finally identified with the help of original Sanskrit texts such as are quoted in this book at every place. An image is nothing but a symbol, and it is the business of the students of iconography to find out how the image was made, by whom it was made, and what philosophical and cultural background was necessary for the production of such an image. In this work, therefore, problems such as these have been treated and enough information is given in order to understand a Buddhist image from different view-points. The scope of this work thus is limited, and it does not claim to unravel the mystery of all stones on which something is carved. But within the limited scope, it has enough information of the highest practical value to the students of iconography, and this value is enhanced by the inclusion of photographs of excellent sculptures, bronzes and original Nepalese drawings procured with difficulty and at high cost.

c23.2

The Buddhist pantheon as such did not exist before cir. 300 A. D. which is the approximate time of the composition of the famous Tāntric work the Guhyasamāja. The pantheon got a good start from the theory of the five Dhyāni Buddhas, the embodiment of the five cosmic forces, Rūpa, Vedanā, Saṃjñā, Saṃskāra and Vijñāna. The pantheon further got a fillip from the theory of the Kulas (families) of the Dhyāni Buddhas and their Śaktis or female counterparts. The Dhyāni Buddhas thus became the Kuleśas or progenitors or heads of families, and the families are seen multiplying until they become overwhelming in number. And along with numerical strength, the excellent and meritorious artists went on producing such wonderful specimens of images which were backed by the religious inspiration of the most transcedental type. The pantheon became extremely attractive, and all including the Hindus and Jainas started building their pantheons and adding to their gods and goddesses. In the meantime other Buddhist countries like Tibet, China, Japan and the rest were struck by the wealth of gods and sculptures of the most bewildering variety, and started constructing their own pantheons according to their own national and cultural genius. The pantheon of the Buddhists created in India thus became world property, although Buddhism as a religion vanished from India the land of its birth long long ago.

c23.3

The teachings of the Guhyasamāja remained dormant for some 300 years, and was handed down secretly from Gurus to disciples, but later, when it became popular, gradually the process of deification rapidly grew with newer and newer gods and goddesses. Each image received and absorbed cultural currents and cross-currents, and as a living organism took newer and newer forms according to time and according to space. It has now become so unwieldy and its ramifications have been so intricate and vast, that it has become a highly specialized study requiring experts to handle the gods and goddesses of Buddhism. The study is fascinating to the extreme, and the interest in the subject is bound to grow with the lapse of time and with the publication of the original MSS on the subject, such as the Vajrāvalī, Kriyāsamuccaya, the original Tantras like the Kālacakra Tantra, Heruka and Hevajra Tantras, Vajrayoginī and Vajravārāhī Tantras, vast in number and voluminous in extent. Let us hope that India will take care of these priceless original manuscripts, preserve them in good libraries, and gradually through publications make them available to the world of Buddhists comprising a third of the population of the globe. Just at the present moment however, for unravelling the mysteries of the Buddhist images of gods and goddesses, there are only two books of outstanding value. These are the Sādhanamālā and the Niṣpannayogāvalī both published in the Gaekwad’s Oriental Series for the first time. The Sādhanamālā was composed in A. D. 1165 since the earliest manuscript of the work bears a date in the Newari era which is equivalent to 1165 A. D. Niṣpannayogāvalī was written by the famous Buddhist author and mystic Mahāpaṇḍita Abhayākara Gupta whose time is co-eval with that of the Pāla king Rāmapāla who flourished in A. D. 1084-1130. Both these works were written at a time when the psychic phase of Buddhism reached its very zenith, before being destroyed by the sword of Islam. Both the Sādhanamālā and the Niṣpannayogāvalī therefore record faithfully the highest development of the psychic phase of Buddhism in the 12th century.

c23.4

The Sādhanas in the Sādhanamālā were composed by men distinguished in the mediaeval age as great Tāntric authors. The Dhyānas contained in the Sādhanas laid down the essential features of different gods, and the sculptors and artists prepared images with the help of these general directions. The Dhyānas left much scope for the exercise of imagination on the part of the sculptors, and the products of their chisels were also very greatly influenced by the spirit of the age in which they flourished, as well as by the geographical situation in which they worked. The ornaments, dress and even facial expressions of the images reflected local conditions to a great extent, while the particular Tāntric rites in which the images were used had also a modifying influence.

c23.5

It has been pointed out several times that the most important factor in the identification of images is the miniature figure of the Dhyāni Buddha on their crowns. When, however, the parental Dhyāni Buddha is not present, other marks of identification have to be sought for. Moreover, difficulties may arise even when the Dhyāni Buddhas are present. In cases where all the Dhyāni Buddhas are present on the aureole, the Buddha right on the top of the head is to be taken as the parental Dhyāni Buddha. The standing figure of Khadiravaṇī Tārā in the Indian Museum, Calcutta or the Vikrampur figures of Parṇaśabarī are the cases in point. They are both emanations of Amoghasiddhi, whose effigy appears right above the heads of the goddesses. The figures of all the other four Dhyāni Buddhas are not required either by the Sādhana or for identification. Their presence can only be explained by the fact that in all kinds of worship the five Dhyāni Buddhas are the first to be invoked. Sometimes, however, the Dhyāni Buddhas appear on the image for artistic reasons only, as for instance, in the case of the Dacca Museum image of Arapacana Mañjuśrī. The Java figure of Arapacana is surrounded by four companions, identical in appearance with himself, but in the Dacca Museum image there are four Dhyāni Buddhas in addition, on the aureole although the central position just above the head of the principal deity is occupied by one of the attendants of Arapacana. The Dhyāni Buddhas, here are not required by the Sādhana and are, therefore, more ornamental than otherwise.

c23.6

But the most serious difficulty arises when instead of the Dhyāni Buddha prescribed by the Sādhana some other Dhyāni Buddha appears on the crown of any figure. For instance, the Sarnath image of Ucchuṣma Jambhala should have shown in accordance with the Sādhana the figures either of Akṣobhya or Ratnasambhava on its crown, but the effigy of Amitābha is shown instead. Again, when a reference is made to the Lucknow figure of Mārīcī, who according to the Sādhana should have shown the figure of Vairocana on her crown, shows Amitābha instead. Again the Indian Museum image of Uṣṇīṣavijayā shows the figure of her parental Dhyāni Buddha as Akṣobhya instead of her own sire Vairocana.

c23.7

True reasons for these discrepancies can hardly be given at this state of our knowledge. The most reasonable suggestion seems to be that the original texts are not still known in their entirety. It must be remembered that the Sādhanamālā and the Niṣpannayogāvalī are not the only texts produced in Vajrayāna. It is quite likely that new Sādhanas will be forthcoming when further material is published. It is difficult, however, to believe that a new Sādhana for either Mārīcī or Uṣṇīṣavijayā will be available. In the Sādhanamālā itself a large number of Sādhanas is published, but nowhere there is any mention of any other parental Buddha than Vairocana. Thus the possibility of discovering further Sādhanas prescribing parental Buddhas other than Vairocana seems to be remote.

c23.8

Another alternative suggestion presupposes the existence of different cults according as one or another of the Dhyāni Buddhas is believed to be the principal or the Ādi-Buddha ¹. The Buddhists of Nepal even now are divided into so many different cults, some regarding Amitābha as the Ādi-Buddha, and others acknowledging either Vairocana or Akṣobhya as the Ādi-Buddha. Now though the Sādhanas prescribe the figure of the Dhyāni Buddha Vairocana for both Mārīcī and Uṣṇīṣavijayā, the followers of the Amitābha cult are at liberty to assign them to that Buddha whom they consider to be the Ādi-Buddha. Similarly, Ucchuṣma Jambhala being regarded as the offspring of Amitābha, is made to bear an image of that Dhyāni Buddha on his crown in the Sarnath figure already alluded to. It is not necessary to multiply instances. This is the only reasonable explanation it is possible to offer at the present state of our knowledge.

c23.9

¹ The theory of Ādi-Buddha originated in the Nalanda monastery about the beginning of the 10th century and was accepted first in the Kālacakrayāna, a later form of Vajrayāna. See Csoma de Koros: *The Origin of the Theory of Ādi-Buddha* in J. A. S. B., Vol. II (1833), p. 57f. See also Bhattacharyya: *Buddhist Iconography* in JBORS, March, 1923.

c23.10

In identifying Buddhist images the student of iconography should guard himself against taking unnecessary figures in the image for principal ones, or necessary figures for unnecessary ones. A full-fledged Buddhist icon shows in the first place, the principal god, an effigy of his sire on his crown, and the Dhyāni Buddhas on the aureole. The icon may further show miniature figures of the companions of the principal god, some worshippers, mythical figures and the three, seven, or sixteen jewels or sacred objects of Buddhism. The figure of Vajrasattva seems to be a favourite decoration with the artists. He appears on many Buddhist images and is perhaps conceived as a sort of general guardian of Buddhism and Buddhist worship. For purposes of identification the principal figure, the figure of the Dhyāni Buddha on the top, and the companions are the indispensable parts of the image. When, again, a reference is made to the Dacca Museum image of Arapacana Mañjuśrī in which besides the four companions there are present four Dhyāni Buddhas Vairocana, Akṣobhya, Amitābha and Ratnasambhava, two mythical figures supporting the lotus seat, and two worshippers to the extreme left of the pedestal. All these figures are redundant for the purpose of identification, and their absence in the Java figure of Arapacana in no wise affects it. But if, for instance, the companions are confused with the worshippers the identification must be regarded as incorrect. The figures flanking Vajrāsana, for instance, are clearly Maitreya and Avalokiteśvara according to the Sādhana, but if they are described as worshippers, as has been done previously, the identification of the whole image becomes vitiated.

c23.11

Another difficulty in identification arises when the letters of the Mantra of the god are deified and appear on the image. This is found in the case of Vajratārā who is surrounded by ten goddesses who originate from the ten syllables of the Mantra “Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā”. It has also been pointed out previously how from the five letters of the name of Arapacana Mañjuśrī originated the five deities Candraprabha, Jālinīprabha, Keśinī, and Upakeśinī, and the principal deity Mañjuśrī. The Dacca image of Khadiravaṇī Tārā (Fig. 249) is a remarkable instance of the deification of the Tārā Mantra. The main figure in accordance with the Sādhana carries the Utpala in the left hand and shows the Varada mudrā in the right, and she is flanked on either side by Aśokakāntā and Ekajaṭā. But on the aureole there are eight female figures identical in appearance with the principal figure. They obviously represent none but the eight syllables of the Tārā Mantra “Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture”, the two others, Uṣṇīṣavijayā and Sumbhā, being omitted.

c23.12

Sometimes in the images of Buddhist gods and goddesses we notice the presence of Gaṇeśa, who is regarded by the Hindus as “Siddhidātā” or the Bestower of Perfection or success in Tāntric rites.

c23.13

The Buddhists as a proof of their aversion to the followers of the Brahmanical faith, made their gods trample upon Gaṇeśa. Thus in the Indian Museum images of Parṇaśabarī and Aparājitā, and in the Baroda Museum image of Vighnāntaka, etc., the deities have been represented as trampling Gaṇeśa under their feet. In the two Vikrampur images of Parṇaśabarī and in the Dacca Sahitya Parisat image of Mahāpratisarā, Gaṇeśa appears below the lotus seat lying prostrate on the ground crushed under the weight of Buddhist deities. Thus did the Buddhists manifest their animosity against the Hindu god, Gaṇeśa, giving him the epithet of Vighna or Obstacle. Their animosity may be further illustrated by the following features of the Sādhanas. The four Hindu gods, Brahmā, Viṣṇu, Śiva and Indra have been designated uniformly as the four Māras or Wicked Beings, and several Buddhist gods have been described as trampling them under their feet. The Sādhanas of Prasanna-Tārā, Vajrajjvālānalārka, Vidyujjvālākarālī, and the like, are instances in point. Trailokyavijaya has been represented as trampling upon the prostrate forms of Śiva and Gaurī; Nārāyaṇa has been made a Vāhana or vehicle by Harihariharivāhana. Poor Brahmā has been most severely handled by the Buddhists. The severed head of Brahmā is a favourite trophy in the hands of Buddhist deities According to Hindu traditions, Brahmā should be very old with grey beard, and four heads, and the Buddhist deities mercilessly hold the heads by the matted hair and flourish them in their hands. This is how the Buddhists attempted to exhibit the superiority of their gods over those of the Brahmanical faith. It is a matter of satisfaction, however, that the Hindus never disgraced any gods belonging to the alien faith in this manner. On the contrary, they placed Buddha among the ten Avatāras of Viṣṇu. In this connection it may be pointed out that in the Kālacakra Tantra a work of the 10th century A. D. there is evidence that an attempt was made by the Buddhists to unite with the Hindus under the common banner of the god Kālacakra ‘The Circle of Time’, against the cultural penetration of the Mlecchas. The later history showed, however, that the attempt proved futile.

c23.14

A deep spiritual significance is attached to the colour, weapons, and the Āsanas of Buddhist gods who are either represented singly or in yab-yum. The conception of yab-yum images, however, is much more complicated than the single ones.

c23.15

It has been stated in the Sādhanamālā that a single deity may take any colour according to the particular Tāntric rite in which he is invoked. For instance, in the Śāntikavidhi or propitiatory rite the god takes the white or the yellow colour. In Pauṣṭikavidhi or protective rite the yellow colour is taken by the deity. Similarly, in Vaśyavidhi (bewitching) and Ākarṣaṇa (attraction) he may take yellow, green or red colour. In Ucāṭana (total destruction) and in Māraṇa (killing) the god is generally blue. It may be pointed out here that the word ‘Kṛṣṇa’ in the Sādhanamālā always signifies the blue colour, and not black. Buddhist gods are rarely black, not because the Buddhists had no perception of the black colour, but because there seems to have been some prejudice against using the black colour in the paintings of gods. It may further be pointed out that whenever a deity gets the blue colour his appearance becomes terrible with protruding teeth and tongue, garland of severed heads, ornaments of snakes and the garment of tiger-skin.

c23.16

With regard to colour it may be remembered that their stock number is usually five corresponding to the five cosmic elements. Thus according to authoritative books, the element of Water is white in colour, Earth is yellow, Fire is red, Ether is green, and Air is blue. Of these the two colours white and yellow representing Water and Earth are benign, and the other colours red, green and blue are clearly malefic. The earthy and watery gods are peaceful, while the gods of the other three elements are fearful in character. Blue seems to be the most violent of all.

c23.17

The Āsanas have likewise a spiritual significance. The Vajraparyaṅka attitude signifies meditation and introspection, the Ardhaparyaṅka shows serenity, the Ālīḍha heroism, the Pratyālīḍha destruction and disgust, and the dancing in Ardhaparayaṅka displays wrath and horror.

c23.18

A reference may be made here to the yab-yum representations. The Tibetan yab means ‘the honourable father’ and yum likewise signifies the ‘honourable mother’. Therefore, the word yab-yum means the honourable father in the company of the honourable mother. A yab-yum image has a deep spiritual significance. It signifies that the god, the embodiment of Śūnya is perfect, having attained Karuṇā and therefore the highest state of Nirvāṇa.

c23.19

The conception of Śūnya in Vajrayāna took the concrete shape of a god and a goddess. Śūnya took the shape of Heruka when a male god, and became known as Nairātmā when a goddess. That Śūnya took the form of a deity does not seem strange in Vajrayāna, where we find conceptions, such as Saṅgha, Dharma, Prajñāpāramitā, the twelve Pāramitās, and the five Skandhas deified in the Buddhist pantheon. Thus the conception of Śūnya in the form of a god or a goddess is perfectly in keeping with the tradition of the Vajrayāna system. When the Bodhi Mind attains Nirvāṇa it merges in Śūnya and there remains in eternal bliss and happiness. And when Śūnya was made a goddess, it was easily understood, how eternal bliss and happiness was possible after the attainment of Nirvāṇa. The yab-yum figures, representing Śūnya in the form of Heruka in the embrace of Śūnya in the form of Nairātmā, were held up before the mass as ideals, and they readily attracted them and helped them in their conception of a bright and definite spiritual prospect.

c23.20

Buddhists of the Vajrayāna consider Śūnya as the Ultimate Reality, and they believe that the host of gods and goddesses, including the Dhyāni Buddhas, are Śūnya in essence. The innumerable gods and goddesses of the Vajrayāna pantheon are all manifestations of Śūnya. The gods have no real existence, the images have no real existence, and therefore, it may be positively asserted that a true Vajrayānist never worshipped an image or god. Naturally, since these, paintings, images, or even the deities themselves have no real or independent existence, they are merely manifestations in a veriety of forms of the One, Undifferentiated Śūnya. But it cannot be denied that these images were very useful, since the forms they presented, in accordance with the Dhyānas, to the gaze of the worshippers undoubtedly helped the latter to visualise the deities with whom they were asked to identify themselves. As they had no real existence, these deities had to be attracted to the mind-sky from unknown regions in the firmament by the luminous rays of light issuing from the Bījamantras uttered by the worshipper. The Śūnya takes the form of a divinity in accordance with the germ-syllable uttered, and exists only as a positive idea in the mind of the worshipper who identifies himself with that transformation of Śūnya.

c23.21

The question may be raised as to the necessity of a veriety of gods and goddesses when one Śūnya would have been sufficient. In answer to this a number of things have to be considered. It may be remembered that Śūnya, which was identified with Compassion by the Vajrayānists was conceived as manifesting itself in diferent forms in accordance with the different functions it had to discharge. For instance, if any disease is to be cured, Śūnya takes the form of Siṃhanāda; when it is a question of snake-bite, Śūnya becomes Jāṅgulī; when destruction of the wicked is needed, Śūnya takes the form of Mahākāla; when again, diseases and pestilences are to be prevented, Śūnya is conceived as Parṇaśabarī; for success in love-affairs, Śūnya is invoked in the form of Kurukullā; and when forcible submission is required in love-affairs, Śūnya becomes Vajrānaṅga, and when finally, Buddhahood is wanted by the worshipper, he should conceive himself as Heruka. From the above it appears that the conception of the multitude of Buddhist deities emerges from the one grand conception of Śūnya in accordance with the various functions it is supposed to discharge, as a mark of compassion towards the Buddhists.

c23.22

Secondly, the number of gods and goddesses increases when Śūnya manifests in different forms the nine "Rasas" or dramatic sentiments. For instance, Śūnya will be Khadiravaṇī or Lokanātha when benign (Karuṇa), Mārīcī when Heroic (Vīra), Vighnāntaka, Heruka or Mahākāla when awe-inpiring (Bhaya), Aparājitā when wrathful (Raudra), Vajracarcikā in its moments of disgust and loathsomeness (Bībhatsa), Prajñāpāramitā when peaceful (Śānta), and so on.

c23.23

Thirdly, the number of deities increases as objects such as the Three Jewels ; philosophical conceptions such as the Pāramitās, Bhūmis or Pratisamvits ; literature such as the Prajñāpāramitā, the Daśabhūmika Śāstra, the Dhāriṇīs and the like ; desires such as for eating, drinking, sleeping and the rest ; the directions such as the north, south, east and west ; the musical instruments such as the flute, the violin, and the drum ; and other innumerable ideas and objects, are required to be worshipped in the forms of gods and goddesses, By these and various other ways the number of deities in the Buddhist pantheon increased phenomenally.

c23.24

As all these deities centre round the one grand conception of Śūnya so also the host of weapons revolve round the one grand conception of Bodhicitta or the Will to Enlightenment. As these weapons are required to discharge different functions, the Bodhicitta resolves itself into so many different forms of weapons¹. For instance, when the darkness of ignorance is to be dispelled Bodhicitta becomes a sword by which the veil of ignorance is cut asunder. The sword is also to be used to destroy the Māra hordes who disturb the worshippers. Bodhicitta becomes the Aṅkuśa (goad) when the hearts of the wicked are to be pierced. It is conceived as a noose when the Māra hordes are to be securely bound. It becomes a needle and a thread when the eyes of the wicked have to be sewn up. Bodhicitta becomes a Kartri (knife) when the wicked have to be chopped. It is a Bhiṇḍipāla (javelin) when Māras have to be attacked from a distance, and a bow and an arrow if the distance be greater.

c23.25

¹ Compare the statement in the Jñānasiddhi of Indrabhūti in the Two Vajrayāna Works (GOS), pp. 80, 81 Bodhicittam bhaved Vajram Prajñā Ghaṇṭā vidhīyate I Cakram-ajñānacchedāt ca Ratnantu durlabhādapi II Bhavadoṣair-aliptatvāt jñānam tat Padam-ucyate I Khadgaḥ kleśārisamcchedāt Utpalam plavanāt tataḥ II

c23.26

The Mudrās also are nothing but the manifestations of the Bodhicitta. If protection is needed, Bodhicitta is conceived as the Abhaya mudrā; if boon is desired it becomes Varada; when instruction in Buddhist Law is required it becomes Dharmacakra, and so on.

c23.27

The Bodhicitta, or the Will to Enlightenment, is that state of Mind which has already acquired the potentiality of dissolving itself in Śūnya. As a matter of fact, Śūnya or Nirvāṇa would be unattainable without the help of the Bodhicitta, which like Śūnya exists only in the mind. The Bodhi mind leads the aspiring soul into the very presence, so to speak, of Śūnya; it ultimately merges and loses itself completely in Śūnya.

c23.28

The gods of the Buddhist pantheon are conceived as carrying the Bodhicitta in their hands, both being of the nature of Śūnya It is with the help of this Bodhicitta that a god is supposed to confer Buddhahood or success in Tāntric rite upon his worshipper. The yab-yum conception of deities is still more sublime. The god Heruka, the embodiment of Śūnya, carrying weapons the embodiments of Bodhicitta also of the nature of Śūnya, is embraced by Nairātmā, whose essence is Śūnya, carrying weapons also of the nature of Śūnya. Thus the Infinite with the Infinite commingles. In Involution, the Many become One. This is the highest state—the Anupādhiśeṣa-Nirvāṇa.

Linked texts (6)

Sādhanamālā — Sanskrit
Jñānasiddhi — Indrabhūti, Sanskrit
Guhyasamājatantra — Sanskrit
Niṣpannayogāvalī — Abhayākaragupta, Sanskrit
Hevajratantra — Sanskrit
Laghukālacakratantra — Sanskrit