[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Architecture and art](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art) › [Indian Sculpture and Painting, Illustrated by Typical Masterpieces, with an Explanation of their Motives and Ideals](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.havell-1908) › c7.193 # Indian Sculpture and Painting, Illustrated by Typical Masterpieces, with an Explanation of their Motives and Ideals c7.193 Indian Sculpture and Painting, Illustrated by Typical Masterpieces, with an Explanation of their Motives and Ideals c7.193 - **Language:** English ### [c7.193](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.havell-1908.c7.193) ¹ The so-called phallic symbol of Siva, though it is found in the Saivaite temples of Java, does not appear to have been the principal object of adoration there, as it is now at Benares, the great centre of Saivaite worship in India. It is evident, from the number of statues of Siva found in Java, that the worship of his image in human, or superhuman, form was also usual in Northern India, the birthplace of Saivaism, before the time of Sankara, as it is still in the south. At the time of Hiuen Thsang's visit, the principal object of worship at Benares was a statue of Siva, a hundred feet high, "grave and majestic, filling the spectator with awe, and seeming as it were indeed alive." If the disuse of anthropomorphic images were only a consequence of the Muhammadan conquest it would have applied to all Hindu sects alike. Though the subject is too intricate to be discussed at length here, it may be stated that there are good grounds for believing that the present Saivaite emblem, when it took the place of anthropomorphic images, had no connection whatever with phallic worship. The latter idea seems to have been a reversion to the primitive phallic worship, which was common to the whole ancient world, one of the many corruptions which have crept into modern popular Hinduism and tacitly accepted by the more ignorant of the Brahmin priesthood. In Sankara's teaching, it was only taken as a symbol of the Eternal Unity, or of "the formless god." It had probably been gradually evolved from the miniature \*stupa\*, or reliquary, which was the popular emblem of later Buddhist worship. There are many close similarities between Saivaism and the Buddhism which it supplanted, or absorbed, and the symbols of these two sects are often difficult to distinguish from each other. Even now it is certain that the phallic associations are only vulgar and incidental, not the only signification attached to the symbol by the uneducated Hindu worshipper. - [Previous: c7.192](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.havell-1908.c7.192) - [Next: c7.194](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.havell-1908.c7.194) - [Up: c7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.havell-1908.c7) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.havell-1908.c7.193](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.havell-1908.c7.193) · Pramāṇa