Maurya and Shunga Art c12.5.3

c12.5.3

It is true, evidences for such a hypothesis are not present before us in all their details as we have them in the case of Greek or Italian art, but if what modern researches, mainly by Strzygowski, have revealed to us in respect of Northern and Mediterranean arts and their intermingling in various centres of early and mediaeval Europe have any objective value and significance for early Indian art and if, further, we have to seek for an explanation of the various culture trends in early Indian art, I do not think we can reasonably escape from such a hypothesis. It is well known that the Buddha issued definite injunctions against representing himself in human form; indeed he was, according to certain texts (Cowell, ‘Jātaka,’ 479), averse to image-representations. I am inclined to believe that this was due to the general Indo-Aryan outlook that the Buddha shared. In any case, this probably explains the absence of representation of human figures in Mauryan art as well the concrete symbols—the vajrāsana, the foot-prints, the wheel, the ‘stūpa’ the sacred tree etc.—by which the Buddha is represented in Śuṅga art. The early Buddhist attitude was essentially religious, not artistic. But as time wore on, the emotional and sensuous of the pre-Aryan Southerner got the better of the religious and rational of the Aryan Northerner and eventually transformed these symbols into human form vibrant with life.