Vastu-shastra (Vol. I: Hindu Science of Architecture; Vol. II: Hindu Canons of Iconography and Painting) v2.c75: Appendix A

Vāstu-śāstra (Vol. I: Hindu Science of Architecture; Vol. II: Hindu Canons of Iconography and Painting) v2.c75

Language: English

v2.c75.s1 Section A — 795 parts
v2.c75.s2 Section I—Jain Images — 65 parts
v2.c75.s3 Section B: Buddhist Iconography — 101 parts

Appendix A

v2.c75.1

(i) *Mānagaṇanam*--vide Chap. III p. 87.

v2.c75.2

‘A distance of one aṅgula is called Murti, Indu, Viśvambharā, Mōksha and Ukta.

v2.c75.3

A distance of two aṅgulas is called Kalā, Gōlaka, Aśvinī, Yugma, Brāhmaṇa, Vihaga, Akshi and Paksha.

v2.c75.4

A distance of three aṅgulas is called Ṛiṇa Agni, Rudrāksha, Guṇa, Kāla, Śūla, Rāma, Varga and Madhyā.

v2.c75.5

A distance of four aṅgulas is called Veda, Pratishṭhā, Jāti, Varṇa, Karṇa (or karaṇa), Abjajānana, Yuga, Turya, and Turīya.

v2.c75.6

A distance of five aṅgulas is called Vishaya, Indriya, Bhūta, Ishu, Supratishṭhā and Pṛithvī.

v2.c75.7

A distance of six aṅgulas is called Karma, Aṅga, Rasa, Samaya, Gāyatrī, Kṛittikā, Kumārānana, Kau`ika and Ṛitu.

v2.c75.8

A distance of seven aṅgulas, Pātāla, the Munis, Dhātus, Lōkas, Ushṇik, Rōhiṇī, Dvīpa, Aṅga and ambhōnidhis.

v2.c75.9

A distance of eight aṅgulas is called Lōkapālas, Nāgas, Uraga, Vasus, Anushṭup, and Gaṇas.

v2.c75.10

A distance of nine aṅgulas is called Bṛihatī, Gṛihas, Randhras, Nandas and Sutras.

v2.c75.11

A distance of ten aṅgulas, is called Dik, Prāturbhāvā, Nāḍi, Paṅkti and....

v2.c75.12

A distance of eleven aṅgulas, is called Rudras and Tṛishṭup.

v2.c75.13

A distance of twelve aṅgulas is called Vitasti, Mukha Tāla, Yama, Arka, Rāśi and Jagatī.

v2.c75.14

A distance of thirteen aṅgulas is called Atijagatī

v2.c75.15

A distance of fourteen aṅgulas is called Manu and Śakvarī.

v2.c75.16

A distance of fifteen aṅgulas is called Ati-śakvarī and Tithi.

v2.c75.17

A distance of sixteen aṅgulas is called Kṛiyā, Ashṭi and Indu-Kalā.

v2.c75.18

A distance of seventeen aṅgulas is called Atyashṭi.

v2.c75.19

A distance of eighteen aṅgulas is called Smṛiti and Dhṛiti.

v2.c75.20

A distance of nineteen aṅgulas is called Atidhṛiti.

v2.c75.21

A distance of twenty aṅgulas is called Kṛiti.

v2.c75.22

A distance of twenty-one aṅgulas is called Prakṛiti.

v2.c75.23

A distance of twenty-two aṅgulas is called Akṛiti.

v2.c75.24

A distance of twenty-three aṅgulas is called Vikṛiti.

v2.c75.25

A distance of twenty-four aṅgulas is called Saṁskṛiti.

v2.c75.26

A distance of twenty-five aṅgulas is called Atikṛiti, A distance of twenty-six aṅgulas is called Utkṛiti. A distance of twenty-seven aṅgulas is called Nakshatra'—Rao's version.

(ii) *Sixfold iconometrical measurements and their synonyms*—vide p. 88. Māna—Āyāma, Āyata, Dīrgha. Pramāṇa—Vistāra, Tāra, Stṛiti, Viśṛiti, Viśṛitam, Vyāsa, Visārita, Vipula, Tata, Vishkambha and Viśāla. Unmāna—Bahala, Ghana, Miti, Utchchhraya, Tuṅga, Unnata, Udaya, Utsedha, Uchcha, Nishkrama, Nishkṛiti, Nirgama, Nirgati and Udgama Parimāṇa—Mārga, Praveśa, Pariṇāha, Nāha, Vṛiti, Avṛita and Nata. Upamāna—Nīvra, Vivara and Antara. Lambamāna—Sūtra, Lambana, and Unmita.

v2.c75.28

(iii) *Tālamāna*—vide p. 89. The Uttama-daśa-tāla (of 124 dehāṅgulas) is prescribed for the images of the principal deities—Brahmā, Vishṇu and Śiva. The Madhyama-daśa-tāla (of 120 dehāṅgulas) for those of Śrīdevī, Bhūmidevī, Umā, Sarasvatī, Durgā, Sapta-mātṛikās, Ushā and Jyeshṭhā. The Adhama-daśa-tāla (of 116 dehāṅgulas) for Indra and the other Lōkapālas, for Chandra and Sūrya, for the twelve Ādityas, the eleven Rudras, the eight Vasus, the two Aśvini-devatās, for Bhṛigu and Mārkaṇḍeya, for Garuḍa, Śesha, Durgā, Guha or Subrahmaṇya, for the seven Rishis, for Guru, Ārya, Chaṇḍesa and Kshetrapālakas. The Navārddha-tāla for Kubera, for the nine Grahas (planets) and certain other celestial objects. The Uttama-nava-tāla for Daityeśa, Yaksheśa, Urageśa, Siddhas, Gandharvas and Chāraṇas, Vidyeśa and for the Ashṭamūrtis of Śiva.

v2.c75.29

Sa-tryaṅgula-nava-tāla for such persons as are equal to the gods in power, wisdom, sanctity, etc.

v2.c75.30

Nava-tāla for Rākshasas, Asura, Yakshas, Apsarsas, Astramūrtis, and Marudgaṇas.

v2.c75.31

Ashṭa-tāla for men.

v2.c75.32

Sapta-tāla for Vetālas add Pretas

v2.c75.33

Shaṭ-tāla for Pretas.

v2.c75.34

Panch-tāla for Kubjas or deformed persons and for Vighneśvara.

v2.c75.35

Chatustāla for Vāmanas or Dwarfs and for children. Tritāla for Bhūtas and Kinnaras. Dvitāla for Kūshmāṇḍas. Eka-tāla for Kabandhas'—Rao's version.

v2.c75.36

(*b*) *Aparājita pracchā's overtopping the other texts—the largest Tāla-measure—vide p. 88.*

v2.c75.37

*N. B.*—The Rūpamaṇḍana being a copier, can not have this credit cf. these comparative estimates—Maṇkad's version.)

v2.c75.38

v2.c75.39

*N. B.*—Representation and magnification of भृगुs as prodigies may be regarded as a later development.

v2.c75.40

ICONS AND ICONOLOGY

v2.c75.41

Exposition of the Pratima-laksan

v2.c75.42

Something has already been said in the 'Introduction' regarding this part. Here a little more may be added to bring home to the readers not only the angle of the treatment; but also the introduction of the new elements in Indian icons and their iconology. Regarding the former, it may be said that the exposition of the Pratīmā-lakṣaṇa, does not only confine itself to the objective treatment of the icons alone as such, but their individual evolutions in relation to their cult-ideology, artistic developments (i. e. iconographic evolutions and associated comminglings) and a critical analysis of their sway over Indian life as a whole in the cultural context of this great sub-continent, have also found a place in this treatment. In this survey a good many new propositions have been advanced and theories propounded, explanations and interpretations put forward to attract the attention of the scholars to these new factors whose estimation has been a long dessedaratum. A few instances, in this connection, may be cited:

v2.c75.43

A reoriented classification of the varieties of the principal deities, like Viṣṇu or Śiva has been put forward. Similarly the relative importance and ideology and their bearing on our cultural traditions, affecting deeply the Indian life as a whole, of some of the varieties of these principal deities, classed as minor or miscellaneous forms by Śri Rao, have been reoriented and re-established. Vāsudeva-Viṣṇu, Anantaśāyī Nārāyaṇa, Sadāśiva, Mahāsadāśiva and Dvādaśa-kalā-sampūrṇa Sadāśiva are some of the many such notable examples, found dealt with, in this new angle. A good many images though described in the manuals and said to be unrepresented in the monuments (the rich sculptural heritage of India) have also been resurrected. A very striking example is that of Simhavāhinī Lakṣmī, described in Hemādri's Caturvarga-cintāmaṇi but said to be unrepresented by Sri Brindavan Bhattacharya (cf. I. I.) in Indian sculpture, has been pointed out here to have been represented alright—vide Khajuraho sculptures. A bold assertion on the basis of the indegenous texts and their ideology regarding the Buddha image has been made to bring home to the readers that the evolution of Buddha image is not cent per cent a foreign contribution. It is fundamentally Indian and accordingly a new critique of Gandhara art has been advanced. A confusion prevailing among the scholars regarding the characteristic traits of Gandharvas and Kinnars has been cleared—vide the correct interpretation of the Mānasāra text describing these demi-gods. This is only a bare outline of this critical and comparative angle of treatment, an appraisal of which can be made only after fully going through all these eight chapters, full of ideas and innovations. This brief indication only aims at enkindling a curiosity in this fascinating study of immortals.

v2.c75.44

Regarding the latter, *i. e.* introduction of new elements, a peep into the very first chapter will convince my readers that some of the most intimate subjects of dessertation in any study of Hindu Iconography, so far remained insignificant, have been given their due. Symbolism in India has been its life breath. Symbolism, therefore, in Indian art is its soul. Accordingly all the principal deities have been treated from this angle also in the last—the secret and sacred significance of the icons and their manifold rūpas, etc. what is termed here as ‘lāñchana-rahasyam’ which is an invariable concomittance in practically all the eight chapters. Similarly a principal image must have his shrine—the āyatana, and his parivāra-devatās. This too is an essential theme invariably adhered to in the treatment of all the principal deities. Needless to multiply other so many new introductions based on an intimate study of the new sources like the Samarāṅgaṇa and the Aparājita-pracchā and the reorientation of the older texts like the Mānasāra.

v2.c75.45

Thirdly the subject of Hindu Iconography regarding the different icons and their iconology has been treated here as an integrated whole. It is why that all the three branches of Indian Iconography—Brāhmaṇa, Baudha and Jain—so far taken as independent evolutions—have been treated here from the broad cultural stand-point in which they are only the side-currents having their rise from a fountain head—the spirit of India.

v2.c75.46

Five Dhyānī Buddhas with their characteristics—Vide Chap. VIII p. 24

v2.c75.47

Section A

v2.c75.s1.1

TRIMŪRTI, ETC. AND BRĀHMA-PRATIMĀ-LAKṢAṆA

v2.c75.s1.2

**Trimūrti.**—The reason why Trimūrti icon is first taken up is not very difficult to understand. It represents not only historical background of the evolutionary processes of the later (i.e. Paurāṇic) sectarianism, but also keeps up intact the lofty idealism of Upaniṣadic monism, already initiated by the Ṛṣi in the Ṛgveda when he proclaimed ‘Ekam sad Viprāḥ bahudhā vadanti’. Trimūrti and other compound mūrties, though regarded as representing syncretistic tendency, in the opinion of scholars like Dr. J. N. Banerji, as a reaction to the morbid sectarianism, really represent, in a nut-shell the truth of the Vedic Henotheism and Vedāntic Monism.

v2.c75.s1.3

Hinduism misrepresented as polytheism, really stands on the solid bedrock of the Advaita, the Brahma, the ultimate reality. The Vedāntic monism is both an idealism of the highest order as well as the Realism of the most practical utility. It is here that Ethics and Metaphysics meet. Therefore the Trimūrti conception is the essence of Hindu culture, religion, philosophy and the world at large. We cannot have a better lakṣaṇa of Trimūrti than one quoted by Gaṅgeśa in his Śabdatatva-cintāmaṇi (cf. Pr. Laks. P. 70) that the Trimūrti, though apparently having different forms, really has one form and it is one monistic principle governing the three-fold work of the Universe, the Creation, the Preservation and the Destruction.

v2.c75.s1.4

The Viṣṇudharmottara also echoes here this concept of Trimūrti (vide Pr. Laks. p. 70). The existence of the Universe is guided by three-fold principle of Energy or Quality—Rājasa, Sātvika and Tāmasa. Accordingly here Brāhma aspect or form or face represents the creative activity, Vaiṣṇava one maintains and sustains the universe, while the Śaiva aspect simply destroys it (to create a vacuum for further creation).

v2.c75.s1.5

As hinted above, the idea of Trimūrti is not Paurāṇic alone. It is as ancient as the times of the Vedas themselves. The Vedic triad Agni, Sūrya and Vāyu or Rudra, really got developed into the Paurāṇic Trimūrti of Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva. Brahmā represents Agni and the later texts both Purāṇas and the Vāstuśāstras (notably the Samarāṅ- gaṇa-Sūtradhāra) corroborate this truth by directing the image-maker to make the Pratimā ‘analārci-pratimāh’ akin to the flamed fire. Viṣṇu is a solar deity in the Veda—everybody agrees to it. He is accordingly reckoned as one of the Dvādaśādityas in the Mahābhārata. The praises and exploits of Viṣṇu in the hymns of the Ṛgveda are all for Viṣṇu as a solar deity and hence his affinity to Sūrya cannot be disputed. As regards Śiva, his prototype in the Vedas is Rudra—Rudras or Rudriyas in the Ṛgveda or more correctly in the Yajurveda, are in intimate association with the Marud-devas, the wind-gods, represented as working havoc, bringing storms, spreading calamities and diseases, etc. and therefore the development of Marud-Rudra into terrific-cum-beneficient Rudra—Śiva—is not difficult to understand.

v2.c75.s1.6

With this background of Trimūrti conception, let us peep into the depth of its meaning. It represents in the nutshell the whole fabric of the Āśramadharma—the three fundamental stages of life, childhood and youth as well as the three periods of Āryan life, the Brahmacarya, the Gārhasthya and the Sanyāsa. ‘Brahmā’s features are exactly those of a Brahmacāri. He holds a Kamaṇḍalu, puts on Kāṣāya cloth, carries the Vedas, all of which are requisites of a young Brahmacārī. The appearance of Viṣṇu is the ideal representation of a householder, enjoying, working and flourishing in the world. His dress, ornaments, attendants all speak of his life of the world. Thus he has been the ideal god to be worshipped by the kings. The image of Śiva, in like manner, represents the life of an Indian Sanyāsī. He wears, like the Hindu ascetic, tiger’s skin, bears a trident and has Jaṭā or clotted hair—the true sign of old age and indifference. Like a Yogī, he is half naked and devoted to spiritual contemplation’—Brindāvana, I. I. p. 5.

v2.c75.s1.7

Metaphysical interpretation of Trimūrti is already hinted at. Mythological accounts of the triad are quite well known—Brahmā created the world; Viṣṇu preserved the creation throughout by maintaining the life principle and removing the destructive elements in various incarnations; Pralaya or dissolution of the world was brought about by Śiva or Rudra.

v2.c75.s1.8

As regards the illustrations representing this form of icon, there is a great paucity of monuments representing this image. The celebrated ‘Trimūrti’ illustration of the famous elephanta cave is held by Rao as an unmistakable representation of Maheśamūrti, and he has adduced strong arguments to prove his contention and substantiate it on the possible grounds. Another sculpture of Chittoragarh in Udaipur State, Marwar is also not ‘Trimūrti’ but Maheśamūrti as contended by Rao, ibid p. 385. Śrī Brindābana Bhattacharya, however, cites two examples of Trimūrti image in the Peshawar Museum and the four-headed liṅgam in the Indian Museum.

v2.c75.s1.9

Trimūrti, according to Viṣṇudharmottara, Pūrva-Karṇāgama, etc. (Pr. Laks. p. 187-188) is also one of the eight Vidyeśvaras (special forms of Śiva), Aṁśumadbhedāgama describes Trimūrti (Ekapāda), Ekanetra and Ekarudra alike. The main features of this Trimūrti sculpture according to this text are: From the right to left of the erect figure of Śiva should be seen emerging those of Brahmā and Viṣṇu, respectively. Both these should be sculptured with their respective characteristics. Rao says, ‘Another way in which Trimūrti may be represented is this: Brahmā and Viṣṇu may be sculptured as issuing from either side of a large liṅga. Thirdly, they may be represented each of one separately with all their characteristics and as standing side by side on three separate padma-pīṭhas. Fourthly, there may be three shrines in a temple each separated from the other and in these there may be set up in the middle shrine a linga and in the right and left, shrines for Brahmā and Viṣṇu, respectively. Fifthly, in a temple consisting of these contiguous shrines (triforium), they may be set up as in the previous case. The central figure may be also Nṛtta or other forms of Śiva.

v2.c75.s1.10

This is the traditional and time-honoured conception of both of the iconology and the iconography of Trimūrti representing Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva as one.

v2.c75.s1.11

There are, however, certain texts notably Aparājita-pracchā which not only describes trimūrti of Hari, Hara and Pitāmaha, but also that of Candra (the moon), Arka (the sun) and Brahmā (common), as well as Hari, the Sun (also Viṣṇu), Hara and Hiraṇyagarbha. The former has not yet found representation in sculpture, but the latter is fully depicted in it. It is, therefore, very curious and also remarkable that some of the uncommon types of icons are either the result of the uncommon conceptions or vice-versa. The association of Sūrya with Hara and Hiraṇyagarbha in the Trimūrti sculpture have some background in peculiar conditions of the religious beliefs of the Hindus. The close connection of Sūrya with Viṣṇu or Viṣṇu as Nārāyaṇa is wellknown. Accordingly a good many Trimūrti sculptures depict this synchronism—cf. six-armed composite image found at Madhia in the old Panna State in Bundelkhand region representing the Trimūrti of Sūrya-Śiva-Brahmā. The three-headed and eight-armed standing Sūrya in Cidambaram temple also illustrates this. ‘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 southern corner of Limboji Mata's temple at Delmal (northern Gujrat)'. '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 Khajurāho'.

v2.c75.s1.12

**Caturmūrti—Aparājita Pracchā**—Also describes Caturmūrtis of Hari (the sun as well as Viṣṇu), Hara and Hiraṇyagarbha, which may be illustrated in the representation already pointed out above—cf. Limboji Mātā's Temple—Vide Trimūrti illustration and Burgess's remarks (Ar. Survey of W. India Vol. IX Arch. Antiq. of N. Guj. p. 88-9) satisfy this composition : 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.

v2.c75.s1.13

**Pañca-mūrti :** Though we do not have any partimālakṣaṇa in the texts of this composite icon, we do find pañcāyatana sculptures and images in accordance with a clear cut tendency of this most tolerant, and universal institution advocated by the Smṛtis like Manu and Yājñavalkya and fully practised by the bulk of people called Smārtas. Accordingly the Pañcāyatana worship must have some symbol (icononic or aniconic) to satisfy this most prevalent urge of ordinary run of men having equal adoration to all the principal deities of Hindu Pantheon. This was really a great and grand syncretistic tendency at work. '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 represening 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).

v2.c75.s1.14

'The Pañcāyatana Pūja of the Smārtas is also illustrated by many extant early and late mediæval 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'. Dr. Banerji has given certain notable illustrations of this religious culture found depicted in stone—a farily large number of mediæval scluptures: '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 mediæval Śaiva of Eastern India belonging to the order of Smārtas. It is inaccurately described in the Museum record 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 Brāhmani-cal Hindu cults.'

v2.c75.s1.15

**Dvimūrti.**—We have already noticed (though rarely) the iconographical presentations of caturmūrtis and Pañcamūrtis, etc., the Dvimūrtis, however, are very popular. Among them, the most famous Haryardha-mūrti or Hari-Haramūrtis are very well known. The different Śaiva-dvimūrtis like Hara-Gaurī, Umā-Maheśvara, Ardhanārīśvara etc., etc., may also be classed dvimūrtis but as they form a class by themselves in the Śaiva icons, they may be passed on here to be taken up in their proper place. It is, therefore, proposed to take only the most famous forms of Dvimūrtis here.

v2.c75.s1.16

*Haryardharmūrti:*—Vide Pr. Laks. p. 71 is enjoined to be sculptured according to Uttara Karṇāgama like this: The Maheśa part should exactly be the same as in the Ardhanārīśvara form, the other half of it, the Vaiṣṇava counterpart however is enjoined to take only two arms with Śaṅkha and Kaṭaka, dressed in Pītāmbara and decorated with all characteristic ornaments. Suprabhedāgama, however, prescribes Hara, clad in tiger's skin, Viṣṇu, of course, in Pītāmbara, though hair would be in Jaṭā, and in Kirīṭa respectively. Śilparatna however adds the bodily pose also—both of them to assume Samapāda standing posture, other characteristics are also mentioned, the emblems, etc. vide Pr. Laks. P. 71.

v2.c75.s1.17

It may be remarked that sculptures found representing the image show Hari always on the left and Hara in the right, as we shall presently see. A word, therefore, on history and culture of this composite image may be first said here. The historical, or more correctly the Paurāṇic, account of the origin of this composition is very popular. Viṣṇu was Mohinī, the beautiful female form assumed by him while distributing nectar churned out of the ocean by the Devas and 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. Now as regards the broader culture which this composite icon represents is the emphasis on the reconciliation between the two major cults of Vaiṣṇavism and Śaivism.

v2.c75.s1.18

Dr. Banerji has illustrated this icon in many of the Indian sculptures: One of the earliest stone reliefs representing this composite divinity is to be found at Badami.... 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 kiriṭamukuṭa), the two different ear-rings (a sarpa-kuṇḍala in the right ear, and a nakra or makara kuṇḍala in the left ear)....and the presence of the bull-faced Nandī and Pārvatī on the right hand, and that of the slightly pot-bellied dwarfish Garuḍa and gracefully standing Lakṣmī on the left’.

v2.c75.s1.19

There are some other dvimūrtis spoken of, in the Śāstra, but unre-presented in the sculpture and vice-versa. Aparājitapracchā gives a description of *Kṛṣṇa-Śaṅkara* dvimūrti which is uncommon. The Kṛṣṇā half (in the left) is said to have mukuṭa, makara-kuṇḍala and cakra; while the Śaṅkara counterpart (in the right) is directed to have jaṭābhāra, kuṇḍala, akṣamālā and triśūla. So far as our knowledge goes this description is not illustrated in the sculpture. Further dis-coveries should be made in this direction and its representation may come to light; because the Aparājita is a medieval treatise and the exuberance of medieval sculptures has not yet been well investigated. A good many images still remain unidentified. This description of this standard manual gives us a sufficient clue for our further studies in the vast store-house of medieval sculptures adorning renowned temple-sites of Northern and Southern India.

v2.c75.s1.20

Two very interesting dvimūrtis of *Mārtaṇḍa-Bhairava* and *Sūrya-Brahmā* are represented in our sculptural heritage and Dr. Banerji observes: ‘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 ‘Mārtaṇḍa-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 accessor-ies noticeable in a well-developed type of Sūrya figure of this part of India. Its central face is placid, the side ones being fierce; 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 ḍamarū, and a sarpa, flames issuing from its heads and shoulders (the Śivaite cha-racter of most of these emblems should be noted). The dhyāna-mantra of a particular variety of Sun (Mārtaṇḍa) appearing in the Śāradātilakatantra conforms to a great extent to its iconographic fea-tures and the text says that such a variety of the Sun god is ‘half’ (a part) of Śiva (Ballabhārddha).’ ‘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 res-pects 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 Dhātrī 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; Padmābhyām śobhitakarā sā Dhātrī prathamā smṛtā). This North Bengal relief has no doubt much in common with the Dhātrī aspect of the twelve Ādityas but the increased number of 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. Dhātrī 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).

v2.c75.s1.21

In the end may be also cited another important dvimūrti of *Nara-Nārāyaṇa* or *Harikṛṣṇa*. The V. D. has given its lakṣaṇa—vide writer’s Pr. Laks. p. 70 (wrongly classed with caturmūrtis under Trimūrti). ‘It is stated therein that the image of Nara should be of grass colour and have two hands; it should me made to look powerful. Nārāyaṇa should possess four arms and be of blue complexion. Both of them should be seated under a badara tree. They should be clad in kṛṣṇājina and wear the jaṭā-maṇḍalas. As regards Harikṛṣṇa, they should be shown as seated in a chariot having eight wheels, with their legs crossed. The story of Nara-Nārāyaṇa is related at many places in the Mahābhārata. Its representation in sculpture however is still to be found out.

v2.c75.s1.22

BRAHMĀ

v2.c75.s1.23

Though one of the members of the Trinity, Brahmā as a God of temples and images is not significant. Instances of a separate temple dedicated exclusively to Brahmā are very few and far between. Contrary to this however the accounts in the Śilpa-śāstras and those in the Purāṇas are full of his glory and glorification as well as dedication and worship. Brahmā, the creator of the Universe, and the foremost among the gods, could not fascinate the minds of the masses, perhaps due to the (curse) as the Padmapurāṇa (Sṛṣtikhaṇḍa 17) shows that the worship of Bahamā had declined at that time, owing, it is said to the curse of Sāvitrī. There is no Brāhma cult as we have the Vaiṣṇava and the Śāiva cults with a large number of adherents.

v2.c75.s1.24

Brahmā, the cosmic creator is a god of a very regulated function. He is neither a showerer of boons nor a player of magic. He could fascinate few. Even the Brāhmaṇas who could have been his adherents and worshippers could not tide over the times and tendencies. Viṣṇu a grand god captivated the minds of Kings, Śiva was very popular among the masses. Kings and beggars both adored him. Hence both these gods became popular gods. Accordingly wlth rise of Bhakti their images became the time-honoured traditions and the practices thereof.

v2.c75.s1.25

**A historical resume.**—With this very brief introduction to the first member of the orthodox Brāhmanical triad, let us peep into the history of Brahmā, the accounts of his rise and growth as well as decline and fall.

v2.c75.s1.26

**Vedic.**—The creator gods described in the Vedic texts are Viśvakarman, Brahmaṇaspati, Hiraṇyagarbha, Prajāpati and Brahmā—vide R.V.X. 81, 82; 72; 121 and vide S. B. XI 2. 3. 1; X. 6. 5. 9; and Prajāpati among them though invariably connected with creation is also associated with Sacrifice as its presiding deity—vide S. B. III 2. 2. 4; XIV. 1. 1. 6.

v2.c75.s1.27

**Smṛtic.**—The most concrete concept of Brahmā had came to be developed in the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad where he is described as the first of the gods as well as the creator of universe and the preserver of the world:

v2.c75.s1.28

‘ब्रह्मा देवानां प्रथमः संबभूव विश्वस्य कर्ता भुवनस्य गोप्ता ’

v2.c75.s1.29

The Manusmṛti completed the golry of this great god by proclaiming that the Svayambhū Lord was born in the golden egg as Brahmā:

v2.c75.s1.30

तस्मिन् जज्ञे स्वयं ब्रह्मा सर्वलोकपितामहः

v2.c75.s1.31

A very notable point in regard to Brahmā's position in the Smṛti is the appellation Nārāyaṇa which echoes the Prajāpati's conception in the Brāhmaṇas like Śatapatha.

v2.c75.s1.32

**Epic.**—Now the concrete god Brahmā was known by such names as Prajāpati, Dhātā, Vidhātā, Pitāmaha, Viśveśa, Sraṣṭṛ, Lokavṛddha, Suragurua, Lokabhāvana, Lokeśvareśvara, Lokādinidhaneśvara, Ādideva, Bhutāman, etc. (Epic Mythology—Hopkins), in the two epics whiich in their earlier sections though keep intact his greatness, also give his gradual decline in their later sections thus paving the ground for Purāṇas to neglect him altogether.

v2.c75.s1.33

**Pauranic.**—Brahmā in Purāṇas is singled out as easily susceptible to grant boons even to Asuras which wrought the wrath of the gods and brought the two great gods Viṣṇu and Śiva to annihilate these Asuras for the good of not only the gods but also of mankind at large. Matsya, Bhāgavata and several other Purāṇas concocted the myth of Brahmā's incentuous love for his own daughter and the already alluded curse of Sāvitrī in the Padma, brought decline of the Father not to be deemed fit for dedication of temples and the consequent worship. One of the early Purāṇas, the Mārkaṇḍeya, paints him helpless to defend himself from the demons Madhu and Kaiṭabha from whose clutches he is saved by Viṣṇu's timely intervention. The accounts of Liṅgodbhava-mūrti, whose Bhairava form is sometimes described as Brahma-śiraś-chedakamūrti, points out Brahmā's passion for telling lies.

v2.c75.s1.34

All these later accounts are an evidence to the historical evolution and revolution inasmuch as with the decline of Vedism, the repository of the Vedas himself (as Brahmā is conceived), had to face a fall. The other details of the life and deeds of Brahmā may be summed up here in the words of Rao: “It has already been stated that Brahmā was born in a golden egg and was therefore known as Hiraṇyagarbha; that he sprang up from the waters and the ether; that he took the form of a boar and lifted up the earth from the ocean; that he took the avatāra of a fish; that he was born from the lotus that issued from the Navel of Viṣṇu; that he was the father of Dakṣa and other Prajāpatis (patriarchs); that he disputed the superiority of Viṣṇu over himself and that when, in connection with the dispute, Śiva appeared between them in the form of a pillar of fire, he (Brahmā) went up to search for its upper end and failed to do so; that he was born to the Ṛṣi Atri and his wife Anasūyā as one of the aspects of Dattātreya; that he served as a Charioteer of Śiva when the latter attacked the Tripurāsura; and that he acted as purohita (officiating priest) in the marriage of Śiva and also of Subrahmaṇya; and many other things have also been mentioned about him”

v2.c75.s1.35

**Iconographical accounts :**—As hinted above, the iconographical accounts of Brahmā are however, fully exhaustive and practically all the treatises describe him. The Pr. Laks, p. 72-75 may be purviewed where lakṣaṇas of Brāhma-icons from as many as twelve works are gathered together and let us summarise them one by one to evolve out a perfect figure of Brahmā from both the points of view of iconology and iconography.

v2.c75.s1.36

Bṛhatsaṁhitā, one of the earliest iconographical texts describes Brahmā only with three of the many attributes—Kamaṇḍalu-kara—holding a ritual water vessel in one of his hands; caturmukha (having four faces) and Paṅkajāsanashha (seated on a lotus). Another ancient text of Kaśyapa quoted by Utpala (as referred to by Dr. Bannerjea –D. H. I.

v2.c75.s1.37

p. 516) adds two more attributes associated with this god—daṇḍī (having a staff) and Kṛṣṇājina (with the hide of a black antelope skin as his upper garment). Both these accounts paint Brahmā as a Brahmacārī.

v2.c75.s1.38

The Matsya, one of the earliest Purāṇas, elaborates the iconoic representation of Brahmā as developed by its time. It makes him ride on his mount of swan, bestows four hands with the additional attributes of sruk and sruvā (the sacrificial implements) besides the usual staff and Kamaṇḍalu. It also gives place in Brahmā icon to the Ājyasthālī and the Vedas on the sides as well as Sarasvatī and Sāvitrī on the right and left respectively. The Agni further elaborates him into a god having a big pot belly—Bṛhajjathhamaṇḍalaḥ and having long moustaches—Lambakūrca. Dr. Bannerjea (D. H. I p. 516) observes: Yet it is curious that in none of these elaborate accounts there is an explicit reference to his face or faces being bearded, though the Ṛṣis who accompany him in a Brahmāyatana (a Brahmā shrine) are described as bearded..... This is, however, not right. Perhaps the learned Doctor has not seen this iconographical prescription of the Agnipurāṇa where he is bearded alright. He is not only bearded but also Jaṭāyuktaḥ (with matted hair—a characeristic sign of Śiva). Again as the Agnipurāṇa is regarded as a later Purāṇa, all the later images of Brahmā have bearded faces, perhaps due to this prescription; otherwise most of the earlier ones being shown without this trait. This is also supported in other medieval texts like Aparājita-pracchā and Rūpamaṇḍana (see ahead).

v2.c75.s1.39

Viṣṇupurāna gives him his lordly conveyance of a chariot drawn by seven swans—‘saptahaṁsarathasthitam’.

v2.c75.s1.40

As regards the accounts of Āgama texts, the Aṁśu and the Suprabheda, etc., they too elaborate these aforesaid attributes with some innovations, viz., the Aṁśu describes Brahmā as Haritālasamaprabha, Jaṭāmukuṭasaṁyukta, piṅgalākṣa, sarvabhūṣaṇa, clad in white garments and decorated with white garlands, etc., etc., Other details are more iconometircal than iconographical.

v2.c75.s1.41

Mānasāra has a distinctive attribute so far not evolved by other texts. The four-faced Brahmā is described as Aṣṭalocana having eight eyes. Śilparatna, another southern text, has some further innovation to add. Here he is said to be sitting on long brush like grass—lambakūrcoparisthitam—perhaps meaning thereby a Kuśāsana (kuśas are a long grass like brushes).

v2.c75.s1.42

In Samarāṅgaṇa Sūtradhāra this god finds first place among the gods described at length from iconographer's point of view. His figure should be that of youth, that is he is to be sculptured as a Brahmacāri or student. He should glow with a lustre akin to that of fire and thus he is represented as of red colour. He should be represented as having pot belly with white flowers and covered with white turban. His uttarīya (the upper garment) should be of the black antelope, other clothes being white. He should have four hands. In both of his left hands there should be a Kamaṇḍalu (a pot) and a staff. In one of his right hands he should hold a rosary, the other one should be in Vardhamāna Mudrā—the benedictory hand pose. His waiste is girdled by a Mauñjī Mekhalā.

v2.c75.s1.43

This account of Brahmā as given in the Samarāṅgaṇa Sūtradhāra more or less agrees with those given in the Purāṇas, though the latter are more copious and traditional. As we have seen, Matsyapurāṇa describes Brahmā riding on a goose or sitting on a lotus seat. Again according to it, in his right hand will be Sruvā and Sruk, the two sacrificial pots instead of rosary and benedictory pose (cf. the S. S). In addition to this, the plate of ghee and the four Vedas should be shown on his sides. He is attended on the left by Sāvitrī and on his right by Saraswatī.

v2.c75.s1.44

The description as given in the Agni tallies more with that of the Samarāṅgaṇa Sūtradhāra. Here he is represented as having a pot belly and clotted hair and long moustaches or a beard, and holding in the right hands a rosary and a Sruvā and in his left hands a Kamaṇḍalu and a plate for ghee. Another important element of representation of Brahmā, left out in these accounts and given in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa is that he should be seated on a chariot drawn by seven swans. The descriptions as found in other works are more conspicuous, but they all belong to the later treatises like Rūpamaṇḍana and Śilparatna. The paurāṇic accounts are more or less similar.

v2.c75.s1.45

Aparājitapracchā's iconographical accounts of Premeṣṭhī Brahmā are related to his four-fold forms—Brahmā, Pitāmaha, Virañci and Kamalāsana—in conformity to the four-fold Vedas, the Ṛg, etc., the four-fold Yugas the Kṛta, etc. and the four-fold Varṇas, the Brāhmaṇa, etc. The attributes though traditional also support Brahmā having a beard (समांसगलकेशक:) in consonance to this developed trait of medieval iconography of Brahmā and the sculptures illustrating thereof as per medieval character of this text itself.

v2.c75.s1.46

Rūpamaṇḍana, the last text quoted in Pratimā-lakṣaṇa p. 75, verbatim describes Brahmā in Aparājita terms. The cent percent copying of Rūpmaṇḍan from the Aparājita-pracchā has already been pointed out before, vide Chap. I ‘Sources of Hindu iconography’.

v2.c75.s1.47

Further details of the attributes, etc. held in hands may be seen in Rao’s book—H. I. Vol. II pt. 2. p. 504-5.

v2.c75.s1.48

**Iconological implication** :—Now before giving the representations of Brahmā’s icons in our sculptural heritage, let us say a few words on the Brāhma-lāñcchana-rahasya—the secret or the mystery of the attributes of Brahmā’s icons. Thus in conception and form, Brahmā is a vedic student, sacrificer and creator. “Metaphysically” says Brindāban, “he represents the Rajoguṇa or the active power. That is why he has red colour (cf. the S. S. Analārci) which is supposed to be peculiar to the creative power. He has four heads in reference to the four quarters of his works. His śakti or female phase is his own daughter Saraswatī or Vāc, possessing creative power of imagination and invention. Yajña or sacrifice, is full of Kāmanā or desire and creation :—‘सोऽकामयत अहं बहुस्यां प्रजायेयम्’—‘I shall be many’. Mythologically from his four mouths the four Vedas are said to have issued.” (Indian Images page 19).

v2.c75.s1.49

The Viṣṇudharmottara has however gone deeper and says : “Through (the preponderance of) rajas the colour is reddish, hence Brahman, greeted by all creatures and the best of the gods should be known as resembling that tip of the lotus. Ṛgveda is (his) eastern face, Yajurveda the southern, Sāmaveda the western and Atharva (Veda) the northern. Those that are the Vedas are these faces and the four quarters are the arms. The world’s movable and immovable are verily (sprung from) water, and Brahman holds these (primeval waters); so the Kamaṇḍalu (water vessel) rests in his hand. Kāla (Time) is indicated in the hand of Brahman by the rosary, because Kāla (Time, Death) is called so on account of seizing (kalana) all creatures. All sacrifice is propogated by work white and non-white (i. e. pious and impious). Therefore, the garment of the lord, the skin of the black antelope, is white and not white (i.e. matted). The seven regions are known as bhūḥ, bhuvaḥ, svar, mahaḥ, janaḥ, tapas and satya. These regions are the swans in the chariot of Brahman, the great god. Oh best of kings! let the pericarp of the lotus, which took its birth in the navel of Viṣṇu, be known as Meru. Oh king, everywhere steadiness is the result of meditation, and hence Brahman assumes (the meditative position) by means of his corporeal lotus seat.

v2.c75.s1.50

Of the (Supreme) Soul, one should think the best position as devoid of form. For the sight of the worlds, He exists with eyes closed in meditation. The medicinal plants which help the sustenance of the earth should be known as the matted locks of Brahman, the high-souled, who moves everywhere. The repositories of Vidyā (learning) which (act) as revealers of the world, should be known as the various ornaments of that great God.

v2.c75.s1.51

This form of that incomparable (soul) that pervades the whole world has been described to you. Thus the Pre-eminent One of the world occupies the whole world with his body"—Kramresch's Translation.

v2.c75.s1.52

**Illustrations :**—Without going into details which may be looked into Rao's and Banerji's work, the following tabulation of the images of Brahmā in Indian sculpture and bronzes as found in the various parts of India exhibiting the general natural characteristics of the country to which they belong (cf. the dictum of Varāhmihira ‘देशानुरूप’ etc., may be interesting from the point of view of illustrating the Brāhma icons:

v2.c75.s1.53

A. INDEPENDENT IMAGES :

v2.c75.s1.54

v2.c75.s1.55

**B. Reliefs**—"Some of the earliest representations of Brahmā are found in theBuddhist reliefs of Gandhāra; his figure is used there either in the Nativity scene of Buddha or as one of Buddha's acolytes. He is invariably shown in them as having profuse dishevelled hair, beared moustache, being dressed in the garments of a Brāhmaṇa, one of his two hands holding a water-vessel. Such figures are, however, not hieratic for they are presented from the unorthodox Buddhist point of view. The later Jaina representations of Brahmā either as a Yakṣa attendant of the Jina Śītalanātha or as one of the Dikpālas are endowed with a great deal of hieratism, even perhaps more pronounced than in their originals in the Brahmānical pantheon."

v2.c75.s1.56

In regard to these illustrations of Brahmā in Indian sculpture, Dr. Banerji's following observations are worth quoting: "Many of the images of Brahma that have been just described are of a subsidiary character, having been used either as Āvaraṇadevtās or as accessory figures in the shrines of the major cult deities. His figure also appears in 'relief compositions' associated with Vaiṣṇavism and Śaivism, some of which have already been noted. The god is seated on a lotus, the stalk of which issued from Nārāyaṇa-Viṣṇu's navel, in the Anāntaśayana reliefs; in the Lingodbhavamūrtis of Śiva, Brahmā is shown first as soaring upwards along the side of a 'columnar Śivaliṅga', and then as standing by its side with his front hands in the Namaskāra mudrā; in the Tripurāntakamūrti of Śiva, he is shown as the charioteer of the great god, and in Śivas Kalyāṇasundaramūrti, Brahmā is shown as the officiating priest in the marriage ceremony of Śiva and Umā. In the Ekapāda-Trimūrti of Śiva or its Vaiṣṇaya counterpart, Śiva or Viṣṇu occupies the central position, Brahmā being invariably shown as a lateral accretion in the attitude of bowing to the central deity."—D. H. I. p. 519.

v2.c75.s1.57

**Brāhma-shrine (The Āyatana):**—This side topic of Brahmā's iconography may also be tackled here both from the stand-point of Śāstra as well as that of the Sthāpatya, the monuments. "In a temple exclusively dedicated to Brahmā, there should be set up in the central shrine that aspect of his, named Viśvakarmā. In this form Brahmā has, as usual, four heads and four arms; in his hands there should be the akṣamālā, a book, a bundle of kuśa grass and a Kamaṇḍalu; and he should be seated upon a swan. The following parivāra devtās are required to be set up in the eight quarters beginning from the east and going round clockwise, namely Ādiśeṣa, Ganeśa, the Mātṛkas, Indra, Jalaśāyī, Pārvatī and Rudra, the Navagrahas and Lakṣmī respectively". This account as given by Rao from the Rūpamaṇḍana is fully corroborated in the Aparājita-pracchā—vide Pr. Lakṣ. p. 76.

v2.c75.s1.58

**Parivāradevatās.**—These are the Dvārapālakas of the temple of Brahmā and the following table (cf. Rao’s book page 507) of all these eight guardians of gate also gives the articles held in their hands.

v2.c75.s1.59

v2.c75.s1.60

“All these eight Dvārapālakas should be represented as of terrific nature with their beards. There should be mukuṭas on their heads. A large number of Ṛṣis also with moustaches and jaṭās, carrying in their hands the Akṣamālā and the kamaṇḍalu, should be seated in the temple of Brahmā and be meditating upon him.” It may, however, be pointed out that in the Aparājitapracchā, they are not represented as terrific but gambhīra—calm and meditative—vide Pr. Laks. p. 76.

v2.c75.s1.61

It has already been pointed out that the temples exclusively dedicated to Brahmā are very few; nevertheless there was a Brahmā cult otherwise Varāhamihira (cf. Pt. I chapt. IX ‘Installation’) would not have given an equal injunction to the installation of the image of Brahmā by only those who were well-versed in the Vedic lore. Dr. Banerea, however, remarks: ‘The analogous references by the same author to the Bhāgvatas, the Pāśupatas, the Magas, etc., being only entitled to install the images of Viṣṇu, Śiva and Sūrya, may suggest that these persons, ‘well versed in the Vedas’, were the exclusive worshippers of Brahmā. But if there were such a sect at all, they did not enjoy any great importance. This hypothetsis is substantiated by the Purāṇic stories cnnnected with such Śaiva icons as the Liṅgodbhavamūrti; Brahmā was cursed by Śiva for telling a lie not to have any cult of his own. Separate temples enshrining Brahmā are very few and far between, and mention may be made here of early medieval and later Brahmā shrines found at Dudahi and Khajurāho (Madhya Bharat), Vasantgaḍh (Rajputana), Unkal (near Hubli, Dharwar district), and Khed Brahmā (Mahi Kaṇṭha). The Dudahi temple was well built having many artistic carvings; the 'presence of a three-headed figure of the bearded Brahmā with his swan mount on the centre of the sanctum doorway and the evidence of an inscription found there recording that the writer paid his adoration to Caturmukha (an appellation of Brahmā) and his wife Sāvitrī, led Cunningham to ascribe this shrine to Brahmā with certainty (A. S. R. Vol. X, pp. 93-4, Pl. XXXI). A small square temple of the god was noticed by the same scholar at Khajurāho which he thought to have been the oldest of the extant shrines at the place (ibid. Vol. XXI, p. 57). The Vasantgadh (Rajputana) brick temple of the god is as old as the 7th century A. D., which faces east and has a standing life-size image of Brahmā with three faces and a nimbus behind him; the figure is two-armed, the hands holding an akṣamālā and kamaṇḍala. The interest attaching to the temple of the god at Khed Brahmā (Idar, Mahi Kaṇṭha) is great for it was still functioning in 1906-07, when it was visited by Henry Cousens. Cousens writes that 'there is a community of Brāhmins at the place who have been there for generations, who devote themselves exclusively to the worship of Brahmā; they are Audīcya Brāhmaṇas (Brāhmaṇas of the north), are followers of the Śukla Yajurveda and are entrusted with the ritual worship of the shrine deity'—D. H. I. p. 513-14.

v2.c75.s1.62

Another example of Brahmā's temple that is still functioning is at Puṣkara near Ajmer; the big temple there is linked up with the shrine of his consort Sāvitri on a hill about a mile distant from it. This sacred Tīrtha is frequented by Hindus of different cult affiliations, and does its existence not necessarily mean the existence of some Brāhma cult there in modern times?

v2.c75.s1.63

VAISNAVA-PRATIMA-LAKSANA

v2.c75.s1.64

Viṣṇu And Vaiṣṇava Icons. Vaiṣṇava-pratimālakṣaṇa is a subject of many-sided treatment, religious, cultural, philosophical, artistic and literary all embedded into one to evolve out not only the grand Viṣṇu Image, but also various Vaiṣṇava icons. The subject is vast, the space is limited and the studies and researches on the theme have no end. T. Gopinath Rao in his monumental work Elements of Hindu Iconography' has devoted a good space to treat Viṣṇu-iconography and exhausted practically all the Paurāṇic and Āgamic accounts of the great God, constituting and forming the most conspicuous member of the Hindu Trinity. Rao at one place had made a remark : 'The materials for the description of the images of Viṣṇu images are not so abundant as they are in the case of image of Śiva. Besides unpublished Vaikhānasāgama, the Tantra-sāra of Mādhavācārya and few other minor works, no authorities are available in relation to the images of Viṣṇu'. The remark of the learned and pioneer author as first pointed out by me in my thesis 'A study of Bhoja's Samarāṅgaṇa Sūtradhāra'—Pt. VI.—'Iconography'—needed modification and it was contended there that a large number of Pañcarātra Saṁhitās, notably the Sātvata and Ahirbudhnya etc. are accredited to have done a fuller justice towards the exposition of Viṣṇu images, both from the point of view of iconography as well as the religious and philosophical thoughts forming the background of the many-sided and diverse developments of Vaiṣṇava images. Happily Dr. Bannerjea has taken up this lost thread and fulfilled the vacuum in his equally monumental and erudite work, the revised edition of the 'Development of Hindu Iconography.' The present writer, therefore, is faced to feel some further vacuum to justify his pen where savants like Rao and Bannerjea have already paved a pakkā pāth.

First 111 of 1,012 passages. Read on

Linked texts (66)

Ṛgvedasaṃhitā — Sanskrit
Aitareyabrāhmaṇa — Mahidāsa Aitareya, Sanskrit
Kaṭhopaniṣad — Sanskrit
Maitrāyaṇīyopaniṣad — Sanskrit
Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Bhagavadgītā — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Śatapathabrāhmaṇa — Yājñavalkya & Śāṇḍilya (Vedic teacher), Sanskrit
Padmapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Devībhāgavatapurāṇa — Sanskrit
Agnipurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Varāhapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Bhāgavatapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Garuḍapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Vāyupurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Liṅgapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Matsyapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra — Bhoja, Sanskrit
Ahirbudhnyasaṃhitā — Sanskrit
Kūrmapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Mānasāra — Sanskrit
Mārkaṇḍeyapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Suprabhedāgama — Sanskrit
Sātvatasaṃhitā — Sanskrit
Vāmanapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Kāśyapaśilpa — Sanskrit
Bṛhatsaṃhitā — Varāhamihira, Sanskrit
Mānava Dharmaśāstra — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit
Rāmacaritamānasa — Tulsīdās 1574, Hindi
Taittirīyasaṃhitā — Sanskrit
Nārāyaṇīya — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Yājñavalkyasmṛti — Yājñavalkya, Sanskrit
Hayaśīrṣasaṃhitā — Sanskrit
Viṣṇudharmottarapurāṇa — Sanskrit
Nirukta — Yāska, Sanskrit
Tibetan translation ('Chi med mdzod) — Classical Tibetan
Taittirīyāraṇyaka — Sanskrit
Viṣṇusahasranāma — Sanskrit
Nāgānanda — Harṣavardhana, Sanskrit
Muṇḍakopaniṣad — Sanskrit
Ādityapurāṇa — Sanskrit
Harivaṃśa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Sāmavedasaṃhitā — Sanskrit
Purāṇa — Sanskrit
Viṣṇupurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Atharvavedasaṃhitā — Atharvan & Aṅgiras, Sanskrit
Hoysaleswara Temple
Kanchipuram
Duladeo Temple
Khajuraho
Bhītargāon
Chatsu
Burdwan
Badami
Mahabalipuram
Aihole
Kailasanatha Temple
Nagalapuram
Nuggehalli
Aparājitapṛcchā — Bhuvanadeva, Sanskrit
Bṛhaddharmapurāṇa — Sanskrit
Śilparatna — Śrīkumāra (Śilparatna) 1500, Sanskrit
Caturvargacintāmaṇi — Hemādri, Sanskrit
Vratakhaṇḍa — Hemādri, Sanskrit
Śāradātilaka — Lakṣmaṇadeśika, Sanskrit
Bhāradvājasaṃhitā — Bharadvāja, Sanskrit
Rūpamaṇḍana — Maṇḍana, Sanskrit

Vastu-shastra (Vol. I: Hindu Science of Architecture; Vol. II: Hindu Canons of Iconography and Painting) v2.c75: Appendix A

Contents

Appendix A

Section A

Linked texts (66)