The Buddha Image An Antiquarian’s Record of its Origins and Worship October 4, 2013, 8:45 pm Book Review By M.B. Mathmaluwe "The Buddha Image and Ceylon" By D. T. Devendra I have been reading with absorbing interest, a new edition of D. T. Devendra’s book, "The Buddha Image and Ceylon" first published in 1956 to commemorate ‘Buddha Jayanthi’ 2500. D.T. Devendra, an intellectual of considerable repute of yester-year, revered teacher, prolific writer on matters of historical and antiquarian interest whom the great Archaeologist of our time, Dr. Paranavitana thought it fit to enlist to his department as his Assistant has been the author of a number of other works of this genre to his credit as well. Writing a brief preface to this edition of his father’s book Tissa Devendra succinctly reveals to the reader in his very first couple of sentences, the genesis and the whole purpose of the books: ".... first published in 1956 to commemorate Buddha Jayanthi 2500, D.T. Devendra’s bold thesis was that the sculptural representation of the Buddha originated in Sri Lanka and not in India, as is generally accepted". This is not a massive tome as books go, on subjects of this order, such as Archaeology, Art, Art History etc.: this is a volume of modest proportions, but the reader here, may be apprised clearly, that every page of it is packed with erudite material patiently gathered and meticulously compiled, teeming with references to sources, books as well as epigraphical records here and abroad, which show the great pains he has taken in presenting his thesis when a controversial point has to be cleared, he does not hesitate to quote other authorities, earlier scholars of repute in the field. Marshall, Hocart, Codrington, Nicholas, Paranavitana et al. to present his material as reliably and authentically as possible. To garner his material first-hand, he has also apparently, travelled the length and breadth of the island and that at a time when many of these places of Archaeological and Historical interest were still buried under thick jungle, remote and of difficult accessibility and, visiting them of considerable danger to life and limb. With the above as a preamble, I shall briefly deal with Devendra’s (DTD) few preliminary chapters which would take the readers to almost half the book, where he refers to the controversial and disputed inferences of rather dubious origins, made on the genesis, evolution and worship of the Buddha image, pointing out, with supporting evidence, the patent un-tenability of some of the earlier entrenched views on these matters, before he presents his own. Also, it may be stated, though the dominant subject of the book is the Buddha image and its early vogue, when relevant, he takes on other stone structures, iconic and architectural, such as moonstones, guard stones, bodhigharas etc., helpful in putting his picture in its correct perspective. The introduction of Buddhism to Ceylon in the reign of King Devanampiyatissa, needless to say, marks a clear watershed in the history of the island and in the moulding of the character of its people, their temperament and values: "To them, religion was the flesh of their flesh...", he says. This is borne out in the fact that even after centuries of tremendous pressure from other religions, both from the east and west, the lives of the majority community, the Sinhala Buddhists, are still dominated by Buddhist values and convictions and, DTD says: ".... the Sinhalese culture calls for examination.... this quest is likely to reveal aspects of their originality in their contribution to the Buddha image". (P.13) Though the author admits that a researcher in this field can be plagued by the meagre availability of evidence to establish this fact, in his effort to place early Indian iconography in situ, he takes the reader far back into the dim past of the Indus Valley culture and refers to its early figurines. Continuing, he reaches the early era of the Aryan infiltration of the so-called Aryavarta, the fertile Northern plains of India, and refers to the Vedic symbols and figures of their gods and goddesses later developing into image making of them i. e. ., of Siva, Pritnvi, Usha, Sarasvati et al. This goes on until the historic era is reached with tile appearance eventually, of Vaddamana and the Buddha; he even says, there had been a certain amount of trade in such figures and figurines Referring to the ascendancy of Buddhism in India, in the reign of Emperor Asoka, more than two centuries after the demise of the Buddha, DTD takes the bold step of ignoring the entrenched belief that though the Buddha image was not created in India earlier than the First Century, A.D. Relying on the source-works of scholars like Wilfred H. Schoff and James Fergusson he argues that it is quite possible that though the Buddha image itself may not have appeared before that date (1st Centre A.D.) it is possible there would have been the worship of other images (P.19). He says that opinion is available that the origin of the Buddha image in India could be traced to Mathura and Gandhara, schools of Sculpture, ………created in the traditions of Bactrian Greeks ———- a stream of robust, realistic iconics. However, it may be stated with a good measure of certainty, that though India was the homeland of the Buddha and the place of origin of his Dhamma, that it took another six hundred years before the Buddha’s image appeared there. Incidentally, some clues could be available as to the origins, evolution and vogue of the Buddha image in some of the statements by Rawlinson in his "India" (1943): he says, the greatest statue of the Buddha was created in Mathura in the reign of Kanishka (120-162 A.D.) and that the Gandhara Buddha statues were appearing as late as 300 A.D. In DTD’s words: "They set out to portray a man in warm flesh and blood....... in everyday cloak, a human and refined soul" (P.20) However, he admits that it was in the late figures of Amarawati, Nagarjunikonda the figures Buddha qualities. On the other had, he says, that the figures at Sanchi, Buddhagaya and Bharut (ceirea .250 B.C.) are not human figures as such, but symbols representing the Buddha where necessary. The worship of all sorts of gods and goddesses, at the time of the advent of the Buddha was the order of the day in India, making man subservient and paying obeisance to them, a practice the Buddha stolidly condemned and discouraged: He maintained unequivocally, that man could very well, do with out the aid of any god and save himself, leading himself finally to Nirvana (an ultimate state of total release)….. and this, for the first time ever, in the history of man’s spiritual life. Again, the Buddha, while he lived, proclaimed he was ‘Devati-devo’ (‘more godly than any god’) and ‘Achchriya Puriso’ (‘man ennobled’) and that he deserved reverence while he lived and, after his death, it followed that in his absence, things, places, articles used by him and, residual remains of his person deserved reverence. But then, those who had accepted the Teachings of the Buddha as a way of their spiritual lives would have wished for some visible, tangible object, artefact, or figure to stand before it, so that they may express their respect and devotion, to worship and to offer something to it. It was to fill this ‘Spiritual vacuum’ that symbols, representing the Enlightened One……. the vacant Throne, the Foot-print, the (eight-spoked) Dhamma Chakka etc., were created first: here, the author uses the term, ‘aniconic’ figures (Dictionary meaning: ‘Object symbolising, avoiding resemblances for worship, without image’). According to DTD, the early symbols representing the Buddha, though collectively called, ‘Chetiyas’, were not necessarily Stupas; in the earlier stages, one factor that perhaps, militated against men erecting human figures to represent the Buddha for worship, was that the Buddha himself while he lived, had said, he was ‘Devati-devo’, if so, how could an ordinary mortal man create, with any earthly material, a figure to represent him? And, it may have been one reason for the long delay for the appearance of the Buddha image in human form. And now, for the appearance of the Buddha image in Ceylon quoting the Chronicles, particularly, the Dipavavamsa, DTD says, Rev. Mahinda, when he met King Devanampiyatissa, in the wake of his introduction of Buddhism to Ceylon, and during his early sojourn here, had expressed a desire to return to Jambudipa and, on being asked why so, by the anguished King, the Thero had said; "We have no object here to which we may pay respect by salutation by rising from our seats or by raising our clasped hands.... etc." by which he, no doubt, meant that there was no Bo Tree or Chaityas etc., representing the Buddha for worship. Significantly, a Buddha image was not mentioned for the obvious reason, no doubt, that such a figure was not available for worship in those early days after the Buddha’s Demise; It is relevant now, to quote the author, where he says; "The first specific reference to a Buddha image in Ceylon, in Rev. Mahinda’s day, occurs in the Mahavamsa, when recording the reign of King Jetthatissa (265-275 A.D.) where it says, (P.36) ‘The greatest beautiful stone image (of the Buddha), that was placed of olds by Devanampiyatissa at the Thuparama... etc.’ Now, this is crucially important: it means, King Devanampiyatissa who had, at the request of Rev. Mahinda, built the first-ever Buddhist ‘Vihara’ had ordered also, the creation of the first-ever Buddha image in Ceylon (or for that matter, anywhere in the world, according to all available information at present) and had installed it in the Thuparama some time during his reign i. e. ., 247-207 B.C. proving this, is the whole purpose of the book and, here, DTD has done it. Also, the author has scoured the whole gamut of available literature to present as detailed a description of this Buddha image to the reader. This Buddha statue would have been of great importance and renown not merely because it was the first-ever, but also because of the great patronage and veneration it would have received; repeated references are made in the Mahavamsa to it and several Kings have shifted it to their own favourite venues for worship; others have adorned it with gems, specific mention is made that its eyes have been embedded with gems. Apparently, this Image had not contained any Buddha relics for, if it had, it would have been stated. The construction of the first Buddha image here, was the break-through that led to more and more of them to be made, numerous and of diverse proportions, in various poses ….. sedent, recumbent, standing, and, made of differing material, wood, stone, metal etc. many such images made of perishables would have been lost to posterity. DTD goes on to deal at length with some of the better known examples of their proportions, lineaments, arrangement of robes, and more than all, the spiritual aspects they reflected: he takes individual statues such as the famous ‘Samadhi’ image of the Abhayagiri, premises (Manamevuna Uyana), the Pankuliya image, the Avukana standing statue etc. etc. and goes on to comment in detail on the attributes of each for instance, he marvels that it was ever given to man to transfer to an insensate stone, such supreme human, human qualities and, deep, calm, spiritual glow as seen in the famed image at Mahamevuna Uyana. Another significant point that DTD makes is that while in India there was a long period where the Buddha, was represented, when and wherever his presence had to be depicted, it was a symbol, that was substituted, which period the author calls the ‘Aniconic’ era, whereas, here in Ceylon there was no such period that could be called ‘aniconic’ because the Ceylon sculptor directly went to the iconic and began straight away, with the true Buddha image. He says: "..... the fact that there is no aniconic Buddhist Art here, could be interpreted only in one way...... that, as the Mahavamsa says, the Buddha image was vogue from the very beginning of religious art in this land". (P.52)
Posted on: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 23:48:05 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015