Guest guest Posted February 19, 2006 Report Share Posted February 19, 2006 I think they are Digambara Jain images of Tirthankaras. Both Buddhist and Jain scuptures would be perfectly feasible for this place and time, but it appears from the photograph that the figures are nude. Buddha images would have a diagonal line over the chest, indicating the monk's robe thrown over the left shoulder. The fact that the royal donor might have been a Buddhist is not a problem--South Indian kings often made donations to religious groups other than their own. (For some reason I was not able to access the following day's edition to see whether Mr Bhaskaran made the same points.) Valerie J Roebuck Manchester, UK At 8:24 am +0000 17/2/06, implementors2002 wrote: >On 13the Feb,2005, the Coimbatore Edition of The Hindu published the >following article: >http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/12/stories/2006021200332000.htm >titled,Buddhist Statues found near Chennai. >The next day a letter by Mr Theodore Bhaskaran was carried, refuting >the above claim that they were Not Buddhist Statues but of Jain >Thirthankaras. > >There was no further discussion on the subject nor any clarification >from the correspondent or ASI. >Will some one throw more light on the matter? > >Hari >Thalassery > > > Links > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 Thank you very much. I am sure he is right. Valerie >Dear Valerie J Roebuck >I give below the complete text of Mr s.Theodore Bhaskaran's letter to >the Editor The Hindu,14.02.2006: >"The two statues in the photograph ..are not that of the Buddha.The >Buddha icon will have a robe acrossthe torso and an 'ushnisha' (a >flame) on top of the head.These two figures are no doubt two different >Jain Tirthankaras, both featured nude.The triple umbrella over one >statue and the Lion 'lanchana' on the pedestal of the other clearly >show they are tirthankaras.Each tirthankara had a lanchana(sign) >,which is featured below the statue. >Because all Tirthankaras are in the nude, it is the lanchana > (sign) that would >identify the tirthankara.The statue on the left is that of Mahavira >, the last of the 24 tirthankaras whose lanchana is the lion.This is >clearly featured below the figure.The statue > on the left is that of the 22nd >tirthankara,Neminatha,whose lanchana , the conch, is featured on the >pedestal. It was a common feature > in Tamil Nadu to have two or three >Tirthankaras in worship at a Jain 'basdi'.(end of letter) >The ASI,Chennai(Madras) replied to the above letter ,published in the >Hindu on 18.02.2006, reiterating its original stand that 'they are >Buddhas', after all. > >Hari >Telicherry >Kerala > > > > Links > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 I have seen the two photographs of the two statues: http://www.telegraphindia.com/1060220/asp/nation/story_5870047.asp http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/12/stories/2006021200332000.htm There is an extremely tiny Tamil Jain community. The members of this community has seen the two statues. Frankly, I have to say, I am amazed by T. Satyamurthy's statements. 1. Iconographically and in terms of artistic style, the idols are just like numerous other Jain idols in Tamilnadu. The features that Satyamurthy states are "Mongoloid features" are actually no different from other Tamil Jain images. I don't see any "south-east asian" influence. Photographos of Tamil Jain idols can be seen in 1. Jainism: A Pictorial Guide: Kurt Titze, 1998, Motilal banarasidas 2. Panaroma Of Jain Art: South India, C. Sivaramamurti, 1982, Times of India Also see a web-page created by a Tamil Jain http://www.geocities.com/tamiljain/20feb06/statues.html 2. The reports say "One sculpture has a dharma chakra on either side of the Buddha." The circular objects engraved are obviously not dharma-chakras, but floral decorations, as one can easily see. 3. One of the reports says "According to the inscriptions, the statues were donated by Sumatran King Sri Vijaya Maharaja." Actually there is no inscription on the two statues. The inscriptions, found earlier, are at the nearby Agatheeswarar temple. The inscription mentions a traditional land donation to the temple. There is apparently nothing to connect the inscription to the newly found idols. Yashwant INDOLOGY, Valerie J Roebuck <vjroebuck wrote: > > Thank you very much. I am sure he is right. > > Valerie > > >Dear Valerie J Roebuck > >I give below the complete text of Mr s.Theodore Bhaskaran's letter to > >the Editor The Hindu,14.02.2006: > >"The two statues in the photograph ..are not that of the Buddha.The > >Buddha icon will have a robe acrossthe torso and an 'ushnisha' (a > >flame) on top of the head.These two figures are no doubt two different > >Jain Tirthankaras, both featured nude.The triple umbrella over one > >statue and the Lion 'lanchana' on the pedestal of the other clearly > >show they are tirthankaras.Each tirthankara had a lanchana(sign) > >,which is featured below the statue. > >Because all Tirthankaras are in the nude, it is the lanchana > > (sign) that would > >identify the tirthankara.The statue on the left is that of Mahavira > >, the last of the 24 tirthankaras whose lanchana is the lion.This is > >clearly featured below the figure.The statue > > on the left is that of the 22nd > >tirthankara,Neminatha,whose lanchana , the conch, is featured on the > >pedestal. It was a common feature > > in Tamil Nadu to have two or three > >Tirthankaras in worship at a Jain 'basdi'.(end of letter) > >The ASI,Chennai(Madras) replied to the above letter ,published in the > >Hindu on 18.02.2006, reiterating its original stand that 'they are > >Buddhas', after all. > > > >Hari > >Telicherry > >Kerala > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Links > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 For some reason I had not been gettting postings from this list for some days, so had not been able to keep up with the discussion. Anyway, according to Mr Sathyamurthy, who has presumably been able to look at the sculptures in person, >The assertion that the images are nude is wrong. There are wavy >lines running across the upper arms and chest of the above image, >indicating the folds of the upper garment, a characteristic feature >of a Buddha image. This would be conclusive, I think. But it would be nice to be able to see some better photographs. Valerie J Roebuck >INDOLOGY, Valerie J Roebuck <vjroebuck >wrote: >> >> Thank you very much. I am sure he is right. > >Here is Sathyamurthy's response: > >http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/18/stories/2006021805531100.htm > >We need to take a look at good pictures. > >N. Ganesan > >> >I give below the complete text of Mr s.Theodore Bhaskaran's letter >to >> >the Editor The Hindu,14.02.2006: >> >"The two statues in the photograph ..are not that of the Buddha. >[...] > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.