Indrashalaguha at Bharhut

[Guest guest]

Indo-Eurasian_research , " jkirk " <jkirk wrote:It would also help if John found an explanation of the figures that

faintly appear between two of the three flower strands in this view:http://www.benjaminfleming.com/indrashalaguha_5.jpg Thanks, Joanna

======================Benjamin Fleming wrote:> Dear List,> > In response to some of the discussion arising around the image of> the Indrashala Cave motif from Bharhut that I posted for him

> yesterday on the 'virtual' pilgrimage thread, John Huntington has> provided a short photographic essay on the interpretation of the> relief carving and its various iconographic parts. He identifies,

> for example, the figure with his back to the viewer as Indra,> corresponding, it would seem, to textual sources relating the> story of Indra's visit to the Buddha. This certainly resonnates> with Joanna's interpretation of the figure as being in some kind

> of authority/teacher position. An image of the Buddha does not> appear, as is typical of these early 'aniconic' Buddhist reliefs> from North India....--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

Indo-Eurasian_research , " naga_ganesan " <naa.ganesan wrote:What John writes speculatively as " agayapetta " , I think this is

" aayagapaTTa " .See image:http://www.benjaminfleming.com/indrashalaguha_5.jpgHappy Xmas to all here,N. Ganesan--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

-- In Indo-Eurasian_research , doris srinivasan <dmswh wrote:Dear John and Naga :Sonya Quintanilla, in History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura

( Leiden , 2007) has a whole section on 'ayagapatas'. Her definition ( pp. 96 - 100 ) does not seem to include the concept of an 'offering platform'. She writes;Ayagapatas are broad, flat, stone slabs ... They are covered on only

one face with carvings that include iconic images, celestial and mythical figures, auspicious symbols and vegetal ornamentation. ...The carvings fall into two major types : diagrammatic' and 'pictorial ' ...

She proposes that they were either displayed vertically , by being built into a wall, or most probably they were displayed horizontally , laid flat upon a pedestal.They functioned as objects of worship and may have been used in

association with prayer or meditation, according to Quintanilla.One does not get the idea from her writing that anything was placed upon these stone slabs and so the Bharhut example would be called by another term. What do you think?

DorisOn Dec 24, 2008, at 9:38 PM, JOHN HUNTINGTON wrote:> Naga,>> Thank you! You are exactly right.>> The only trouble is that I am not sure that this is the word that I

> am actually looking for. It refers to the 2nd 3rd century CE Jain > Ayagapetas at Mathura, especially Kankali Tila, but my somewhat > foggy brain thinks there is another term for Buddhist offering

> platforms� maybe as seen in Theravada countries such as Sri Lanka, > Burma or Thailand. I will be back to my servers on the first or > there about and I will search for it.>> Thank you and all the best,

>> John>> -> naga_ganesan <naa.ganesan> Wednesday, December 24, 2008 6:37 pm> [indo-Eurasia] Re: Indrashalaguha at Bharhut

> Indo-Eurasian_research >>> What John writes speculatively as " agayapetta " , I think this is>> " aayagapaTTa " > .

>> See image:>> http://www.benjaminfleming.com/indrashalaguha_5.jpg>> --->>

[Guest guest]

-- In Indo-Eurasian_research , Michael Witzel <witzel wrote:You will find a lot of data, discussion, inscriptions and photos of/

on ayagapattas in S.Q.'s 1999 dissertation (some 600 pp. or so):Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie.Emergence of the stone sculptural tradition at Mathura : mid-second century B.C.-first century A.D. / a thesis presented by Sonya Rhie

Quintanilla.1999 May (Harvard Thesis, Art Dept).If memory does not fail, the earliest such 'offering plates' in stone are indeed from Jaina monuments as John hints at (often established by women) and the Buddhist ones are somewhat later. John probably

can immediately point you to medieval Mepalese ones.With holiday cheers (dies Solis invicti),MichaelOn Dec 24, 2008, at 6:21 PM, naga_ganesan wrote:> What John writes speculatively as " agayapetta " , I think this is

> " aayagapaTTa " .>> See image:> http://www.benjaminfleming.com/indrashalaguha_5.jpg>>> Happy Xmas to all here,

> N. Ganesan>> --->>

[Guest guest]

Indo-Eurasian_research , " naga_ganesan " <naa.ganesan wrote:Joanna,For the iconic and aniconic theories of the Buddha image, here

are some references we can follow.HUNTINGTON, SUSAN L. 1990, 'Early Buddhist Art and the Theory of Anicomism', Art Journal, vol. 49/4, pp. 401-408. HUNTINGTON, SUSAN L. 1992, 'Aniconism and the Multivalence of Emblems: Another Look', Ars orientalis,

vol. 22, pp. 111-56. DEHEJIA, VIDYA 1991, 'Aniconism and the Multivalence of Emblems', Ars orientalis, vol. 21, pp. 45-66. DEHEJIA, VIDYA 1992, 'Rejoinder to Susan Huntington', Ars Orientalis, vol. 22, p. 157.

KARLSSON, KLEMENS 1999, Face to Face with the Absent Buddha, The Formation of Buddhist Aniconic Art, Uppsala: Univ. Library (Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Historia religionum 15). LINROTHE, ROB 1993, 'Inquiries into the Origin of the

Buddha Image: A Review', East and West, vol.43, 1993, pp. 241-256. N. Ganesan--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

Indo-Eurasian_research , JOHN HUNTINGTON <Huntington.2 wrote:Apropos of Naga's�bibliography, as I have pointed out several times in various contexts, there are Buddha images from Mathura, Gandhara�and Kausambhi, that are of BCE�dates. Simply, the whole question of an aniconic�period is moot -- there are images almost as early as we�have any substantial amount of stone carving!

John--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

Indo-Eurasian_research , JOHN HUNTINGTON

<Huntington.2 wrote:

 

Dear Joanna,

 

 

 

In response to your question (below) a little present just for you

and anyone else who might be interested

 

http://www.safarmer.com/Indo-Eurasian/Thinggawhatsis.jpg

 

John

 

-

Joanna Kirkpatrick wrote:

 

> It would also help if John found an explanation of the figures that

> faintly appear between two of the three flower strands in this view:

 

> http://www.benjaminfleming.com/indrashalaguha_5.jpg

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

Indo-Eurasian_research , JOHN HUNTINGTON

<Huntington.2 wrote:

 

Dear Michael and Doris

 

As to Doris's suggestion that there must be another name: this is

exactly what I suggested in my letter to Naga, but having a slightly

foggy brain is not helping at this moment.

 

As to the suggestion about the relative lateness of the Buddhist

offering platforms, we are leaving out of the discussion the fact

that my observation about offering platforms takes place because

there is a Bharhut seat (asana) or offering platform (Skt ?) in the

ca. 100-80 BCE image. with offerings on it. and it occurs at

Mathura, Sanchi, Bharhut, Amaravati, Bodhgaya etc.,etc. in more or

less the same pattern of usage. Thus the use of the platform by

Buddhists was ubiquitous by ca.100-0 BCE

 

However the platform/seat that first attracted my attention to the

problem is the Mauryan period " Vajrasana " at Bodhgaya (now

regrettably sealed from view by a idiot local bureaucrat who

was " protecting the tree. " If it is a seat it is also a brutal

torture device. The sharp edged design on the upper surface would be

a killer to sit on. However, it has been used for offerings in early

representations and in modern times (since the restoration). I

assume that the thrones and chairs shown for the Buddha's place in

the sites mentioned above, are more the norm. However, the point

remains, Given the Mauryan Vajrasana The concept is as old as the

existence of Stone sculpture in the Mauryan period.

 

I will send some pictures to be posted later today.

 

John

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

Indo-Eurasian_research , " naga_ganesan "

<naa.ganesan wrote:

 

 

John Huntington wrote:

 

>but my somewhat foggy brain thinks there is another

>term for Buddhist offering platforms maybe as seen

>in Theravada countries such as Sri Lanka, Burma

>or Thailand.

 

Dear John,

 

Thanks for the drawing, and your thoughts

on the platform.

http://www.safarmer.com/Indo-Eurasian/Thinggawhatsis.jpg

 

I'm very interested in the word that Sinhala

people use in Sri Lanka. Sanskrit word

is " bali-pITha " and the Tamil word is " poli-maNai "

or " pali-maNai. " In Tamil, poli > pali

in sangam literature. Cf. bali in Sanskrit with

voicing of word-initial p- as b-. For 'maNi' ss

in every day use of the proverb, " kiDakkiRatellAm

kiDakkaTTum, kizaviyait tUkki maNaiyil vai "

(~ 'Leaving out more important stuff, the old

woman gets the attention by being placed

on the maNai/pITha').

 

Doris Srinivasan wrote:

> Dear John and Naga :

 

>Sonya Quintanilla, in History of Early Stone

>Sculpture at Mathura ( Leiden , 2007) has a

>whole section on 'ayagapatas'. Her definition

>( pp. 96 - 100 ) does not seem to include

>the concept of an 'offering platform'.

[...]

>One does not get the idea from her writing

>that anything was placed upon these stone

>slabs and so the Bharhut example would be

>called by another term. What do you think?

 

I also concur that this is not 'aayaaga-paTTa'.

paTTa is a band placed vertically, for example

tied on the forehead of the bride or groom

in a wedding, or as in yoga-paTa of an yogi

(Last year or so, John have the picture of Bharhut

yogi with an yoga-paTTa).

 

The platform is 'zrIbali-pITha' (Skt) / " poli-maNai "

(Tamil), I think.

 

N. Ganesan

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

I'd really like to see J. Huntington's photos, too.But perhaps not 'kosher' to distribute them.KathieOn Dec 27, 2008, at 11:53 PM, Kishore patnaik wrote:Indo-Eurasian_research , JOHN HUNTINGTON <Huntington.2 wrote:Dear Michael and DorisAs to Doris's suggestion that there must be another name: this is exactly what I suggested in my letter to Naga, but having a slightly foggy brain is not helping at this moment. As to the suggestion about the relative lateness of the Buddhist offering platforms, we are leaving out of the discussion the fact that my observation about offering platforms takes place because there is a Bharhut seat (asana) or offering platform (Skt ?) in the ca. 100-80 BCE image. with offerings on it. and it occurs at Mathura, Sanchi, Bharhut, Amaravati, Bodhgaya etc.,etc. in more or less the same pattern of usage. Thus the use of the platform by Buddhists was ubiquitous by ca.100-0 BCEHowever the platform/seat that first attracted my attention to the problem is the Mauryan period "Vajrasana" at Bodhgaya (now regrettably sealed from view by a idiot local bureaucrat who was "protecting the tree." If it is a seat it is also a brutal torture device. The sharp edged design on the upper surface would be a killer to sit on. However, it has been used for offerings in early representations and in modern times (since the restoration). I assume that the thrones and chairs shown for the Buddha's place in the sites mentioned above, are more the norm. However, the point remains, Given the Mauryan Vajrasana The concept is as old as the existence of Stone sculpture in the Mauryan period. I will send some pictures to be posted later today.John--- End forwarded message --- Kathie Brobecksivadasi