Aparajitaprucchha

SR No.: 008438
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: B Bhattacharya
Publisher: Oriental Research Institute Vadodra
Total Pages: 810
Language: Sanskrit, Hindi
Classification: Book_Devnagari, Culture, & Art
File Size: 12 MB

Page 77

Ixxi
concomitants are once appreciated in all their bearings, the Egyptian temple (page 54. II. 3) wherein there is no fanta or turret of any description, over the sanctuin, but there are at the outer entrance, two pylons, the prototypes of Draviclian Gopuras, and wherсin the section decreases and becoines simpler and more modest, as one approaches the holiest spot in the temple, will at once be realized as an example of aren, one of the six main perspective views. The temple of Tanjore (p. 10. II. 3) which the author of Indian Architecture considers as a solitary instance of exception to his Dravidian idea of bathos, if viewed in the light of yes of the Nāgara school will cease to be an exception but will be a pure and simple illustration of AF . Similarly for the Jāva and Cambodian schools. The temple of Angkor Vat of Camhoulia (r. 02. II. 3) built by the king aran who came to the throne in 1112 A. D. will cease to be an exception just as much as a church at Milan (p. 57. 1). 3), a cathedral at Amiens and the st. Paul's Cathedral of London of the Englislı Renaissance type (Vicle pages 57 and 58. II. 3); also the church of St. Sophia in Constantinople-Byzantine type as also a Florentine church of the 13th century (Vide pages 55 and 56 Ibid). It may be repeated that it is not the material greatness which has dictated the above arrangement. The principal function of Gopura 1817347 cvidently signifies that the underlying consideration in the above arrangement was more strategic and political than what is ascribed to it.
I need not close this subject without meeting one more argument wherein the Vimana is considered to be the soul and consequently eternal and everything else in the body being a clothing as transient and unimportant.
Everyone will admit that the soul is soul and the body the body, and the difference between them cannot be wiped out. Be it cmphasized that it is neither the Gopura nor even the Vimana that can be styled the soul- which is the principal deity enshrined in the interior of the sanctum. The Vimana forms the corpus just as well as the Gopuras do. The fact that it docs not constitute the soul but is only a body and that the holiest of the holy has nothing to do with this matcrial gross covering necds hardly any justification when one finds himself brought face to face with the following terminology- gre, 8(, jar, ut, aa, F671, 21, 1, 2, fear, (zruf9), STEF, HR, faitr, 7131, figaa, aitan, 975, 17, 18, SET, STIET, EU, FIT etc. etc. all of them referring individually to one or other member of the body. corporate, i. e. fin.
In face of such a clear and explicit notation, it is left to readers to judge how far the theory that the Vimāna represents the holiest of the holy, stands unassailed. The sanctity of a Vimana, it may be added, lies only in the fact that it enshrines, within its interior, the cmbodiment of the Supreme Being, Moreover, a Vimana being thus a material covering is not eternal; its liability to wear and tear imposes a necessity for its repairs from time to tirne and on this account it would be hardly profane if workmen of a particular ad and are engaged to carry on the necessary repairs which are unavoidable owing to the destructive nature of the building materials, however well selected,