Figures of the two Lower Reliefs on the Parsvanatha Temple at Khajuraho

SR No.: 250093
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Klaus Bruhn
Publisher: Z_Vijay_Vallabh_suri_Smarak_Granth_012060.pdf
Publication Year: 1956
Total Pages: 30
Language: English
Classification: Article & Tirth
File Size: 4 MB

Page 27

BRUHN: KHAJURAHO
Garbhag?ha
The reader may himself compare the dikpālas on the garbhagpha with the dikpālas on the mandapa. It is noteworthy that in some cases, it seems, padma and sarpa correspond to each other. Compare I 21 (g.) and II 61 (m.), I 131 and IV 101, III 111 and XI 211
Indra and Iśāna, the guardians of the eastern and north-eastern direction-and the two Śivas above them--are placed transversely (i.e, on the side wall of the projection for the following/preceding figure) so that they face the proper direction. Niches and Lintels
The figures identified as Brahmāni: According to my information no yakşi has three heads, whereas tradition ascribes three or more heads to several yaksas.
The second figure described under C b. and identified as Sarasvati: I read the mutilated vāhana as hamsa because I found the same animal as vāhana of Brahma (and his consort) on a slab of the Siva temple at Chandpur (from Dhaura Station, Bina-Jhansi Line).
CONCLUSIONS
$1. Cunningham identified many of the figures on the Jaina temples more or less hesitatingly as brahmanical (ASI Reports Vol. X p. 17 on Ghanțai temple "probably brahmanical", Vol. II p. 432 on two smaller Jaina temples "figure which looks like Lakşmī", ibid. on Pārsvanātha temple "amongst which [statues] I recognized several of the brahmanical gods"). In Burnier's work 'Hindu Medieval Sculpture', however, the figures are simply called by the names of the brahmanical models. We shall see that the iconography of the Pārsvanātha temple is not brahmanical strictly speaking but highly influenced by brahmanical iconography. This solution almost suggests itself, but it is necessary to support it by such evidence which only a systematical analysis can give. The analysis has possibly also some general interest because investigations of this kind are comparatively rare.
$2. The interpretation of figures other than tīrthamkaras presents many difficulties. The artists were not bound to follow exactly the rules of the texts in the representation of yakşas, yakṣiṇīs, etc. Art and theory influenced each other, and there was no one-sided dependence. What renders the books even more inapplicable is the stress laid upon features