________________
Appendix II PAINTING AND JAINA CANONICAL LITERATURE
The Jaina canonical literature casts ample light on the state of art of painting in ancient India. It provides not only the earliest references to the art of painting but also furnishes some of the missing links in the understanding of the subject.
According to one of the legends mentioned in Avaśyaka-cūrņi (A.D. 600-650) I, Ratlam, 1929, p. 156), Rşabhadeva was the originator of the art of painting. Běhatkalpasūtrabhasya refers that the art of painting was forbidden to monks and nuns. The Ācārārgasūtra (II, 12.1), the earliest Agama, says that monks were refrained from looking at the painting for pleasure sake. Similar injunctions were laid down in Daśavaikalikasūtra (VIII.4). The monks and nuns were also prohibited dwelling in the houses decorated with paintings. The BỊhatkalpabhāsya (III, gātha 2426-2431) has categorised painting as sadosa and nirdosa. The nirdosa or pure painting includes pictures of trees, rivers, mountains, oceans, various kinds of creepers, pürna-kalasa and svastika, while the sadosa or impure painting depicts man, women, animals and scenes on śrngära-rasa. The sadoņa paintings are likely to divert the mind and create obstacles in the path of meditation and spiritual pursuits.
The learning of this art was considered necessary for a full development of the personality and hence it was designated the third place in the frequently mentioned lists of seventy-two arts in the Agamas Jñätādharmakathā (c. late 3rd century A.D.), Samavāyāngasūtra (Ahmedabad, 1938, p. 77) and Aupapātikasūtra (Rajkot, 1959, II sutra 46, pp. 604-612) and also sixty-four arts of the females as mentioned in the Jambūdvipaprajñapti (c. 3rd century A.D., Bombay, 1920, 2, 136f ). The Kāmasūtra of Vätsyāyana has suggested that a Nagarika (better citizen) should have a painting board (citraphalaka) and a casket full of
brushes (vartikā-samudgaka) in his bed chamber (Kamasutra, Bombay, 1891, 4, 10).
The Bhagavatisūtra, the Jñatadharmakathā and the Aupapātikasūtra refer to a class of people called markhas. Abhayadeva (c. 11th century A.D.) in his commentary on Bhagavatisutra has explained markha as a special type of mendicant whose hands were engaged with picture-board. It appears that the markhas have been professional entertainers like many others who were called on to perform at the time of royal celebrations (Jñātadharmakathā, 1.90). The tradition of markhas existed as early as sixth century B.C. Ghośāla, an ascetic and contemporary of Mahavira, was the son of a markha. However, it is not certain whether the painting was done directly on the picture board or on a canvas (pața). Abhayadeva has rightly interpreted the word 'citra-phalaka' as picture board. The Nalacarita Nāțaka making distinction between phalaka and pata says - 'here is the board, this is the canvas, this is the brush and here are the colours' (idam phalakam. esa citrapatah, iyam ca tulikh, ime ca varnasambharaha) (quoted by C. Sivaramamurti, South Indian Painting, New Delhi, 1968, p. 34).
The story told by the markhas was shown on citra-phalaka which confirms that the form of art was narrative. There are references to panel painting. A Jain Prakrit text Tarangalolā by Acārya Padalipta refers to a romantic tale which mentions that a merchant's daughter Tarangavati displayed her canvas representing her past life in public in the Kaumudi-Mahotsava (JainaCitrakalpadruma, Ahmedabad, 1936, pp. 21-22). Such examples are also found in later Jaina and non-Jaina stories, for examples the story of Lalitānga as mentioned in Avaśyakacūrņi and the story of Nilayasa Lamba in Vasudevahindi.
The art of portraiture was well, developed in
Jain Education Intemational
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.ainelibrary.org
