Jain Rup Mandan

Author(s): Umakant P Shah
Publisher: Abhinav Publications

Page 25

12
Jaina-Rupa-Mandana in the forest-grove (vanakhanda) of the Caitya. This Silā-pața was possibly meant to represent the Pārņabhadra Yaksa. Mahavira visited and stayed in such shrines. Nowhere is it said that he visited a Jaina shrine or worshipped a Jina image. Obviously shrines dedicated to Tirthankaras seem to post-date Mahāvira 69 and the canonical passages referring to Saśvata-Jina-Pratimas and Saśvata-Jina-āyatanas must be regarded as later than the epoch suggested by the description of the Pūrņabhadra-Caitya. The stock description (varnaka) of such Caityas, explained as Yaksa-Caityas by commentators, is as under.
The Purnabhadra Caitya was in the udyana (park) called Amraśālavana, situated to the N.E. of the city of Campā. It was very old in age (cirätita), recognised by people as old, ancient (porāna), famous, praised everywhere and jñata (of the Jñats-people ?). It was decorated with an umbrella (or umbrellas), banners, bells, flags, atipatakas (flags surmounted on flags), whisks or bunches of peacock-feathers (lomahatthaga) and having a railing (vitardikā, vedikā, according to Abhayadeva, which would also mean 'containing a sacrificial altar'), its inside floor was coated with cow-dung and the wall-surfaces were polished by rubbing with cowries; it bore palm-impressions in red gošīrsa or dardara sandal, was adorned with
tas (auspicious jars), and on its entrance gates were toranas (arches) with candanaghata decorations. It was sprinkled all over with perfumed water and garlands were hung; it was fragrint with flowers of five colours, and with burning incense of kålägaru, kundurukka and turukka. It was haunted by actors, dancers, rope-walkers (jalla), wrestlers, boxers, experts in mimics (vidambaka), ballad-singers, story-tellers, pole-dancers (läsaka), picture-showmen (mankha), pipe-players, lute-players and minstrels. Many people visited the shrine which deserved praise, offerings, worship with sandal-paste, etc., gifts, adoration and respect, and which like a benefic, auspicious divine (devayam) ceiam (caityam, image according to commentators), deserved to be propitiated with due respect, and which when wor. shipped with desire did not fail to fulfil it (saccopaye), and which was attended upon by divine prātihāryas. It deserved a gift of a share from sacrifices (Aupapatika sūtra, sūtra 2).
The above description shows that this Purnabhadra Caitya, which according to the explanation of commentators, was a Yakşa-ayatana, a Yaksa-shrine, was situated in a big park called Amraśālavana (a forest of mango and śāla trees) and was ancient even in the days of Mahavira. It had a Vitardika (Vedikā) or railing around. The wall surfaces were polished. It had entrance gates with toranas (arches). This would suggest that the shrine had walls as well as a railing. Does it mean that its compound or courtyard had a railing with four entrance gates (on four sides and) adorned with arches?
There is no mention of the image worshipped and the sanctum (garbhagrha) in which it might have been installed. The fact that it was visited by actors, dancers, showmen and the like shows that it had a big compound around in which these people could perform dancing etc. But where was the Caitya in this udyāna? Was it in the centre of the udyana?
In the next sūtra we are told that on all sides of it (i.e., on all sides of the Caitya or shrine) was a big forest grove (vanasanda) with a central big Asoka-tree (obviously a Caitya-vrksa). Attached to its stem and under the tree was a Prthvi-Sila-Pafa placed on a simhasana. This Silā-para had a very smooth surface and was soft to touch like butter, etc. Its surface was shining like a mirror. Thus this plaque (silā-pața) made of earth (Prthvi), that is, the terracotta plaque, was a highly polished one, what we know as N.B.P. ware. This was not unknown in the age of Buddha and Mahavira as is proved by the discovery of such ware of different colours obtained in excavation of the foundations of the Ghositārāma at Kaušāmbi. We find, in the reliefs of Bharhut, scenes of worship of Sila-patas placed on a simhasana under a Caitya-tree. Obviously such scenes represent continuation of such traditions from the age of Buddha and Mahavira and even still earlier. The Sila-pata was placed under the tree reclining a little against its stem (isim khandhasamalline) and deposited on a simhasane (siha sanasamthie) obviously because it was an object of worship. It rested on the lion-throne, not vertically but horizontally, either slightly raised on the trunk side or with its one end probably slightly thrust into the stem of the tree. This was possibly meant by the expression isim khandhasamalline. That the pața was horizontally placed obtains confirmation from representations of the Bodhi-shrine at Bharhut.
The description of the Purnabhadra Caitya ends with the description of the Asoka tree and the Sila-pața. So what was the object of worship in the Purgabhadra shrine? We are told in this text sūtra 2,