A.P. Jamkhedkar
Buddhism in the Deccan
Buddhist legends tell us that the hermits in the plateau region in the Maharashtra were aware of religious awakening brought about by the Buddha. Bavari, a hermit living on the banks of Godāvari River, dispatched his disciples to the Buddha to seek clarifications on certain spiritual issues. Similarly a later legend enumerates how the Buddha had obliged one of his disciples, Purna from Shurparāka (ancient Sopārā, near Mumbai in Maharashtra) to visit a monastery built in his honour. Whereas the Suparāga jātaka (no. 463 in Pāli jātakas) deals with the birth of the Buddha as a navigator from Sopārā by name Shurparāka who because of his skills saves the lives of passengers boarding on his ship.
Thus for the Buddhist tradition, Deccan was converted to Buddhism right from the times of the Buddha. However, one has to wait till Aśokan times to get material evidence in the form of antiquities or written records to come to such a conclusion. Traditional accounts of the Buddhists recount that Piyadassi Aśoka not only convened a council of Buddhist monks (sangiti) at Pāṭaliputra, the third of its kind after the demise of the Buddha, but also sent missionaries for the spread of Buddhism to different parts of the then civilized world. Two of them, Yavana Dhammarakkhitā and Mahādhammarakkhitā, were dispatched respectively to the coastal region of the peninsula (Aparanta) and the Deccan (Mahārāṭṭha). The inscriptions found along with the relic caskets at Sāncī have proved the historicity of these missionaries. The existence of stūpas at Paunī (district Bhandara, Maharashtra) and Sopārā, the Aśokan edict at the later place, and a similar inscription at Devatek (district Chanda) bring us to the same conclusion.
As the archaeologists reconstruct, perhaps such a contact with the urban centre of Gangetic valley was part of the process of urbanisation that started in sixth to seventh centuries BC. The areas of Maharashtra that were inhabited by the chalcolithic and megalithic cultures were being tapped for the natural resources by the trans-Vindhyan urban centres. Along with trade caravans came the missionary monks to introduces better methods of agriculture and teach the traders the urban ways of life. This process was accelerated during the Mauryan period when parts of Deccan became part of the empire.
This process is better understood with the help of the manual of an Alexandrian Greek sailor, the Periplus of the Orythrean Sea, which describes the ports on the western and eastern coasts of the peninsular India. Starting from Barbaricon (Modern Karachi in Pakistan) and Barygaza (modern Bharuch in Gujarat) items of import and export were traded at particular centres. It was usually sandalwood, ivory and semi precious stones that formed the main items of export, in return of which a lot of gold in the form of Roman coins, wines and slaves came to India. Majority of the population of the Deccan were Buddhist, and a significant section were in trade, both internal and international. They were being taken care of by the Buddhist caravan traders. Thus, Buddhist monasteries and prayer halls came to be established along the trade routes. Roads, originating from the ports on the western coast such as Sopārā and Kalyāṇa, went to Junnar across the pass known as Nāneghāt. Junnar was the place from where first the Śaka rulers ruled (firgt to second century AD) the newly acquired territories in Maharashtra. It was also the capital of Sātavāhanas for some time. After the Sātavāhanas shifted their capital to Paiṭhan (ancient Pratiṣhṭhāna), the route went further to Paiṭhan via the present Ahmadnagar region. It is noteworthy in this connection that coastal shepherds moving to the plateau are still using the Nāneghāt Pass that led to Junnar. Another route, starting from Sopārā and Kalyāṇa, went via Nāsik and Manmā� to Aurangabad and Paiṭhan. The third went quite significantly via the present Bhorghāt to Lonāvalā, Śelārwāḍi, Puṇe, Ahmadnagar and ultimately to Paiṭhan. Another branch route originating at Caul and Kuḍa joined the Lonāvalā route via Pāli-Sudhagad and Khopoli. The one from Chiplun (Ratnāgiri district) went across the pass to Karaḍ and from there to Kolhāpur that was an important centre commercially and politically. Still another route from Ujjain and Vidiśā in Madhya Pradesh reached Bharuch, which branched off via Maheshvara (Nimad district M.P.) on Naramadā, to go across the Tāpti River to Ajantā. And from there, via Bhogavardhana (modern Bhokardan, Aurangabad district) to Pratiṣṭhāna the capital of Sātavāhana kings. One trade route on extreme east of Maharashtra, originating from Vārāṇasi-Prayāg area, went through Vindhyan regions to come to Nandivardhana (modern Nagardhan in Nāgpur district), capital of Vākāṭakas. This went further across Vidarbha along the modern Vainaganga River, a tributary of Godāvari, and reached Nāgārjunakoṇḍā / Amarāvati on Kriṣṇā River (in Āndhra Pradesh), a great commercial centre and seat of the power of later Sātavāhanas and Ikṣvākus.
A perusal of the inscriptions, therefore, of Sātavāhanas, and their rivals in Gujarat and Mālwā, the Śaka-Kṣatrapas, would show that about two scores of inscriptions (actually thirty-seven) mention the regnal years of particular kings in their introductory portions. Of these, only seventeen inscriptions mention directly the kings or the other members of the royal family as direct patrons of pious deeds. Among the Śaka-Kṣatrapas, names of Nahapana, his daughter, Dakṣamitra, and son-in-law, Usavadata occur very prominently in inscriptions found in Cave 10 at Nasik, which seems to be their pious gift to the Buddhist church. Similar are cases of Gautami Balaśri, her grandson, Vasishtiputra Pulumayi (c 90 - 119 AD), and son, Gautamiputra Satakarni (c 60 - 90 AD) who appear as patrons of Cave 3 at Nasik as well as donors of village land nearby for use of the monastery. Mentioned of Bhatapalika, a Sātavāhana queen, and a minister to Kanhan Sātavāhana, and one more minister to a Sātavāhana queen, appear similarly in inscriptions at Nasik and Kanheri. Yaj�aśrī Satakarṇī (c 171-199 AD) was one of the last glorious Sātavāhana rulers. He also has some pious deed to his credit in Andhra Pradesh. Other inscriptions found at Ter show that the Sātavāhanas patronised the Puranic form of Hinduism also.
A study of the inscriptions at Kanheri, the site under active occupation of the Buddhist monks for more than a millennium (c.first century BC to eleventh century AD) gives a glimpse into the nature of patronage received by the Buddhist monks in the Deccan. The three periods envisaged are from: a) c. 100 BC to 300 AD; b) c. 300 to 600 AD; and c) c. 600 to 1100 AD. The first period was marked by the active support of the masses, a majority of which was converted to Buddhism. These included people from all walks of life especially the trading community. The second period is marked by patronage of the elite with one deficiency noted in that there are no women patrons as compared to period A. Most of the donors are monks themselves. It shows a two-fold change. The donations are for the transfer of merit so that all beings in this world get enlightenment. This way one becomes aware of the doctrinal changes that were taking place. The formula according to scholars is indicative of the shift from Hinayāna to Mahāyāna. The absence of women donors can be interpreted as a change in attitude towards women, who were being deprived of their right to own and inherit property and subsequently to donate it. The situation may also be taken as their decrease of social status. One important aspect is the increase in the academic atmosphere in some of the bigger monastic establishments. Majority of the cenotaphs in the burial gallery at Kanheri are of this period and their contents show that the ācāryas were known for their ecclesiastical learning and had a good following. Such assiduous pursuit of knowledge was also possible, it is argued, because the traditional sedentary monks had become quite established by this time. The next period very clearly indicates the declining state of Buddhism which had undergone another doctrinal shift that was Vajrayāna. The prominent Gomin Avighnakāra came from Gauḍa region. The evidence from Ellorā and Panhale Kaji, where the Vajrayana Buddhism was still noticeably practiced, indicates an offshoot of the mainstream Buddhism in Eastern India. One of the reasons for such a drying out of the roots of Buddhism in peninsular India was also the vigorous spread of Pāśupata sect in Western India around the Christian era. Many centres of this sect seem to have been growing strongly near the erstwhile centres of Buddhism. The caves at Elephanta, Jogeśvari, Maṇḍapeśvara and Ellorā are a proof of this. Evidence from Kanheri shows that the monastic centre there had to struggle a lot in face of the competition from the rival sect and also indicates the state of Buddhism in Maharashtra in general.
Patronage at Ajantā
One gets a fairly good idea about the patrons who supported the activities of the monks at Ajantā from the inscriptions there; their constructional undertakings, the images carved there and paintings rendered on the walls and ceiling. Ninety four incised and painted inscriptions tell about the social background of the donors and their spiritual aspirations.
There are about 30 caves at Ajantā. Of these, five are caityagṛhas where worship was offered to the stūpa and images, and twenty-five are residences meant for the monks. Of these, six belong to the early phase and the rest to the later. The latter or the Vākāṭaka phase thus seems to be more vigorous from the constructional point of view, though six of these (one prayer hall viz. Cave 29 and five residential caves viz. 3, 24 and 28) remained incomplete. Moreover fifteen out of the thirty excavations contain inscriptions and help us understand the historical background of these pious works. Some of the inscriptions merely note the dedication and it is on the basis of the palaeography and the nature of art historical evidence that one has to decide to which period / phase they belong; while some others are in the form of eulogy of a prince or some personality and are quite long.
Stone inscriptions in Caves 16, 17, 20 and 26 which are of later or Vākāṭaka phase are of this type and clearly show that the pious activity was done single-handedly. Eulogy in Cave 16, patronised by Varāhadeva, son of Hastibhoja (and Prime Minister of Harisena), the serving ruler of the vast territory comprising modern regions of north Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, central India and Maharashtra relates that he caused to be constructed this cave (layana) of the monks, fully equipped with the shrine of the Buddha and a huge water storage tank. He also expressed his wish that this cave would endure till the sun and the moon shine in this world. The objective of the donor is expressed in the last verse where he expects the whole world to attain the state of no grief, sorrow and afflictions but of peace! This eulogy starts by recounting the genealogy of the Vatsagulma line of Vākāṭaka kings, who ruled roughly from 260 AD to 500 AD. Harisena (c. 462 to 477 AD) was eighth in the line from Vindhyaśakti who had established this dynasty. Another inscription from a nearby cave at Gulva�a, about 11 kilometers from Ajantā gives us the names of nine ancestors of the minister, eight of whom probably served the Vatsagulma line of Vākāṭaka kings.
Varahādeva was prime minister of Harisena, the Vākāṭaka king. He was the patron of Cave 16. The patron of Cave 17 and a prayer hall (Cave 19) was a feudatory chief of Harisena who ruled in the area. The genealogy shows that this local king, whose name is unfortunately lost, was twelth in his line and ruled alongwith his brother Raviśamba, who met an untimely death. This very clearly shows more ancient roots in the region than the sovereign line.
After the untimely death of his brother, this prince concentrated more on his spiritual life. His bounty not only satiated the needs of his supplicants, but also manifested itself in creation of vihāras and stūpas, that, because of their excellence became the very ornament of earth! His devotion to monks, and charity to the poor, scaled the very heights of these virtues. Convinced that the material riches are fetters for a spiritual achiever, he generously distributed his wealth among the needy. He paid ransom even for those who were dispatched for their criminal offence. He caused this monolithic vihāra (Cave 17) to be carved with a shrine dedicated to the Buddha. A huge water cistern on its side, full of clear and cool water, was provided. To its west he also established a lofty prayer hall (ga�dhakūṭi). The eulogy ends with a very pious note that all the riches be well spent in the cause of bringing spiritual welfare of all the beings. Cave 20 is situated immediately next to the prayer hall forming part of the complex starting from Cave 17. It was patronised by one Upendragupta. It is a little jewel of a vihāra and was probably the creation of the same king.
Though the patron of the complex (Caves 17 and 19) has referred to the country of Aśmaka, the reference suggests more of enmity than friendly relations with the feudatory chief and his overlord, emperor Harisena. Cave 26 was patronised by the minister of Aśmaka country, and Buddhabhadra, a Buddhist monk, friend of the former. The cave was last to be finished among the works of the Vākāṭaka phase as the architectural and sculptural evidence suggests. The eulogy is significant from social, religious and spiritual angles.
One point, which comes out sharp in focus, is the belief about the pious deeds and their fruit. Buddha was different from many of his predecessors, the Pratyekabuddhas, inasmuch as he preached the practice of the middle path leading to the Release. The Pratyekabuddhas kept the knowledge to themselves and led the life of the Bodhisattvas till their demise. The monks of the later phase kept before them Buddha's ideal. Buddhabhadra, the composer of eulogy in Cave 26 says following this spirit: "Why then the Bodhisattvas (who emulate the example of the Buddha and), who are still desirous of the worldly pleasures, or even those who aspire for the higher goal of attaining Release, should not strive to undertake the construction of a shrine of the Buddha". He further observes in verses 3 and 4: "Saluting and reciting his virtues is fruitful and of great abundant advantage and where even the gift of a flower is the cause of the fruit of heaven and final beatitude." There is another very important statement regarding the fruit of pious deeds, common to all religious traditions of India, expressed in stanza 8: "Human being enjoys heaven so long as his fame in this world lasts; so fame that may endure as long as the sun and moon shine, must be acquired in the mountain."
Patron of Cave 22 brings another significant aspect of this belief. He says, any one who makes (in paint or in stone) an image of the Lord is endowed with virtues and physical charm. Thus the pious deed not only results in worldly happiness but also in the next birth and spiritual progress. The merit acquired through any pious deed could be shared with your near ones nay with all the beings in this world for their spiritual upliftment. All these long inscriptions of the Vākāṭaka phase are in contrast with those of the Sātavāhana phase.
Examples from Caves 10 and 12 are illustrative of this difference in attitude. Vasithiputa Katahadi fashioned the facade of Cave 10, while Dhammadeva Pavajita and Kanhaka Bahada contributed to the wall and ceiling. These inscriptions are short, describing only the nature of the work for which the contribution was made. The gift (dāna) is described as a gracious one (prasād). The objective of dāna is not specified and may be imagined to be the spiritual welfare of the donor himself. The above two types show the change in the attitude of the donors with the passage of time.
There is one more class of donatory inscriptions, accompanied by painted and carved Buddha figures. These are on pillars and walls of the prayer halls. Apparently, these do not follow any iconographic scheme and occupy a suitable empty space. Prof. Spink refers to such figures as 'intrusive'. Similar Buddha figures also occur at all prominent Buddhist cave centres in Maharashtra e.g. at Karle, Kanheri, Kuḍa, Junner and Nasik and are patronised by monks themselves.
These images are clearly indicative of a decline in the patronage of Buddhism. The monks were not supposed to amass any wealth. So they must have made such donations or gifts either from the wealth accumulated before they entered the order, or from the wealth received from their lay followers. But this also shows depletion in the number of patrons, which might have been increased due to popularity of new sects like Paśupata in Hinduism. There are now new rock-cut monuments, affiliated to this śaiva sect, virtually in the neighbourhood of dying Buddhist settlements.
One more reason for such a depletion seems to have been the general political and economic instability that was an outcome of the collapse of both the Gupta and the Vākāṭaka empires, that otherwise covered major portions of Indian Subcontinent. The economic instability was a result of the Huṇa invasion that destroyed surface trade links of north India with outside world. As a result, in the post Vākāṭaka period there were many minor dynasties that ruled the Deccan. These were Mauryas of Koṇkaṇ, Kalacuris of the west coast and the Narmadā region, Rāṣṭrakūṭas of Vidarbha, Marāṭhwāḍa and Western Maharashtra. This picture changed only when the Calukyas of Bādāmī emerged as a strong power in the latter half of the sixth century AD.
Prof. Mirashi has very ingeniously reconstructed account of how the great empire of Harisena Vākāṭaka came to a catastrophic end, with the help of a story in the Daśakumāracaritam of Danḍin.
Ajantā, with its elegant architecture, charming sculpture, and fascinating paintings is a visual vestige of the prosperous and glorious ancient Maharashtra (Vidharbha, Aśmaka and Mulaka) that formed the core of the two successive empires of the Deccan, of the Sātavāhanas and the Vākāṭakas.