Sculptures

Deepak H. Kannal

 

The Buddha Images Reliefs on the friezes of the entablature and other minor sculptures The large narrative / semi-narrative panels

Ajantā sculpture, though significant in various ways is unfortunate not to get its rightful place in the history of Indian sculpture. This large corpus of Buddhist statuary is overshadowed by the opulent painting from this very monument and the flamboyant sculptural wealth of Ellorā which is just a hundred kilometres away from this complex. Scholars seldom talk about Ajantā sculpture at length for its apparent lesser quality in comparison with its neighboring monuments like Ellorā. Some consider it as an inferior version of Gupta sculpture. Some find it stiff and lifeless. The Ajantā sculpture is tentative and inert, still groping for fulfillment which to some extent is true. It lacks the sophistication and vitality that is discernible in the sculptural manifestation of the era that it belongs to. Even Cave 19 that employs sculpture in place of painting to embellish the facade and the interior and which supposedly rivals the beauty of the richly painted 'emperor's cave' (Cave 1), cannot be considered as one of the finest manifestations of Indian sculpture. As a result, the debate and discussions on Ajantā sculpture mainly revolve around the extrinsic issues like dating or patronage even while discussing some of the finest and most ambitious sculptures like Parinirvāṇa or Māradarṣana from Cave 26 which otherwise would merit accolades. However, with all the 'mediocrity and the lesser quality' that is discernible by and large in Ajantā sculpture, it will have to be acknowledged as a significant landmark in the evolution of Deccan idiom that reigns supreme in the Indian sculptural art of post Gupta period. The complex and evolved sculptural language of Ellorā owes a lot to Ajantā; rather Ajantā is almost like a cauldron that brings together various elements from different regional lineages that culminate into the unified Deccan idiom at Ellorā. The eclectic adventure begins at Ajantā during its Mahāyāna phase under the patronage of the Vākāṭakas and their feudatories like Asmaka and Ṛśika.

The total corpus of Ajantā sculpture can broadly be divided into three stylistic categories:

a)	The iconic seated Buddha images in the shrines of many of the caves and the large iconic sculptural panels on the facades and in the shrinelets on the outer walls of the caves.
b)	The small sculptural friezes on the entablature, pillars, the kicaka figures, nidhis, Hāritī-Pāñchikā, Nāgarāja, etc.
c)	The large narrative, semi narrative panels like those in Cave 26 and also the aṣṭabhayātaran images (saving from eight perils)

The chronology or the possible patronage of the caves is not taken into consideration in this categorization for two reasons, one: these issues have been already dealt with possibly in other essays of the book, and two: the stylistic evolution is not necessarily obliged to these issues. It can be given a thought without referring to them. Moreover, it is difficult to subscribe to the notion of single royal patronage to the Buddhist monuments. There is enough evidence of the royal and elite donations available from the inscriptions but the inscriptions mentioning the dānas from the common people, like carpenters or merchants that are found in abundance in Ajantā plead contrary to the idea of elite patronage. The stylistic inconsistency in a single cave and the oft seen intrusive images could be a result of these assorted donations disallowing the organizers from adhering to the conceived program. Under these circumstances studying the typologies and their characteristic features is a simpler and safer proposition.

a) The Buddha Images
 

Ajantā has four caityagṛhas in the complex barring the incomplete and inaccessible fifth one (Cave 29), and two of them have Buddha images carved on the large stūpas, but over and above these proper caityagṛhas, there are a few caves that do not adhere to the conventional apsidal ground plan of caitya but are supplemented by a shrine with very large images of seated Buddha in them. They are almost like Buddhist cave 'temples'. In some of the caves the antechamber (antarāla) could be an afterthought between the maṇḍapa and the sanctum. The images in the sanctum are large, having imposing iconic gravity. Most of them are in dharmacakrapravartana mudrā.  They are well conceived but poorly executed. One can notice the sculptors' sincere attempts towards creating a serene and contemplative image, like the Sarnath Buddha, but accomplished only partially. The large head placed on broad shoulders and the strong stocky torso is too heavy to be borne by the proportionately smaller and weaker lower half of the body. As a result, the images fail to impart a sense of grandeur and monumentality despite their huge size. It is possible as Walter Spink suggests that they were carved hurriedly while working towards the hasty completion of these caves but the consistency of these features, discernible in the shrine images, does not indicate that the sculptor lacked understanding of the intrinsic elegance of human anatomy.

The large standing images on outer walls and the standing Buddha images on the extension of the facade of Cave 19 in particular also are not free of these lacunae. The images betray a marked affinity with the Mathura - Sarnath images but lack the elegance and sophistication. The rigidity of posture, the disproportionate and awkwardly set limbs, the extra large and stiff spread palms in particular, mark the difference between the classical Gupta idiom and the Guptaesque sub-category of Ajantā sculpture.

The seated Buddha images and those on the outer walls follow a given prototype which obviously does not seem to have evolved at the site. The prototype is imported, but wherefrom is not clear. The gesture and the costumes of the Ajantā images divulge some difference from the Mathura prototype. Considering the possible date of the Ajantā sculptures which could be before 475 AD, they certainly cannot be seen as an extension of the developed Mathura - Sarnath style as the latter had yet to reach its zenith by this time. The pre-Gupta or the early Gupta schools of central India, like Pawaya or Udaygiri that contributed to the crystallization of the Gupta idiom must have worked as the common stock to both these schools. The Madhyadeśa idiom seems to have matured at two different places. This contention explains the similarities and the differences between the Gupta and Vākāṭaka sculpture. The matrimonial relationship between the Vākāṭakas and the Nāgas of Central India strengthens it further.

b) Reliefs on the friezes of the entablature and other minor sculptures
 

The apparently insignificant sculptures on the friezes, pillar roundels, kicakas, bhāravāhakas (bearing the load of the ceiling), the female figures embellishing the door frames, and the languid kuṭilakas accompanying them seem to have contributed immensely to the formation of later Deccan idiom. These sculptures are used as a part of the decorative program of the caves occupying quite insignificant positions. Sculpture in the Hinayāna phase of western Indian caves, barring a few exceptions, like the Bhāja Māndhātā panel, has been reduced to decorative motifs here. Surprisingly, the quality and delineation of these sculptures is no lesser to any major sculptural manifestation. The pillar capitals of Kārle, Nāsik, Bedsā or the sculpted friezes of Pitalkhorā are some of the finest examples of early Indian sculpture and are comparable to Kṛṣṇā valley sculptures. The so called minor sculptures of Ajantā also divulge the dexterity and caliber of the sculptor, the sensitivity and understanding of human figure and the inner vitality that is rarely seen in the iconic Buddha images. The carving techniques, the space division and the surface treatment of these sculptures reveal their Sātavāhana lineage. The iconic treatment of the Guptaesque images leaves no scope for the activation of space. Space in those sculptures is just the void around the images - the area unoccupied by the image. In the present category, the space is an entity having its own presence and purpose in the sculpture. The form or the images belong to the space that is constructed within the frame by the sculptor and the space too belongs to the form. The palpable space and its interplay with the form are not known to the Gupta sculptors. If observed carefully, the inspirations and prototypes of the later Buddhist and Brahmanical sculpture in the Deccan can be traced in these miniature friezes.

c) The large narrative / semi-narrative panels

Ajantā can boast of at least two sculptural panels, viz. Parinirvāṇa and Māradarśana scenes that can be counted among the greatest achievements of Indian sculptural tradition. Both of them are in Cave 26 and perhaps are not the part of the original program of the cave. They seem to be intrusive as also suggested by Walter Spink because insignificant space has been allotted to such important sculptures. Even on stylistic grounds they look far evolved and later in date to the rest of the Ajantā sculptures. Deccan sculpture in the post-Gupta period employs an extremely complex idiom. It tries to incorporate all the achievements of the earlier schools of Indian sculpture. It is a confluence of the sophistication of Maurya, the semiotic intricacy of Śunga-Sātavāhana, the vitality of Kuṣāṇa and the contemplative serenity of Gupta idiom. Since most of it is carved in living rock, the sculptors could enjoy the liberty of size and depth which not only added to the grandeur of the sculpture but also gave a mysterious, otherworldly appearance to it. The colossal sculptural panels in the western Indian caves impart a sublime experience to the viewer.

The sculpture depicting Buddha's nirvāṇa measuring about twenty feet in length, despite all the constraints of space, imparts a dramatic experience. It has been placed most strategically next to the door of an aisle. The physical measurements would betray the lacunae in the relative physical proportions of this sculpture but the serene visual experience that it offers is perhaps the result of an extremely intelligent manoeuvering of light and shade. The pulsating bulges are composed in such a manner that they do not form cast shadows. The soft shadows dissolve in the undulating planes and the subtle play of grays impart a mysterious, otherworldly experience.

Māradarśana is much more complex in both visual and contextual terms. It depicts Buddha's victory over Māra. The composition revolves around the seated image of the Buddha placed in the center. The medley of figures around depicts Māra's army full of ferocious and grotesque characters, coming into the sculpture from the upper left corner. When the army failed to threaten the 'Śākyasiṃha', Māra tried to seduce him with the charm of his youthful daughters. They are seen in seductive postures at the bottom of the relief trying to lure Buddha. The Tathāgata who had gone beyond such temptations in his previous lives remained unperturbed. The crest-fallen Mara is seen seated in the lower corner, and the Enlightened One in the centre of the panel is inviting the Earth Goddess on the scene who had witnessed all his spiritual achievements, pāramitās, in the previous births. Māra is seen leaving the battlefield with his army in the upper right corner.

The dynamic space construction and activation, the intricate composition and the complex narratology speaks of the evolved visual language and its later date as a corollary of the same. An early Ellorā sculpture reveals a marked affinity with this sculpture that prompted the scholars to trace the mobility of the sculptors' guild from Ajantā to Ellorā. Some also suggest that it could be via Aurangabad. The date and chronology is a debatable issue and need not be addressed here but it will have to be admitted that this is one of the earliest examples of the evolved Deccan idiom that must have inspired generations of Deccan sculptors.