Klemens Karlsson
University of Uppsala
This is a short summary of my dissertation in the History of Religions that was presented at Uppsala University early this year (Face to Face with the Absent Buddha. The Formation of Buddhist Aniconic Art. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Historia Religionum 15. Uppsala, 1999). I became interested in this subject as a result my awareness of the recent debate about the so-called Buddhist aniconic art. My intention thus far has not been to discuss individualworks of art,;but to uncover the origin and development of early Buddhist aniconic art.
The absence of anthropomorphic images of the Buddha in early Buddhism has often been explained by a prohibition against images of the Buddha or by a doctrine that made it inappropriate to depict the body of the Buddha. It has also been explained by the practice of different meditational exercises (buddhanusmurti). I reject such explanations. There was no programmatic aniconism in early Buddhism. Instead, my study emphasizes the transformation that Buddhist aniconic art underwent from auspicious signs belonging to a shared sacred Indian culture to aniconic compositions representing the Buddha.
In order to understand its origin and development I have attempted to construct a chronology using archaeological remains from Sanci, Sarnath, Bodhgaya, Bharhut and Andharadesa. From this preliminary chronology it is possible to see a development from simple signs (trees, wheels, tridents, purnaghatas, lotus flowers, etc.) to carefully made aniconic compositions representing the Buddha in a narrative context. It is my conviction that the earliest part of this development belongs to a shared sacred Indian culture. This is apparent if we take into consideration the similarities between early art on Buddhist and Jain stupas and signs on old coins and pottery. Auspicious signs, local deities and mythological creatures were probably included in the Buddhist cultic life as a way to protect and popularize the Buddhist movement. Visual signs on stupas may also reflect the fact that artists and craftsmen were paid workers, working for Buddhists and non-Buddhists as well.
My conclusion is that Buddhist aniconic art was transformed from simple signs belonging to a shared sacred Indian culture to carefully made aniconic compositions by a connection of these signs with a narrative tradition about the life and teachings of the Buddha.
However, it is remarkable that the tree and the wheel are not emphasized in early texts dealing with the enlightenment (Ariyapariyesanasutta, Mahasaccakasutta) and the first sermon (Mahavagga, Samyutta Nikaya). Generations of Buddhists have interpreted the wheel on the Asoka-pillar in Sarnath as the wheel of the law and the first sermon of the Buddha. This connection between the wheel and the life of the Buddha may not be as old as it is commonly believed. It may seem provocative, but I will call some of the main events in the life of the Buddha in question. In the time of Asoka the wheel may have represented Cakkravartin, the righteous wheel-turning ruler, and not the first sermon of the Buddha. I think that it is not unrealistic to believe that visible signs were an important part in the development of biographies of the Buddha. What is told about the enlightenment and the first sermon may have been inspired by visible signs of wheels and trees.
Some of my points need further research and I am hoping to have the opportunity to spend more time on semantic interpretations. I am also looking forward to doing further research on Buddhist visual art in contemporary Southeast Asia.
Abstract available in PDF format at: http://www.ub.uu.se/acta/91-554-4635-3.pdf
To send comments, or to obtain a copy of the dissertation, e-mail Klemens Karlsson at <Klemens.Karlsson@bibl.hj.se>.