Indo-Asiatische ZeitschriftMitteilungen der Gesellschaft für indo-asiatische Kunst

18 . 2014

Inhalt / Contents

Vorwort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Zur Abschaffung des Studiengangs „Kunstgeschichte Südasiens“ an der Freien Universität Berlin (und damit in Deutschland überhaupt) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

An Inscribed Statue of a “Lustful” Woman from MathuraHarry Falk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Fruits of Research on the History of Central Asian Art in Berlin (II): The Buddha and the Tree God

Robert Arlt & Satomi Hiyama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

˜a¼karåditya – eine synkretistische Form ˜ivas und S÷ryasAdalbert J. Gail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

The Second Buddha and Arhats? Two Paintings in the Asian Art Museum, BerlinHans-Werner Klohe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Gipsabgüsse von Angkor Wat für das Völkerkundemuseum in Berlin – einesammlungsgeschichtliche Anekdote, Teil II

Michael S. Falser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Drei imperiale Juwelen. Ein Beitrag zur Schmuckkunst unter Jahangir und Schah JahanBernd Augustin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Ram Kumar. Portrait des Künstlers als LandschaftsmalerUrsula Bickelmann-Aldinger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

Anil Revri’s “Ram Darwaza No. 9”Raffael Dedo Gadebusch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

The Dying Art of Painting Cinema Billboards in IndiaAndreas Weigelt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

Autoren / Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

Ausstellungskalender / Upcoming Exhibitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

Mitglieder der Gesellschaft für indo-asiatische Kunst 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Impressum / Imprint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Indo-Asiatische Zeitschrift 18 % 2014: 18-28

Fig. 1 Kizil, Cave 110 (Treppenhöhle), right side wall. TheGrünwedel Collection of the State Hermitage Museum, St.Petersburg, Inv. No. ȬȮ 766; 20 x 20 cm. © The State Her-mitage Museum

Fruits of Research on the History of Central Asian Art in Berlin (II)

The Buddha and the Tree God

Robert Arlt & Satomi Hiyama

The “Grünwedel Collection” of the State Hermitage

Museum, St. Petersburg, includes a small mural fragment

(ɁɃ 766) from Kizil Cave 110, on which the upper body

of a figure is represented (Fig. 1). Thanks to the Hermi-

tage Museum’s recent restoration of the painting on the

fragment, both the original contour of the image and

the brightness of the pigments are in astonishingly good

condition.

No information about this fragment has ever been

published. It is not included in the list of the mural frag-

ments removed from Kizil Cave 110, published in Spät-antike, Vol. VII.1) This fragment was formerly registered

with the inventory number IB 8890, its provenience has

been unknown, the only available information was that it

was acquired during the fourth German expedition.2) Be-

fore the Second World War it was on display in the exhi-

bition room XXXVI of the Ethnological Museum, Berlin,

that has been destroyed in the war (Fig. 2); unfortunately

no catalogue of the objects exhibited in the Ethnological

Museum had been prepared. After the War the fragment

was brought to St. Petersburg and has not been published

until today. For these reasons the existence of this frag-

ment has remained unknown to scholars of the field.

We express our deepest gratitude to the State Her-

mitage Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia, and all the per-

sons involved in giving us the honourable permission to

publish this precious research material for the first time

since its discovery in the early 20th century.3)

This fragment originally formed part of a painting in

Kizil Cave 110 (Treppenhöhle) illustrating a particular

moment in the Buddha’s life. Kizil Cave 110 is a cave

with a square floor plan and a vaulted ceiling (Fig. 3),

located in the innermost part of the Gunei district (Große

1) LE COQ/WALDSCHMIDT 1933: 71.

2) On the museum’s inventory card describing the fragment, only

little information is given: „Wandbild: Anbetendes Figürchen

(in Blumen) in añjali n.l., 20 x 20 cm, Herkunft: Kyzil“

[transl.: “Mural: worshipping figurine (surrounded by flowers)

in añjali to left, 20 x 20 cm, provenance: Kizil”]; cf. DREYER/

SANDER/WEIS 2002: 176. The provenance given for objects

acquired by the fourth German expedition is often inaccurate,

since the notes of Bartus, which were the only source of infor-

mation, were lost during the Second World War; cf. TONGER-

LOO/KNÜPPEL/GABSCH 2012: 36.

3) We express our special and amicable gratitude for the courtesy

of Dr. Mikhail Borisovich Piotrovsky, Dr. Anastasia Mikliaeva,

Dr. Evgeniy Kiy, Dr. Kira Samosyk and Dr. Nikolai Pchelin of

the State Hermitage Museum, as well as to Prof. Klaus Ruiten-

beek and Dr. Lilla Russell-Smith of the Asian Art Museum of

Berlin, who all kindly supported our work on this paper.

The Buddha and the Tree God 19

Fig. 2 Exhibition room XXXVI of the Ethnological Museum, Berlin, ca. 1930, with our fragment on top left. Photo-graph in the Archive of the Asian Art Museum, Berlin, © Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Museum für Asiatische Kunst

Bachschlucht) of Kizil.4) In this cave, the Buddha’s life

was originally represented chronologically in 60 rectan-

gular scenes.5) These scenes featured on both side walls

and the rear wall, and were arranged in three horizontal

rows; seven scenes were represented in each row of the

side walls, while six scenes were represented in each row

of the rear wall. Each scene is labelled with an inscription

in Tocharian B in the Bråhmï script, which in some cases

allows the precise identification of the narrative content

of each scene.6) The wall paintings of Kizil Cave 110 are

among those classified as Second Indo-Iranian style.7)

4) The German expeditions called this cave „Treppenhöhle“ (Stairs

Cave) because it had to be accessed through a stairway; cf.

GRÜNWEDEL 1912: 117. VIGNATO (2006: 12) pointed out that

Kizil Cave 110 formed a group with Kizil Caves 111 and 111a,

connected by a shared wooden porch. The stairway would have

been in a tunnel, and not visible from outside.

5) Some of the scenes of Kizil Cave 110 do not match with the

chronological order of the Buddha’s life stories as known to us.

For example, a scene concerning the prophecy for the monk

Priyadar¸ana is inserted between the scene about the offering

by Brahmin Pai¼gika and the scene about the Buddha’s disease.

However, to a great extent, the order of the events reflects the

tradition of the M÷lasarvåstivådins, as found in the Sa¼gha-bhedavastu, as has been pointed by SCHMIDT 2010: 862. The

present authors have been able to show that this is especially

true for the depiction of the early stages in ˜åkyamuni’s life as

a Bodhisatva (with minor divergences). Intriguingly the ico-

nographic features of the represented life-events reflect other

traditions, that can be connected to other traditions, for ex-

ample the depiction of the birth and the four excursions (de-

monstrated by the present authors in a presentation at the

XVIIth Congress of the IABS, Vienna). For the inscriptions of

the relevant scenes, see PINAULT 2000: 162; SCHMIDT 2010:

858-859.

6) For the decipherment of the inscriptions of Kizil Cave 110, see

SCHMIDT 1998; PINAULT 2000; SCHMIDT 2010.

7) For the classification of the three artistic styles in the Kuchean

Buddhist art, see GRÜNWEDEL 1912: 5-6, 42-43; WALDSCHMIDT

1933: 24-31. While the classification and the dating of these

20 R. ARLT & S. HIYAMA

Fig. 3 Kizil, Cave 110 (Treppenhöhle), interior elevation planof 3-D model of Kizil Cave 110. Prepared by Robert Arlt

The fragment under discussion originally formed the

middle upper part of one of the rectangular scenes in the

second row of the right side wall, as is visible in photo-

graphs taken before the painting’s removal (Fig. 4).8) The

scene is labelled with the following inscription:

tane poy(¸)i (ka)[¹¹]i brå(mñä)[k]t(e)¸6 lkå¹¹aº// ta[n]e bråmñäkte pe(laikne) åksi ¸au¸tarne//

tane [po]y¸i ka¹¹i upa(ge)mpa y[t]årine [ka]l(tra)

Here the Omniscient, the Teacher, looks at Brahmå.

Here the god Brahmå entreats him (i.e. the Omniscient,

the Teacher) to teach the law. Here stands the Omni-

scient, the Teacher, with Upaga on the path.9)

The inscription fits the representation closely. On the left

half of the scene, the Buddha is sitting on a throne in

front of a tree. A male figure, depicted with a halo and

folded hands, is kneeling in front of the Buddha. This fig-

ure can be conclusively identified as the god Brahmå,

since it has the typical appearance of Brahmå in the wall

paintings of Kucha, wearing a white robe draped over one

shoulder (Fig. 5). The right half of the scene depicts the

encounter of the Buddha with a naked person wearing

a penis ring (li¼gavalaya), who can be identified as the

Åjïvika Upaga.10) Thus, in this scene multiple moments

are represented: 1. The moment after the Buddha’s En-

lightenment – where he accepted Brahmå’s request to

teach the dharma for the merit of all beings; 2. The en-

counter with Upaga, whom he met on his way to his first

sermon in the deer park (m¡gavana) in Sarnath. When the

Buddha meets Upaga he declares to him that he has at-

tained Enlightenment, but Upaga, showing no sign of in-

terest, went away.

However, one inconsistency between the inscription

and the representation can be observed. According to

SCHMIDT, the inscription mentions the Buddha’s glance

at Brahmå and Brahmå’s request. In the painting under

discussion, however, the Buddha does not have eye con-

tact with Brahmå. What catches his eye is apparently the

small figure emerging from the tree, depicted on the frag-

ment kept in St. Petersburg (Fig. 6).

The figure folds its hands and inclines its head to-

wards the Buddha. The costume covering the figure’s

breast is typical among the female figures in the Kuchean

wall paintings; hence her identification as a female. She

has a halo and is represented in a smaller scale than the

other figures.

A similar figure, though male, can be found in the

scene of the Buddha’s parinirvå½a in Kizil Cave 76

(Pfauenhöhle, Fig. 7). In this scene, the god of the ˜ala

tree exhibits his sorrow about the Buddha’s physical

death, in the same manner as he does in Gandharan art

(Fig. 8).11) This god of the Ðala tree shares iconographical

features with the discussed figure in Kizil Cave 110; they

both have halos and only their upper body is shown as

emerging from the tree. It is therefore certain that the

female figure in Kizil Cave 110 is also a tree deity.

What is the role of this goddess in the represented

story? In fact, this iconography can be observed in Gan-

dharan art, too, where some reliefs show the same type of

styles (the First Indo-Iranian style, the Second Indo-Iranian style

and the Chinese style) by WALDSCHMIDT have been widely

accepted until today, there are also critical remarks against it.

HIYAMA (2013: 125-128) presents the bibliography of literature

concerning the artistic styles in the Kucha region.

8) This photograph has been taken during the third German expe-

dition in 1906; it is now kept in the archive of the Asian Art

Museum of Berlin (MIK B 1089). Cf. LE COQ 1924: Tafel 7.

9) After SCHMIDT’s German translation: „Hier blickt der Alleswis-

sende, der Lehrer, auf Gott Brahman. Hier fordert Gott Brahman

ihn [scil. den Alleswissenden, den Lehrer] auf, das Ge(setz) zu

verkündigen. Hier steh(t) der Alleswissende, der Lehrer, mit

Upaga auf den Wege“; cf. SCHMIDT 2010: 853.

10) The religious affiliation of this naked figure can also be ascer-

tained by an iconographical deduction; in the wall paintings of

Kucha, the Brahmins are depicted as figures wearing an antelope

skin, while the Jainas are represented as figures wearing a white

cloth tied over their chests and a short skirt. Thus, the naked

figure with a penis ring must have a religious affiliation other

than Buddhism, Brahmanism or Jainism. See HIYAMA 2014.

11) Cf. KURITA 2003, I: pls. 481-483, 487, 489, 492, 496.

The Buddha and the Tree God 21

Fig. 4 Kizil, Cave 110 (Treppenhöhle), right side wall. Photograph taken by H. Pohrt during the third German Expedition in1906. Archive of the Asian Art Museum, Berlin (MIK B 1089), © Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Museum für Asiatische Kunst

composition (Figs. 9, 10).12) The Buddha sits in front of

the tree, from which at least one tree god appears. This

type of iconography can often be observed in reliefs

framed by a pointed arch that are reminiscent of a ga-våk¹a. The pensive Buddha looks at the tree, while Vajra-

på½i stands behind him. On the left and right of the arch,

Brahmå and Indra are represented on pillars upon which

the arch rests. Brahmå folds his hands towards the Bud-

dha, while Indra holds a bejewelled garland. In front of

the pillars, and in a strip under the main image with the

pensive Buddha, are either scenes from the Buddha’s life

or figures of donors.

TANABE interprets this kind of depictions as the

Buddha’s contemplation in front of the Bodhi-Tree, and

analyses the unique posture of the Buddha as sitting not

in the correct parya¼ka, but relaxing his legs and in-

clining his body. According to TANABE’s interpretation,

this posture may be explained by errors during the trans-

cription of texts; scribes may wrongly have transcribed

“paryaºkaºbhidyanto/parya¼kaºbhindan (by breaking

the parya¼ka)” instead of the correct wording “paryaº-kamabhidyanto/parya¼kaºabhindan (without breaking

the parya¼ka)”.13)

12) Cf. KURITA 2003, I: 219; TANABE 2012: figs. 3-6, 9. For ex-

amples in portable shrines, see HAMEED 2014: figs. 1-5.

13) According to TANABE, this wording can be found in the Mahå-vastu (ed. SENART 1897, III: 272) and in the Lalitavistara (ed.

VAIDYA 1958: 269); cf. TANABE 2009/10: 108-117.

22 R. ARLT & S. HIYAMA

Fig. 5 Kizil, Cave 77 (Statuenhöhle), left side wall of the right corridor. After Kizil Grottoes 1984: pl. 19

In a later paper he cited the Lalitavistara (the Sanskrit

version and T 187, the later Chinese translation of Skt.

Lalitavistara) and concluded that this kind of iconogra-

phy represents the Buddha’s contemplation at the Bodhi

Tree with unblinking eyes during the third seven days

after his Enlightenment.14) BOPEARACHCHI also describes

this type of scenes as the pensive Buddha looking at the

Bodhi tree without blinking, while QUAGLIOTTI rather

pleads for a symbolic explanation.15)

However, the presence of the tree goddess in this

scene has remained unexplained in the previous studies.

Is she simply a visual device to personify the Bodhi Tree?

This is indeed a possibility and QUAGLIOTTI has shown

that the Bodhi Tree can be understood in many ways.16) In

the case of Kizil Cave 110 the personification of the tree

through this deity can be ruled out, since the tree is also

represented in other scenes in the same cave, but never

14) TANABE 2012: 195-196. TANABE explained the represented sce-

nery by relating it to the following sentence from the Lalita-vistara, Ch. 24: T¡tïye saptåhe tathågato ‘nimi¹am bodhi-ma½àamïk¹ate sma/ iha mayånuttaråº samyaksaºbodhimabhi-saºbudhyånavarågrasya jåtijaråmara½aduµkhasyåntaµ k¡taiti (La troisième semaine, le Tathâgata regarda Bodhima½Üa

sans cligner l’oeil. Ici, par moi, l’Intelligence parfait, accompli-

ce et sans supérieure a été revêtue, et il a été mis fin à la douleur

sans commencement et sans fin, de la naissance, de la vieillesse

et de la mort). Cf. ed. VAIDYA 1958: 274; transl. FOUCAUX

1884: 314. The corresponding sentence can be found in T 187:

601a1-2. TANABE (2012: 195) translated the sentence in T 187

(601a1) as follows: “For the third seven days the Buddha con-

templated the Bodhi-tree with unblinking eyes”, but this trans-

lation must be corrected to: “For the third seven days the

Buddha contemplated the Bodhima½Üa with unblinking eyes”,

the same as in the Skt. Lalitavistara.

15) BOPEARACHCHI 2008: 36; QUAGLIOTTI 1991/92.

16) QUAGLIOTTI analysed numerous Gandharan reliefs featuring a

solar disk and related images, including those featuring a god-

dess emerging from the Bodhi Tree. One of the most inter-

esting pieces kept in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London

(I.M. 31-1935), resembles the representation in the Kizil Cave

110 to a great extent. QUAGLIOTTI interpreted this piece as

representing the Buddha before his Enlightenment after the

victory over Måra. Her focus lies on the solar disc represented

behind the Bodhi Tree and the potential symbolic meaning of

the whole iconography; cf. QUAGLIOTTI 1991/92: 86-87, 92

figs. 1-2. The goddess, however, remains unexplained. At least

the representation in Kizil is guaranteed to deal with an event

after the Enlightenment. QUAGLIOTTI’s identification of a tree

goddess in Kizil Cave 207 (the Painters’ Cave; cf. ibid.: 86-87,

105, fig. 23) has to be corrected in terms of sex, since the de-

picted figure is obviously male, and it has to be added that the

whole scene is not related to the Buddha’s Enlightenment, but

illustrates the offering of Åmrapålï; cf. GRÜNWEDEL 1912:

154; BULIR/HIYAMA 2012: 145, 196, Anm. 21-23.

The Buddha and the Tree God 23

Fig. 6 Detail of Fig. 4

with the emerging goddess.17) So does the

goddess play an active role in the repre-

sented scenery? It seems likely to the pre-

sent authors, since the tree god belongs to

the fixed elements of this kind of icono-

graphy.

As for the unblinking look of the Bud-

dha it has to be said that it is not limited to

a particular moment and thus this feature

may not bear emphasis for an analysis. In

the Mahåpadånasutta and other texts it is

said that Buddhas, just like the gods, do not

blink.18) A later example from the MSV-

Sa¼ghabhedavastu of the M÷lasarvåstivå-

dins, even cites this characteristic as a rule

(dharmatå):

dharmatå khalu såºpratajåto bodhisat-va19) animi¹an; r÷på½i pa¸yan nåsau ni-mi¹ati; tadyathå devås trayastriº¸åµ20)

In fact, there are textual sources that explicitly mention

the role of this tree god, though they have been over-

looked in the previous studies. The present authors are

aware of three different variations of the story concerning

the tree god.

Type 1: According to the Puyao-Jing (T 186), which

is the Chinese translation of an earlier Sanskrit version of

the Lalitavistara, the tree god appears directly after the

Buddha’s agreement to Brahmå’s request. After that, a tree

god with the name Faming (Dharmaprabhåsa/Dharmå-

bhås(?)) appeared and asked the Buddha where he would

turn the wheel of the dharma.21) The Buddha answered

that he would do it in the m¡gavana of Benares. The tree

god responded that the people in the m¡gavana are frivo-

lous and thus cannot be taught. In answer the Buddha re-

quested him not to say such things and explained that all

the Buddhas have turned the wheel of the dharma in the

m¡gavana. After this conversation, the Buddha turned to

the question of the audience of his first sermon. Knowing

that Rudraka Råmaputra and ÅråÜa Kålåpa had already

died, he decided to hold his first sermon for the five men

that had accompanied him as he practiced austere asceti-

cism.22)

Type 2: This version can be observed in the Foshuo-Taizi-Ruiying-Benqi-Jing (T 185),23) which was translated

by “The Upåsaka of Yuezhi” Zhiqian (222-280),24) as well

as in the Fangguang-Da-Zhuangyan-Jing (T 187),25)

which is a later translation of the Sanskrit Lalitavistara by

Divåkara (613-687).26) On the seventh day after the En-

lightenment (T 185), or in the seventh week after the

Enlightenment (T 187), the caravan of the two merchants

17) See for example the preparation of the bodhima½àa; cf.

SCHMIDT 2010: 851; LE COQ 1924: Tafel 6.

18) In the Mahåpadånasutta (ed. RHYS DAVIDS/CARPENTER 1903:

II. 1.37; transl. RHYS DAVIDS 1910: 17), the Mahåvadånas÷tra(ed. WALDSCHMIDT 1956: 115; transl. WEBER 1999: 66).

19) In the edition of GNOLI bodhisatva reads as bodhisattva. In a

recent re-edition by KARASHIMA and WILLE this word is tran-

scribed as bodhisatva, as it should have been (cf. BHATTA-

CHARYA 2010); another difference is the animi¹an at the end

of this sentence, that has been transcribed as animi¹a½ by

GNOLI. See KARASHIMA/WILLE 2000 (SBV: I 52).

20) M÷lasarvåstivådavinaya-Sa¼ghabhedavastu, ed. GNOLI 1977:

52; KARASHIMA/WILLE 2000 (SBV: I 52).

21) The text lists three other names of this god: Fale (Dharmasukha/

Dharmaruci(?)), Fayi (Dharmamati) and Fachi (Dharmadhara);

cf. T 186: 528c13-14. The authors express the deepest gratitude

to Prof. Seishi Karashima (Soka University, Tokyo) for his ad-

vice about the reconsturuction of the Sanskrit names from the

Chinese names.

22) T 186: 528c13-529a10.

23) T 185: 479a19-479b23.

24) MATSUDA (1988) pointed out that this text is a patchwork of

different Sanskrit sources.

25) T 187: 601c03-602b23.

26) A brief biography of Divåkara is recorded in the Song-Gaoseng-Chuan (T 2061: 719a18-b4).

24 R. ARLT & S. HIYAMA

Fig. 7 Kizil, Cave 76 (Pfauenhöhle), left side wall, drawing by Albert Grün-wedel. Archive of the Asian Art Museum, Berlin (MIK TA 6438) © StaatlicheMuseen zu Berlin, Museum für Asiatische Kunst

Fig. 8 The parinirvå½a of the Buddha, Gan-dhara. After KURITA 2003, I: pl. 482

Trapu¹a and Bhallika came to the forest, where the

Buddha stayed. A tree god (T 185) or the god protecting

the forest (T 187) obstructed the way of the caravan and

appeared in front of them entreating permission to offer

the Buddha a meal, who had not eaten since his En-

lightenment.

Type 3: This version is a variant of Type 2. The ac-

count of the vinaya of the Dharmaguptakas (T 1428) is

similar to the account included in T 185. However, the

tree god receives mention a further time. After the Bud-

dha ate the meal offered by Trapu¹a and Bhallika, he had

an attack of flatulence. Knowing that the Buddha had be-

come unwell, a god of the harïtakï tree brought a harïtakïfruit to the Buddha for medicinal relief. This god became

the first of all the numerous gods to become a follower of

the Buddha.27)

Of these three episodes, the occurrences of Type 2

and Type 3 can be also observed in other texts, although

the tree god is replaced by a nameless devatå (Type 2

and 3),28) specifically the devatå who was once the

kinsman of Trapu¹a and Bhallika (Type 2)29) and Indra

(Type 3).30) On the other hand, the account given in Type

1 is a singular case, and the authors were unable to find

the same episode in any other texts.

How are these textual sources related to the repre-

sentations? In the reliefs of Gandhara and the wall paint-

ing of Kizil, the tree god is represented alongside Brah-

må, requesting the Buddha to teach the Law (Figs. 4, 10).

Furthermore, in the case of Kizil Cave 110, the scene illu-

strating the offering by Trapu¹a and Bhallika and four

lokapålas precedes the scene with the tree deity.31) From

these observations, the episodes of Type 2 and Type 3

seem to be less relevant for the representations under dis-

cussion than Type 1.32)

Upon receiving the tree god’s suggestion, the Buddha

is pondering the place and the audience for his first ser-

mon. In previous studies, the pensive gesture of the Bud-

dha has been interpreted as representing the contem-

plation of the Buddha with unblinking eyes. According

27) T 1428: 781c15-786a9.

28) T 191: 951b19-26. The Mahï¸åsaka-Vinaya (T 1421: 103a8-10)

mentions the god of the mountain Ma-xiu-luo, who brought the

Harïtakï fruits to the Buddha.

29) Nidhånakathå 3.7 (ed. FAUSBØLL 1877: 80; transl. RHYS DAVIDS

1878: 110; JAYAWICKRAMA 1990: 107); Catu¹pari¹ats÷tra (ed.

WALDSCHMIDT 1952: Vorg. 2; transl. KLOPPENBORG 1973: 7-9).

30) According to the Catu¹pari¹ats÷tra, it is Indra who brought the

harïtakï fruits to the Buddha (ed. WALDSCHMIDT 1952: Vorgang

5; transl. KLOPPENBORG 1973: 11-12); T 191: 952a26-952b5.

31) See LE COQ 1924: Tafel 7.

32) An exceptional representation on a Gandharan relief, which is

published in the article of SANTORO (1986: pl. III), may be re-

lated to the episode of Type 3, where the Buddha once stands

in front of the tree goddess while he touches his stomach with

the right hand. This scene may indicate the Buddha’s flatulence,

to whom a god of the tree brought a harïtakï fruit to the Buddha

as a medicine.

The Buddha and the Tree God 25

Fig. 10 The Buddha looking at the tree goddess, Gandhara. After KURITA2003, I: fig. 219

Fig. 9 The Buddha looking at the tree goddess, Gan-dhara. Photograph courtesy of Mr. Tatsuzo Kaku

to the episode of the Puyao-Jing (T 186), however, the

Buddha may not just meditate by looking at the tree but

rather have a conversation with the tree god, about the

audience of his first sermon.

At this juncture we must inquire whether the repre-

sentation is based on this episode, or whether the repre-

sentation preceded and influenced the description in the

Puyao-Jing. OKANO’s study demonstrates that the origi-

nal Sanskrit text of the Puyao-Jing must have been extant

in Northwest India in the latter half of the 2nd century

AD.33) On the other hand, this type of Gandharan reliefs

has so far only been found in the Kapisi area.34) One of

these reliefs bears a Kharo¹¶hï inscription which, ac-

cording to the reading of H. FALK, mentions “the year

74” of the Kani¹ka Era, corresponding to either 201 or

301 AD.35) Giving multiple reasons, TANABE argues that

the date ought to be reckoned as 301 AD.36) If TANABE’s

dating is correct, the genesis of the narrative must be

much earlier than the representations.

This new interpretation of Gandharan art suggests

another possible reading of the Tocharian inscription

labelling the scene under examination in Kizil Cave 110.

According to SCHMIDT’s reading, the first sentence men-

tions that the Buddha looks at Brahmå, while the second

sentence describes Brahmå’s request of the Buddha’s

sermon (see fn. 9). However, the mural shows that the

Buddha does not look at Brahmå at all (Figs. 4, 6). He

apparently gazes at the goddess of the tree.

The reading of Tocharian inscriptions in Kizil Cave

110 is difficult, since the inscriptions are heavily dam-

aged. The fourth word of the first sentence was recon-

structed by SCHMIDT as brå(mñä)[k]t(e)¸6; however, the

present authors consider that the first part of this re-

construction “brå” is not certain, since the visible char-

acter resembles “po” instead of “brå” (Fig. 11).37) Thus,

we suggest that the first sentence may rather indicate that

the Buddha looks at the Bodhi tree (podhi-ståm).38)

33) OKANO 1990: 263-262.

34) In our personal correspondence in July 2014, Prof. Tanabe

kindly gave us the advice that some of these reliefs might be

from Hadda. We express our special gratitude to Prof. Tanabe

for this precious information. The research of HAMEED has

provided us with more material in the form of portable shrines,

that also have to be taken into consideration. However, ac-

cording to HAMEED (2014) none of them seem to be earlier

than the 5th century AD.

35) FALK 2010: 30-31.

36) The authors follow the dating of the Kani¹ka Era as starting

from 127 AD; cf. FALK 2001: 133.

37) We express our deepest gratitude to Dr. Michaël Peyrot (Ber-

lin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Turfan-

forschung), who kindly proved our reading and supported our

suggestion.

38) The word podhi-ståm appears once again in the inscription

labelling another scene in Kizil Cave 110, dealing with the en-

counter with Kålika and Svastika; cf. SCHMIDT 2010: 851.

26 R. ARLT & S. HIYAMA

Fig. 11 Detail of Fig. 4

Even with this new reading of the Tocharian in-

scription suggested, there remains an inconsistency be-

tween label and painting; if the inscription mentioned the

Buddha’s glance at the tree at first, and then Brahmå’s

request, this would not match the sequence of events as

given in the Puyao-Jing (T 186).

How can we solve this problem? The Puyao-Jing, or

to be precise, its Sanskrit original text, cannot be the

direct source for the wall paintings of Kizil Cave 110 in

any event, since the encounter with Upaga, which is illu-

strated in the same scene as the argued representation, is

not mentioned in this text. It can, however, be assumed

that the old narrative tradition of the Sanskrit original

used for the translation of the Puyao-Jing exerted influ-

ence on the Buddha’s life story as narrated in Tocharian

B in the Kucha region. The other option would be that the

iconography had been adapted from the Gandharan art,

possibly without the precise knowledge of these stories.39)

The ongoing research of HAMEED provides us with a

number of portable shrines, where this iconography has

been represented.40) Since such shrines, made in Gandha-

ra, have also been found in East Asia, there is no reason

to doubt a possible transmission of the iconography to

Kucha with the help of portable objects, such as small-

scaled shrines.

However problematic the inscription in Kizil Cave

110 may be, this new interpretation provides a contri-

bution to our understanding of Gandharan art and its

transmission to Kucha. It also gives new clues about the

Buddhist literature that was known to the people of Ku-

cha, or at least to the painters/scribes of Kizil Cave 110.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Catu¹pari¹ats÷tra, ed. Ernst WALDSCHMIDT, Das Catu¹pari-¹ats÷tra. Eine kanonische Lehrschrift über die Begründungder buddhistischen Gemeinde. Text in Sanskrit und tibetisch.Verglichen mit dem Påli nebst einer Übersetzung derchinesischen Entsprechungen im Vinaya der M÷lasarvåsti-vådins. Auf Grund von Turfan-Handschriften herausgegebenund bearbeitet. Berlin, 1952, 1956, 1960 (Abhandlungen der

Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1952.2, 1957.1,

1962.1); transl. Ria KLOPPENBORG, The S÷tra on the Foun-dation of the Buddhist Order (Catu¹pari¹ats÷tra). Leiden,

1973 (Religious Texts Translation Series, Nisaba, 1).

Lalitavistara, ed. Parasuram L. VAIDYA. Dharbanga, 1958

(Lalitavistara Buddhist Sanskrit Texts 1); trad. Phillippe

É. FOUCAUX, Le Lalitavistara. Développement des jeux.

Paris, 1884 (Annales du Musée Guimet, 6).

Mahåpadånasutta = Dïghanikåya XIV, eds. Thomas W. RHYS

DAVIDS & Joseph E. CARPENTER, Vol. II. Oxford, 1903;

transl. Thomas W. RHYS DAVIDS & Caroline A.F. RHYS

DAVIDS, Dialogues of the Buddha, Vol. II. Oxford, 1910:

1-41.

Mahåvadånas÷tra, ed. Ernst WALDSCHMIDT, Das Mahåvadåna-s÷tra. Ein kanonischer Text über die sieben Buddhas. Sans-krit, verglichen mit dem Påli nebst einer Analyse der in chi-nesischer Übersetzung überlieferten Parallelversionen. AufGrund von Turfan-Handschriften herausgegeben. Berlin,

1953, 1956 (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaf-

ten zu Berlin, 1952.8, 1954.3); Takamichi FUKITA, TheMahåvadånas÷tra. A reconstruction of Chapter IV and V.

Tokyo, 1985: 17-52 (Memoirs of the Postgraduate Institute,

Bukkyo University, 13); Takamichi FUKITA, The Mahå-vadånas÷tra. A new edition based on manuscripts dis-covered in Northern Turkestan. Göttingen, 2003; transl.

Claudia WEBER, Buddhistische Sutras. Das Leben desBuddha in Quellentexten. München, 1999.

Mahåvastu, ed. Émile SENART, Le Mahåvastu, Vols. I-III. Paris,

1882-97; transl. John J. JONES. London, 1912 (Sacred

Books of the Buddhists, 16, 18, 19).

39) The iconography and the inscription of the wall paintings of

Kizil Cave 110 display a lot of discrepancies anyway. For ex-

amples of problematic inscriptions, see ARLT/HIYAMA 2014.

Concerning problematic iconographies in Kizil Cave 110 the

present authors have been able to demonstrate that, although

most of the scenes in this cave representing the Buddha’s life

are in the order that can be found in the MSV-Sa¼ghabheda-vastu, the iconography of the individual depicted events often

refers to versions of the Buddha’s life that cannot be found in

the literature of the M÷lasarvåstivådins or even contradicts it

(e.g. the Mahåvastu or the Lalitavistara). As examples the re-

presentations of the Buddha’s conception, his birth, the four

encounters and his first meditation can be referred to (that are

argued in the authors’ joint paper “Scenes from the Life of the

Buddha before His Enlightenment in the Murals of the Kucha

Region”, presented at the XVIIth Congress of the International

Association of Buddhist Studies, Vienna, 19th of August 2014).

40) Cf. HAMEED 2014.

The Buddha and the Tree God 27

Nidånakathå, ed. Michael V. FAUSBØLL, Jåtaka, Vol. I. Lon-

don, 1877: 1-94; transl. Thomas W. RHYS DAVIDS & Caro-

line A. RHYS DAVIDS. Buddhist Birth-Stories; Jataka Tales.The Commentarial Introduction Entitled Nidånakathå; theStory of the Lineage. Translated from V. Fausböll’s Ed. ofthe Pali Text by T.W. Rhys Davids. New and Rev. Ed. byMrs. Rhys Davids. London, 1878.; N.A. JAYAWICKRAMA,

The Story of Gotama Buddha. The Nidånakathå of theJåtaka¶¶akathå. Oxford, 1990.

Sa¼ghabhedavastu, ed. Raniero GNOLI, The Gilgit Manuscriptof the ̃ ayanåsanavastu and the Adhikara½avastu. Being the17th and last Sections of the Vinaya of the M÷lasarvåsti-vådavin. Vols. 1-2. Rome, 1977, 1978; eds. Seishi KARA-

SHIMA & Klaus WILLE, 2000, Sanghabhedavastu (online-

resource: http://gretil.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil/1_sanskr/

4_rellit/buddh/vinv171u.htm; last accessed 08.2014).

T = Taishð Shinsh÷ Daizðkyð, eds. Junjirð TAKAKUSU, Kaiky÷

WATANABE & Gemmyð ONO. Tokyo, 1924ff.

*

ARLT, Robert & Satomi HIYAMA (2014) The Wall Paintings of

the Stairs Cave (110). New Perspectives. Sanskrit on theSilk Route. New Delhi (in print).

BHATTACHARYA, Gouriswar (2010) How to Justify the Spelling

of the Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Term Bodhisatva? FromTurfan to Ajanta. Festschrift for Dieter Schlingloff on theOccasion of his Eightieth Birthday, eds. Eli FRANCO &

Monika ZIN. Bhairahawa, Rupandehi: 35-50.

BOPEARACHCHI, Osmund (2008) Les premiers souverains kou-

chans: Chronologie et iconographie monétaire. Journal desSavants (Paris), 01-06.2008: 3-56.

BULIR, Jana & Satomi HIYAMA (2012) Zum Leben erwacht: Die

Wandmalereien der Malerhöhle. Auf Grünwedels Spuren.Restaurierung und Forschung an zentralasiatischen Wand-malereien, hg. Toralf GABSCH. Leipzig: 142-151, 196.

DREYER, Caren, Lore SANDER & Friederike WEIS (2002) Staat-liche Museen zu Berlin, Dokumentation der Verluste, BandIII: SMB Museum für Indische Kunst. Berlin.

FALK, Harry (2001) The yuga of Sphujiddhvaja and the era of

the Ku¹â½as. Silk Road Art and Archeology (Kamakura) 7:

121-136.

— (2010) Signature Phrases, Azes dates, Nak¹atras and Some

New Reliquary from Gandhara. Annual Report of the Inter-national Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology atSoka University for the Academic Year 2009 (Tokyo) XIII:

13-33.

GRÜNWEDEL, Albert (1912) Altbuddhistische Kultstätten in Chi-nesisch-Turkistan. Berlin.

HAMEED, Muhammad (2014) Study of an Unidentified Scene

from Buddhist Portable Shrines. Puråtattva (New Delhi)

44 (forthcoming).

HIYAMA, Satomi (2013) Study on the First-style Murals of

Kucha: Analysis of Some Motifs Related to the Hephtha-

lite’s Period. Buddhism and Art in Gandhara and Kucha.Buddhist Culture along the Silk Road. Gandhara, Kuchaand Turfan. Section I (Proceedings of the InternationalSymposium held at 3rd Nov. 2012, Ryukoku University).Kyoto: 125-165.

— (2014) The Buddha’s Sermon Scenes in Kizil Cave 207 (“the

Painters’ Cave”). Proceedings of the International Work-shop “Reading outside the Lines” (held in Munich during13-15 Sept. 2013). München: Ludwig-Maximilians Univer-

sität (forthcoming).

Kizil Grottoes (1984) Chugoku Sekkutsu Kizil Sekkutsu, Vol. 2,

eds. Shinkyo Uighur Jichiku Bunbutsu Înkai / Haikiken

Kizil Senbutsudo Bunbutsu Hokanjo. Tokyo.

KURITA, Isao (2003) Gandhara Bijutsu [Gandhåran Art]. 2

Vols. Tokyo.

LE COQ, Albert von (1924) Die buddhistische Spätantike inMittelasien = Ergebnisse der Kgl.-Preussischen Turfan-Expeditionen, III, Die Wandmalereien. Berlin.

LE COQ, Albert von & Ernst WALDSCHMIDT (1933) Die buddhi-stische Spätantike in Mittelasien = Ergebnisse der Kgl.-Preussischen Turfan-Expeditionen, VII, Neue Bildwerke III.Berlin.

MATSUDA, Y÷ko (1988) Chinese Versions of the Buddha’s

Biography. Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (Tokyo)

37/1: 489-480.

OKANO, Kiyoshi (1990) Fuyokyo no Kenkyu (ge) [Study on the

Puyao-Jing (III)]. Bunka (Sendai) 53/3-4: 268-249.

PINAULT, Georges-Jean (2000) Narration dramatisée et narration

en peinture dans la région de Kucha. La Sérinde, terred’échanges. Art, religion, commerce du Ier au Xe siècle.Actes du colloque international (Galeries nationales duGrand Palais, 13-15 février 1996), publiées sous la direc-

tion de Jean-Pierre DRÈGE. Paris: 149-168 (XIVes rencontres

de l’Ecole du Louvre).

QUAGLIOTTI, Anna Maria (1991/92) The Buddha, the Solar

Disk and the Cosmic Tree. A Relief in the Victoria and

Albert Museum. Silk Road Art and Archaeology (Kama-

kura) 2: 73-105.

SANTORO, Arcangela (1986) Note di iconografia gandharica.

Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientali (Napoli) 46/1:

35-62.

SCHMIDT, Klaus T. (1998) Interdisciplinary Research on Central

Asia: The Decipherment of the West Tocharian Captions of

a Cycle of Mural Paintings of the Life of the Buddha in

Cave 110 in Qizil. Die Sprache. Zeitschrift für Sprachwis-senschaft (Wien) 40: 72-81.

— (2010) Die Entzifferung der westtocharischen Überschriften

zu einem Bilderzyklus des Buddhalebens in der „Treppen-

28 R. ARLT & S. HIYAMA

höhle“ (Höhle 110) in Quizil. From Turfan to Ajanta. Fest-schrift for Dieter Schlingloff on the Occasion of his Eight-ieth Birthday, eds. Eli FRANCO & Monika ZIN. Bhairahawa,

Rupandehi: 835-866.

TANABE, Katsumi (2009/10) Iconographical Studies on Gan-

dhåran Art 4: The Buddha seated at ease after the Enlighten-

ment and the Date of a few newly-unearthed Kapisian Bud-

dhist reliefs. Bulletin of the Ancient Orient Museum (Tokyo)

XXIX-XXX: 83-136 (in Japanese with English summary).

— (2012) Iconographical Study on a Limestone Buddhist Relief

unearthed in Northern Afghanistan. The Two Buddhas jus-

taposed beside the Bodhi-Tree. Parthica: Incontri de Cul-ture nel Mondo Antico (Rome) 14: 189-201.

TONGERLOO, Aloïs van, Michael KNÜPPEL & Toralf GABSCH

(2012) Theodor Bartus – Forschungsreisender, Museums-

techniker und Restaurator. Auf Grünwedels Spuren. Restau-rierung und Forschung an zentralasiatischen Wandmale-reien, hg. Toralf GABSCH. Leipzig: 30-49, 191-194.

VIGNATO, Giuseppe (2006) Wooden Architecture of the Kizil

Caves. Journal of Inner Asian Art and Archaeology (Turn-

hout) 1: 11-27.

WALDSCHMIDT, Ernst (1933) Über den Stil der Wandgemälde.

Die buddhistische Spätantike in Mittelasien VII, NeueBildwerke 3. Berlin: 24-31.

Deutsche Zusammenfassung

In diesem Aufsatz wird das Fragment einer Wandmalerei aus der Treppenhöhle (Höhle 110) in Kizil

vorgestellt, das sich heute in der Sammlung der St. Petersburger Eremitage befindet (Fig. 1). Dieses

Fragment gelangte1914 mit der vierten Turfanexpedition in das Berliner Museum für Völkerkunde. Das

Fragment wurde bereits vor dem Zweiten Weltkrieg mit fehlerhaften Angaben zur Provenienz archi-

viert. Eine fotografische Dokumentation erfolgte während der dritten Turfanexpedition 1906 in situ(Fig. 4). Später findet sich das Fragment glücklicherweise auf einer Aufnahme, die im Inneren des

Museums für Völkerkunde gemacht wurde, wieder (Fig. 2); auf dieser Aufnahme ist die Malerei bereits

auf ihr heutiges Format zugeschnitten. Nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg wurde die Malerei zusammen mit

anderen Objekten nach St. Petersburg gebracht.

Mit freundlicher Genehmigung der St. Petersburger Eremitage ist es den Autoren erstmals möglich,

dieses wichtige Malereifragment in seinem heutigen Zustand zu publizieren und seine Geschichte etwas

zu erhellen. An dieser Stelle möchten die Autoren all jenen herzlich danken, die zum Erwirken der

Genehmigung ihren Teil beigetragen haben.

In der Malerei ist der Buddha nach seiner Erleuchtung dargestellt, zusammen mit einer Baumgott-

heit, die ihm mit gefalteten Händen Verehrung erweist. Die Malerei ist mit einer Bråhmï-Inschrift in

Tocharisch B versehen, die Aufschluss über das Dargestellte geben soll (siehe Fn. 9). Die Autoren

möchten die bisherige Lesung dieser Inschrift dahin gehend korrigieren, dass der Buddha nicht auf

Brahmå blickt, sondern, wie im Bild zu sehen, auf eine Baumgottheit, die im Übrigen aus dem Bodhi-

baum hervorkommt. Eine derartige Ikonografie konnte bisher in der Kunst Gandharas nachgewiesen

werden (vgl. Fig. 9-10) und wurde folgendermaßen gedeutet: Nach seiner Erleuchtung ruht der Buddha

für einige Tage/Wochen und schaut dabei auf den Bodhibaum, ohne mit den Augen zu blinzeln

(TANABE 2012; BOPEARACHCHI 2008). Dieser Deutung fehlt jedoch die Erklärung der Baumgottheit,

die in den bisher zitierten Quellentexten nicht vorkommt. Die Autoren möchten hingegen auf andere

Erzähltraditionen hinweisen, in denen der Buddha kurz nach seiner Erleuchtung einer Gottheit aus dem

Bodhibaum begegnet, die den Ort für die erste Predigt mit ihm diskutieren möchte; eine derartige Ge-

schichte findet sich in der früheren chinesischen Übersetzung des Lalitavistara (T 186).