New Perspectives on the Origin and Spread of Bhadrāsana Buddhas throughout Southeast Asia (7th-8th...

127

Origin and Spread Of BhadrāSana BuddhaS thrOughOut SOutheaSt aSia

Chapter 11

New Perspectives on the Origin and Spread of Bhadrāsana Buddhas throughout Southeast Asia (7th–8th Centuries CE)

Nicolas Revire

Abstract

Images of seated Buddhas with legs pendant (Skt. bhadrāsana)1 were frequently found all over Buddhist asia during the 1st millennium Ce. Bhadrāsana Buddha images chiefly display two types of hand gestures, the teaching gesture with one hand (vitarkamudrā) or some variant gestures of “turning the Wheel of the Law” with both hands (dharmacakramudrā or dharmacakrapra-vartanamudrā). the spread of such Buddha images with one mudrā or another is uneven in Buddhist asia. While the combination of this posture with the vitarkamudrā is found regularly in mainland and maritime Southeast Asia as well as in Central and east asia, it is rather exceptional in the indian subcontinent [fig. 11.1].2 Conversely, the combination with the dharmacakramudrā occurs, mostly, in the north of South asia as well as in maritime Southeast Asia. It is not found in Mainland Southeast Asia or in East Asia.

Introduction

this paper mainly focuses on Bhadrāsana Buddha images with the vitarkamudrā and attempts to connect its origin to a certain important Buddha icon from india.3 While investigating the different areas outside South asia in which this iconography is found, the author explores the possibility of Central and east Asian models having played an important part in transmitting it to Southeast Asia during the influential tang period (618–907). By the 7th and 8th centuries, it seems that local Southeast asian styles had not asserted themselves much indeed, at least not enough to resist incoming models. therefore, one might search in tang China and along the Silk road for a possible Bhadrāsana Buddha “prototype” in vitarkamudrā or, more accurately, a “missing link” to explain subsequent developments in Southeast Asian imagery.

A Specific and Widespread Iconography in Southeast Asia

possibly one of the earliest Southeast asian images of its kind, generally dated to the 6th–7th century, is the pendant-legged Buddha said to be from the village of Sòn tho, trà Vinh province, in southern Vietnam (Malleret 1963, vol. 4: 178–9, pl. 34)4 [fig. 11.2]. this small stone Buddha image shows some affinities in both style and iconography to those found in central thailand (dupont 1959: 279; revire 2008: 100, fn. 257). although the right hand is now broken, it must have been raised to display either the single “teaching” gesture (vitarkamudrā) or the “assurance” hand gesture (abhayamudrā). Contrarily, the left hand, in a lower position, rests on the thigh and seems to hold the final part of the robe. Pierre Dupont has remarked that this unusual mudrā “does not conform to the indian tradition” (1959: 279).

from where could this mudrā and āsana have drawn its inspiration? nancy tingley evokes the fact that the Chinese monk Xuan-zang, after his return to Chang’an (Xi’an) in 645 from his travels to india, produced a large number of terracotta tablets of different motifs, “one of which was a Buddha with legs pendant”. She then goes on to suggest that this particular posture (bhadrāsana) may have been inspired

127

Connecting Empires 11.indd 127 8/11/2012 3:29:32 AM

128

niCOlaS reVire

by a “revered image” that Xuanzang had seen in india, or may indicate “a particular time in the life of the Buddha” (2009a: 148). this tentative connection with China and Xuanzang is intriguing and i will return to it later. unfortunately, in the Mekong delta, there are no other complete statues sculpted in the round with which to compare the Sòn tho Buddha image.5

Yet, Buddhas with legs pendant are often found in several ancient sites from central thailand and in different materials such as stone, bronze, terracotta, stucco and in bas-relief (revire 2008: 61–90; Baptiste and Zéphir 2009: 115, 212, 228, 230). probably the most outstanding examples of these stones are the four or five colossal statues reported to come from Wat phra Men in nakhon pathom (revire 2008: 95–102; 2010, figs. 5–6, 8–11; Baptiste and Zéphir 2009: 214, 221, figs. 1 and 5). all of these Buddha images show the teaching gesture with the right hand raised, except for one now located at Wat Na Phra Men in Ayutthaya, where the two hands rests on the knees.6 in any case, both hand gestures are rather unusual or even totally absent in Indian art. I will show below that this gesture is, however, more common in east asia, especially during the early tang period in China, or during the hakuho or nara periods (645–794) in Japan.7

With regard to the bas-reliefs, the majority are narratives that can be associated with the teachings of the Buddha to gods, the world of men, and even to his mother. the Wat Suthat stone slab is interesting in this regard. the slab is divided into two registers: the lower register depicts the great Miracle at Śrāvastī and the upper one shows the Buddha seated on indra’s throne preaching to his mother and deities after his ascent to trāyastriṃśa heaven8 [fig. 11.3]. With this marked division set in the stone, the observers are left to guess what happens between the two episodes. I will return to this later but it is important to notice now that the two depictions of the preaching Buddha in the narrative are both seated in the same

Fig. 11.1: Seated Buddha (h. 59cm), sandstone, ca. 6th–7th century (?), exact provenance unknown, north india, asian art Museum, Berlin, inv. no. MiK i 22 (Copyright: national Museums Berlin, Prussian Cultural Foundation, Asian Art Museum, art Collection South-, Southeast- and Central asian art, Jürgen liepe).

Fig. 11.2: Seated Buddha (h. 55cm), sandstone, ca. late 7th century, from Sòn tho, southern Vietnam, Museum of history, ho Chi Minh City, inv. no. BtlS. 5517 (Copyright: photographic archives of Vietnam, École française d’Extrême-Orient, Paris).


129


posture with legs pendant (bhadrāsana) and with the right hand performing the same teaching gesture (vitarkamudrā).

In 1st-millennium Burma, only a handful of surviving metal images, somewhat reminiscent of dvāravatī bronzes, depict this iconography of the Bhadrāsana Buddha with the right hand raised (luce 1985, ii: fig. 76b; Moore 2007: 20–1, 164, 222). perhaps the most interesting image to compare with dvāravatī imagery, however, has not been published. this is a small bronze sculpture said to have been found in Sameikkon, north of Myingyan, by a farmer in the early 1990s and now located in a private collection in europe. this bronze shows striking similarities with another image found earlier in Nakhon Pathom and now on display in the Bangkok national Museum (dupont 1959: fig. 502). Although the patina of both images is damaged, one can imagine their original appearances by com-paring them to a third fine sculpture in bronze also on display in Bangkok [fig. 11.4]. dupont hesitated to assign a Mon origin to the latter example because of the unusual head features of the Buddha and the makara throne with two upright lions, etc. (1959: 278). in accordance with dupont, it seems that most of this imagery of Bhadrāsana Buddhas, found in various places in ancient Burma and thailand, is of neither Mon nor pyu origin but clearly shows some Southeast Asian “regional” features.9 As we will see below, the same can be said about a certain type of molded clay tablets found in both regions and beyond.

in ancient indonesia, the archaeological material is more abundant and diverse in terms of the style and iconography of Bhadrāsana Buddhas during the 1st millennium. Roughly speaking, there are two major groups. the first group — with which this paper is mostly concerned — relates to those Buddhas that make the teaching gesture with the right hand (vitarkamudrā). there are some well-known examples in bronze (e.g., lunsingh Scheurleer and Klokke 1988: 64, fig. 12, 109, fig. 57; fontein et al. 1990: 183–5; nies 2008: 16–7), but at least one stone image from central Java seems to be of this type as well (inv. no. Mni 228a; revire 2011a: fig. 3). the second group consists of Buddhas displaying variant gestures of “turning the Wheel of the law” with both hands (dharmacakramudrā), such as the famous one enshrined at Caṇḍi Mendut or the small bronze sculpture on display in the asian art Museum, Berlin (inv. no. MiK ii 217) [fig. 11.5]. in my opinion, the latter images draw their artistic inspiration almost

Fig. 11.3: The Great Miracle at Śrāvastī (lower register) and the Buddha preaching in Trāyastriṃśa heaven (upper register), stone slab (h. ca. 200cm, w. ca. 90cm), bas-relief, ca. 7th–8th century, from Nakhon Pathom, central Thailand, Wat Suthat, Bangkok (Photo: N. Revire).

Fig. 11.4: Seated Buddha (h. ca. 15cm), bronze, ca. 7th–8th century, from Muang In, Singburi province, central Thailand, Bangkok National Museum, inv. no. DV 35 (Photo: N. Revire).


130

niCOlaS reVire

directly from the Vākāṭaka models in ajaṇṭā, ellorā, Kaṇherī, and other western deccan caves in Mahārāṣṭra. Consequently, the often proclaimed assertion of a direct connection between Javanese art and that of nālandā or other pāla-period sites in Bihār, particularly in the casting of bronzes (e.g., Bernet Kempers 1933: 28), is still uncertain in the cases of Bha-drāsana Buddhas (huntington 1994: 60–2).

in terms of chronology, i am inclined, for various reasons, to date the images belonging to the first group earlier than those of the second group. My main argument is based on the divergent hand gestures displayed by the Bhadrāsana Buddhas as well as on the occurrence of certain throne motifs. these latter can help narrow down a possible date. hiram Woodward has convincingly suggested that similar works, such as the bronze Buddha image found in Palembang and now in Amsterdam (inv. no. tM 2960–157),10 dates toward the end of the 7th century or the first half of the 8th. Woodward also raises intriguing questions about the impacts of Chinese Buddhist pilgrims such as Yijing and others travelling the south seas in the 7th century, on the formative period of Buddhist iconography in Southeast asia (1988: 82, fig. 12). as discussed later in this paper, my own comparative analysis with Chinese material tends to support this view and dating.11

Conversely the images of Bhadrāsana Buddhas belonging to the second group could be approximately dated to the end of the 8th and beginning of the 9th century. apparently, by the 10th century, this peculiar iconography was already out of fashion in ancient indonesia and the rest of Southeast asia.12 It will reemerge in a different manner in the 12th–13th centuries, first in Burma (e.g., luce 1969, iii: pl. 74c, 193b, 312b; Bautze-picron 2003: 60–3, figs. 64–5) and later in thai art, this time celebrating the offerings made by a monkey and an elephant to the Buddha in the pārileyyaka forest (Khaisri Sri-aroon 1996: 240–1, fig. 51).

perhaps reflecting the complexity of interchanges in Southeast asia during the 7th–8th centuries, a unique type of molded clay tablets displaying a Bhadrāsana Buddha with the right hand raised is found in equal numbers in central and peninsular thailand (pattaratorn Chirapravati 1997: 22–3, fig. 7), Burma (Moore 2007: 198), western Java (Manguin and agustijanto indrajaya 2006: 249–50, fig. 23.6), and Campā (Baptiste and Zéphir 2005: 69, fig. 4). these tablets seem to belong to a Southeast asian “regional type” (Skilling 2009: 111–2). hence, it is not possible to affirm that they relate to a more specific “Mon”, “pyu”, “Malay”, “Javanese”, or “Cham” type. Yet again it is significant to observe that some small terracotta plaques from tang China and Japan, circa the late 7th century, show a similar iconography for the central enthroned Buddha (Woodward 1988: fig. 9).13 the wide distribution of these molded tablets may provide clear evidence of an artistic continuum and various contacts between neighboring regions of Southeast Asia by way of land or sea routes.

The Tang Ascendancy and Interactions with Southeast Asia

the archaeological evidence presented above from Southeast asia and its apparent connection with some eastern asian material raise fascinating questions as to how this iconographic idiom — Bhadrāsana

Fig. 11.5: Seated Buddha (h. 11.5cm), bronze, ca. 8th–9th century, exact provenance unknown, from central Java, Asian Art Museum, Berlin, inv. no. MIK II 217 (Photo: N. Revire).


131


Buddhas with right hand in the teaching gesture — may have spread to Southeast asia and why it was so popular, particularly in dvāravatī and Java around the 7th and 8th centuries. Bearing in mind the international context of Buddhism in asia and the impact and prestige of the tang dynasty in China during this period, i am inclined to think that it was part of a “cosmopolitan Buddhist art style” at the time, in the wake of the traffic and trade on the silk roads — both mainland and maritime.

as dorothy Wong has written:

throughout the seventh century, tang China rapidly developed into a powerful international empire, reaching its zenith by the first half of the eighth century. the defeat of the Western turks during emperor taizong’s 太宗 reign (626–49) secured Chinese dominance over the land routes to the West, which promoted commercial and cultural exchanges along the Silk road. Most notable was the sixteen-year journey to india undertaken by Xuanzang 玄奘 (602–64), the celebrated Chinese pilgrim and translator whose relatively smooth journey back to China in 645 signaled a new phase of internationalism in tang history. […] the images, copies and sketches of images and monuments brought back by Xuanzang and Wang Xuance,14 among others, provided new visual sources and stimuli, creating what some scholars call an “indian boom” in the tang capitals. the impact of these new influences is apparent in the international and indianizing character of the plastic arts in Chang’an and luoyang. […] in addition, the presence of foreign artists in the capitals contributed to this international trend. artists of indian or Central asian descent had long been present in China, and they continued to enliven the tang court (2008: 132–3).

is it conceivable that a few “Kunlun”15 were also residents in the tang capital? there are no official records of “artists” from Southeast asia who made the journey to China. in the early years of the tang dynasty, however, as many as 20 Southeast asian polities sent tribute missions to China. ralph Smith suggests that “the interests and renown of tang China reached far into the hinterland of mainland South east asia” (1979: 445). among the various “countries” mentioned by the tang annals in the first half of the 7th century, dvāravatī sent three “embassies” in 638, 640 and 649 before falling into historical oblivion (luce 1924: 179–80; tatsuro Yamamoto 1979: 1147). these official envoys were most likely followed by traveling merchants or traders of various sorts and perhaps craftsmen and monks. Basing their assumptions on the Nihongi (Japanese Chronicles), compiled in the early 8th century, some Japanese scholars even speculate that a few “dvāravatī people” or “Kunlun” went so far as to visit ancient Japan in the mid-7th century.16 from approximately 650 to 750, tributes were continuously sent to China from Southeast asia (e.g., Zhenla, Wendan and Śrīvijaya) and from South asia (Smith 1979: 444–5): it was the heyday of the tang dynasty.

this period also shows a flourishing and renewed interest of Chinese monks in indian Buddhism. Consequently, the importance of Southeast asia as a destination, or as a stopover along the maritime trade route was significantly enhanced. after the celebrated return of Xuanzang to China in 645, other monks and pilgrims imitated him and undertook the journey to india. the “land Silk road” taken by Xuanzang and often favored by his predecessors centuries before him such as faxian (Beal 1981: xxiii–lxxxiii; lévy 1995: 83–119)17 or Song Yun (Beal 1981: lxxxiv–cviii; lévy 1995: 121–36), however, was now closed because the rise in power of tibet and the emerging threat of the arabs in Bactrian caused political turmoil in Central asia (grousset 1991: 200–1; tansen Sen 2003: 25–6). the so-called “maritime Silk road”, therefore, became important for the circulation of religious ideas, objects and men between india and China as of the second half of the 7th century.18

the most famous Chinese monk who embarked upon a journey to india using the southern sea route was Yijing (635–713). he boarded a merchant ship departing from guangzhou in 671 and subsequently resided several years in insular Southeast asia, possibly in palembang, South Sumatra (Junjirō takakusu 1998: xxvii–xxxvi). according to Yijing’s Biography of the Eminent Monks who sought the Law in the Western Regions during the Great Tang Dynasty, 37 other pilgrim-monks, who preceded or accompanied him, traveled by sea on merchant ships and passed through the region or even spent some time there between monsoons.19 additional records indicate that a few Chinese monks ventured “off the beaten track” and went into the Southeast asian hinterland. Yijing refers to the monk da Cheng deng (“Mahāyāna pradīpa”) who, traveled to dvāravatī by sea with his parents in his childhood, and later went to india, never to be seen again (Chavannes 1894: 68–73). the name of another isolated Chinese monk, wandering even further north in the mainland, is found on the reverse of two terracotta tablets said to be from Si thep


132

niCOlaS reVire

(prapod assavavirulhakarn 2010: 48, fn. 29).20 the four-character Chinese inscription, biqiu wen xiang 比丘文相, can be rendered as “monk [whose name is] Wenxiang” (Brown 1996: 36–7, figs. 52a–b; revire 2009: 119, fn. 16). Woodward dates these tablets on stylistic grounds to the 8th century; the inscriptions are contemporaneous (2010a: 156–7, fig. 76).

going in the opposite direction, a number of indian monks are also known to have traveled to China by sea. Śubhakarasiṃha (637–735), Vajrabodhi (671–741) and amoghavajra (705–74) must be counted among the most influential “western” monks for the spread of esoteric texts in tang China (Sundberg 2004: 103–10); they all traveled the southern sea to guangzhou. preceding them, the monk puṇyodaya (the exact dates are uncertain) traveled extensively in Zhenla and China in the second half of the 7th century (li-Kouang lin 1935). there is also the famous case of the South indian priest Bodhisena, who officiated at the “opening the eyes” ceremony of the great tōdai-ji Buddha at nara in 752, having arrived in Japan in 736 in the company of a Cham monk whom he met during his sea travel (holcombe 1999: 288).21

given the possibility of extensive interaction of Buddhist monks between india and east asia by sea, with the concurrent extensive break-journeys in Southeast asia in the 7th–8th centuries, it would seem reasonable to assume that these pilgrims would carry along with them some miniature icons or ritual utensils,22 cloth paintings, sketchbooks, printed texts, etc.23 unfortunately, these have not yet been discovered in Southeast asia; they could hardly have resisted the ravages of time. Molded clay tablets, small bronzes, wooden artifacts, embroideries or paintings on silk,24 or palm leaves, are highly transportable and have been regarded as fine media for spreading new iconographic idioms.25 Yet with no surviving Southeast Asian paintings or embroideries from the first millennium, the mode of this iconographic transfer can only be the subject of hypotheses.

nevertheless, at least one attempt has been made to interpret some dvāravatī reliefs in the light of the archaeological evidence found in east asia. the well-known dharmacakra carved socle from nakhon pathom, for instance, shows in bas-relief a Buddha seated in bhadrāsana with his right hand raised in vitarkamudrā and his left hand in his lap, preaching to an assembly of disciples in the foreground [fig. 11.6]. Woodward wonders whether this relief could have been “inspired by a Chinese painting or that a Chinese pilgrim passed through Southeast asia with an irrecoverable indian model.” he thus sees “some Chinese role in its genesis in the years around 700” as he attempts to associate this particular relief with various other reliefs from the Baoqingsi temple in Chang’an [fig. 11.7], with Chinese and

Fig. 11.6: the first Sermon, bas-relief in stone (h. 60cm, w. 110cm), ca. 7th–8th century, from nakhon pathom, central thailand, phra pathom Chedi national Museum, inv. no. 19–635 (photo: n. revire).


133


Japanese plaques, or with the well-known Japanese national treasure embroidered textile depicting a similar Bhadrāsana Buddha (2003: 73–4).26 In this silk embroidery, the Buddha is similarly shown preaching with his right hand and seated on a throne apparently supported by two lions. On each side, two larger haloed deities seem to be holding slightly different flowers. they may well form a triad, with an additional six smaller haloed deities on each side. above them, celestial beings appear flying on swirling billows, which may echo the pattern of clouds seen over the disciples on the nakhon pathom relief.27 although the traditional interpretation of the embroidered scene is given as “Buddha Śākyamuni preaching”, other interpretations are plausible.28 Contrastingly, the Nakhon Pathom relief is widely accepted as a representation of the first Sermon of the Buddha (Brown 1996: 31–2; Woodward 2003: 71–2; Baptiste and Zéphir 2009: 139, 219, fig. 3).

While the iconographic resemblance of these depictions from nakhon pathom and nara is note-worthy, some doubts can naturally be cast upon the facile scenario of Buddha images directly transiting from tang China or nara Japan to dvāravatī or neighboring areas.29 it may be more accurate to imagine that common or similar Buddhist texts, legends, or treatises simultaneously inspired a related imagery widespread in these regions. a good claimant among the various Buddhist legends, and widely popular in Central and east asia during the first millennium, is the story of the King udayana Buddha image.

An Ideal Model? The “King Udayana” Image

an unusual group of Buddha images distributed in several small caves and niches around longmen, China, shows striking similarities with Southeast asian material. inscriptions in Chinese term these statues the “King udayana” (You-tian-Wang Xian) image.30 in the latest account, amy Mcnair reports

Fig. 11.7: preaching Buddha, bas-relief in limestone (h. ca. 120cm, w. ca. 80cm), tang dynasty, ca. 703–704, from Baoqingsi temple, Xi’an, Shaanxi province, China, national Museum of tokyo, inv. no. tC 770 (photo: n. revire).


134

niCOlaS reVire

that there are about 100 such “udayana” images at longmen, each about 1m high, all firmly dated in the inscriptions between 655–80 (2007: 99–102).31 far from being convincingly Chinese, the longmen figures show strong indian feeling; thus it seems plausible to find the prototype in some region(s) of india. the Buddha images of this Longmen group are seated in bhadrāsana, with the right hand raised, while the left hand rests on the thigh [figs.11. 8 and 11.9]. each image is depicted clothed in a clinging robe showing no drapery folds and leaving the right shoulder bare — reminiscent of the Sārnāth type of the gupta period, except for the hand gestures.32 the head style, however, with the long, full face and the very low uṣṇīṣa, is more distinctly related to a South indian type. presumably, this peculiar iconography would ultimately mirror some indian tradition from the 6th–7th centuries as distantly reflected, for instance, in the extant Berlin image (inv. no. MiK i 22) [fig. 11.1]. however, we do not, as yet, seem to have determined the most plausible regional source in india for the style of the longmen group. But because these figures are identical it also suggests that they were copies of a specific statue.

these images are also fascinating because they are termed “King udayana” and may thus refer to the legend of the “first” sandalwood image of the living Buddha, executed by the order of a pious king,33 a copy of which was said to be brought later to China. But what exactly did the original “udayana” image look like? the locus classicus is Xuanzang’s 7th-century Da-Tang Xiyu-Ji (Record of the Western Regions during the Great Tang Dynasty). there, the great monk mentions a statue of Śākyamuni, said to be commissioned by King udayana, which he discovered at Kauśāmbī, north india. he describes the miraculous circumstances34 of its manufacturing as follow:

When the tathâgata first arrived at complete enlightenment, he ascended up to heaven to preach the law for the benefit of his mother, and for three months remained absent. this king (i.e., udâyana), thinking of him with affection, desired to have an image of his person; therefore he asked Mudgalyâyanaputra, by his spiritual power, to transport an artist to the heavenly mansions to observe the excellent marks of the Buddha’s body, and carve a sandal-wood statue. When the tathâgata returned from the heavenly palace, the carved figure of sandal-wood arose and saluted the lord of the World. the lord then graciously addressed it and said, “the work expected of you is to toil in the conversion of heretics and to lead in the way of religion future ages (Beal 1981, i: 235–6, my emphasis).

Xuanzang reported that the sandalwood image “arose” which clearly indicates that the image was originally seated, not standing. the monk faxian, who previously traveled to india, but not to Kauśāmbī, also recounts the story in a similar way but with King prasenajit of Śrāvastī instead of udayana. the narrative thus takes place in the Jetavana monastery. When the Buddha returned from trāyastriṃśa heaven after three months, he addressed these words to the sandalwood portrait: “Return, I pray you, to your seat. after my nirvâṇa you will be the model from which my followers shall carve their images.” On hearing this, the image returned to its seat (Beal 1981: xliv, my emphasis).35

persistent ancient tradition relates that the udayana Buddha image eventually reached China. Xuanzang himself reports that he brought seven images back with him, all copies of famous icons in india, upon his return to Chang’an in 645. the third of these images was said to be a copy of the sandalwood image and executed at the order of King udayana (Wong 2008: 132, fn. 3). the cult of the udayana statue must have been popular in the luoyang region by then and patrons at longmen were certainly also familiar with the legend. On these grounds, several Chinese and Japanese scholars have entertained the possibility that the longmen images could simply be copies of this first sandalwood statue of the Buddha brought back by Xuanzang (romi hida 1986; Yasuo inamoto 1997; tamami hamada 2006).36 A valid argument is the short gap in time between the return of the great monk (645) and the making of the first statues of “King udayana Buddha” in the longmen caves (655). drawing from various inscribed dedications at longmen, Mcnair concluded that “a small group of related people donated most of these King udayana Buddha figures” and that these “people may have been especially interested in this figure because they had direct contact with its model.” She suggests that these people might even be Xuanzang’s friends, relatives, or monastic associates from Jingtu Monastery, in luoyang, where the great monk had been previously ordained (2007: 102–3).

Strangely enough, another introduced “udayana type”, exemplified by the famous wooden standing statue from Seiryō-ji in Kyoto, Japan, is completely different in iconography (henderson and hurvitz 1956: pl. i).37 In the Longmen images, however, the transmission of an important tradition embodied


135


Figs. 11.8 and 11.9: the “King udayana” Buddha images, haut-reliefs in stone (h. ca. 100cm), tang dynasty, ca. 655–680, longmen, henan province, China (photo: n. revire).


136

niCOlaS reVire

in a famous Buddhist image is clearly determined. Conjecturing an origin in a northern South asian model for the udayana Buddha images at longmen is certainly acceptable. We should also balance this, however, with the possible role of Central asian or gandhāran models.38 Some mural paintings from the Kizil caves, Xinjiang province in western China, seem to share the pattern (le Coq and Waldschmidt 1928, ii: pl. 14; inv. no. MiK iii 8865).39 At least one example of a Bhadrāsana Buddha, in wood and said to be from Kizil cave 76 (inv. no. MiK iii 8135), also remains in the storage of the Asian Art Museum, Berlin [fig. 11.10].40 In this wooden figure, the Buddha’s proper right hand, now ruined, must have been raised in abhaya- or vitarkamudrā; the right shoulder is also bare. While many other wooden images of this kind may have once existed, these are likely to be provincial expressions of this specific iconography.41 this interesting question must, however, be pursued in further research.42

I shall now ask whether these images from Longmen may have served as a model for its transmission in Southeast asia. there is no doubt that the udayana images at Longmen are related to a “foreign type”.43 Marylin rhie (1988: 42) suggested they imitate Southeast asian sculpture more than indian figures when she wrote, “though the source of the style of these Buddhas may ultimately be the Sarnath school, the particular details seem to be closer to the special interpretation of that school in the sculptures of Southeast asia dating from ca. 6th–7th century.” undeniably, the stone image from Sòn tho, southern Vietnam [fig. 11.2], and the other little bronze from central thailand [fig. 11.4] and related images,44 share some remarkably close affinities. this seems the case especially when considering the hand gestures or the pleats of the monastic garb. rhie further contends that the use of the single lotus pedestal for the feet of the images is another common feature (1988: 43). On this stylistic and iconographic basis, i would suggest that the Bhadrāsana Buddha image from Sòn tho ought to be dated, like the udayana images, closer to the second half of the 7th century, significantly later than had previously been thought.

furthermore, some longmen images are provided with a throne with high back slab, incised lightly into the wall surface. this kind of throne, which shows a “scalloped edged top part”, became common for other tang Buddha images, usually seated with legs pendant (rhie 1988: 43). the same kind of chair is found in the embroidered Buddha from nara (see supra) and in the murals of the Sui cave 405 at dunhuang (Yasuo inamoto 1997: 372, 410, figs. 17, 24–5). the Sui example, however, would be late 6th–early 7th century, significantly earlier than the longmen group. One might assume, therefore, that the source for this throne decoration might come from the “land Silk road” rather than the sea route. Yet, a similar “lobed throneback”, as Woodward calls it, can also be seen in some 7th–8th centuries Southeast asian images such as the little bronze Buddha, already referred above as tM 2960–157, said to be from palembang, as well as on other images found in Sambas, Borneo (1988: 82–8, figs. 10, 12). this almost simultaneous trend surely reveals how artistic styles and particular motifs could travel relatively fast from one extremity of the Silk Road to the other.

Fig. 11.10: Seated Buddha (h. 12cm), wood, ca. 6th–7th century (?), from Kizil, Xinjiang province, China, Asian Art Museum, Berlin, inv. no. MIK III 8135 (Photo: N. Revire).


137


Provisional Conclusions

In tentatively mapping the origins and spread of Southeast Asian images of seated Buddhas in bhadrāsana and showing the vitarkamudrā, this paper focused primarily on less-studied areas of interactions, especially between east and Southeast asia. My preliminary research tends to demonstrate that this new iconographic trend in Southeast asia ca. 7th–8th centuries, is most likely to be affiliated with some early tang models or, at least, could be related to a similar indian source, transmitted separately and almost simultaneously to Southeast Asia and China.45

In this regard, possible “prototypes” or models for slightly later developments in Southeast Asia are the mysterious and short-lived “King udayana” statues at the longmen caves, dated by inscriptions to ca. 655–80. But how was this exceptional form of the udayana image then able to exert its strong influence on the Southeast asian Bhadrāsana Buddha image type, particularly in dvāravatī? Clearly, the style of this longmen group represents a non-Chinese tradition, perhaps a more or less conscious rendering of an indian model. it is quite conceivable, therefore, that the “ideal model” might have been one of the images brought back from india by Xuanzang in 645. One statue from this group is reputed to be a copy of the original sandalwood figure commissioned by King udayana in Kauśāumbī, the most famous Buddha image of all. if so, the great monk Xuanzang could well be considered one of the chief transmitters into China for this tradition of famous Indian Buddha statues. Furthermore, in light of the renewed interest for the maritime route to and from india, other Buddhist monks and pilgrims could have subsequently played a major role in conveying this iconographic convention in both China and Southeast Asia.

from this cross-cultural and interregional perspective, one can definitely infer that the east asian Buddha images offer invaluable resources for comparison with those in Southeast asia. they may vividly record the course of transregional religious and artistic transmissions. if we accept the above scenario, the udayana Buddha images from longmen, for instance, could indicate an interesting intermediary model between South and Southeast Asia. Alternatively, both the Southeast Asian and the Longmen group of images could reflect something that was going on in india at the time, circa mid-7th century. in the future, more could certainly be done in tracing the ultimate indian roots of this Buddha type of images but that should wait for further research.

Acknowledgments

this article is part of the author’s doctoral research under the supervision of Claudine Bautze-picron and peter Skilling. i am grateful to arlo griffiths, Kwi Jeong lee, amy Mcnair, Marylin rhie, peter Sharrock and hiram Woodward for reading various versions of this paper and offering me their comments. for other assistance, help in translation, and fruitful discussions regarding east asian sources, i thank Marcus Bingenheimer, frédéric girard, dominique glasser, Kyeongmi Joo, dorothy Wong and Shimizu Yohei. i also wish to show my appreciation to leedom lefferts for editing the english and to Martina Stoye and isabelle poujol for their kind authorizations to reproduce figures 11.1 and 11.2.

Notes

1. Scholars once referred to this seated posture as the “european posture” or pralambapādāsana. For several reasons, both terms are unsatisfactory and have come under criticism (revire 2011a).

2. fig. 11.1 is an exception. this fine sculpture is now preserved in the storage of the asian art Museum, Berlin (inv. no. MiK i 22; härtel 1960: 72, fig. 40). One more exception is a bas-relief found in andhra pradesh displayed on a slab at the nagarjunakonda site museum (longhurst 1999: 60‒1, pl. la; inv. no. aC. 69). it is difficult to ascertain, however, whether the right raised hand is performing the “teaching” gesture (vitarkamudrā) or the “assurance” hand gesture (abhayamudrā).

3. this paper has not attempted to deal with the controversial question of identifying these Buddhas. the possible identities of “a buddha” (Śākyamuni, Maitreya, Vairocana, etc.) in bhadrāsana combined with one mudrā or another can and should be explored but only when enough textual evidence, epigraphy or archaeological context is provided. See, for instance, revire 2010.


138

niCOlaS reVire

4. the provenance as recently been given as Vinh loi, trà Vinh province (tingley 2009a: 148–9) but i believe the record of louis Malleret, based on previous french data, is correct.

5. a fragment belonging to a similar seated Buddha from southern laos, near the site of Wat phu, has recently been published (lorrillard 2008: 121, fig. 13; revire 2011a: fig. 2). in addition, other similar pieces have disappeared in the course of the 20th century. dupont, for instance, describes a pendant-legged Buddha image from phnom da in Cambodia, but reported missing (1955: 190–1). peter Skilling speaks of a smaller size model (21cm) with a “ye dharmā” inscription on the back apparently found in the province of Quáng nam [Vietnam] in the early 20th century, but unfortunately never photographed and now untraceable (2003: 285, fn. 33). additionally, in a recent northern american exhibition, an unusual Bhadrāsana Buddha appeared, but its exact place of origin is unknown (tingley 2009b: 114, pl. 38). this Buddha image, from an american private collection, shows an interesting blend of the dvāravatī iconographic type and the Mekong delta art style.

6. these fine Buddha images were heavily restored by the fine arts department of thailand in the 1960s or perhaps even earlier in the 19th century by local inhabitants. for the whereabouts of these restored images, see dhanit Yupho (1967); none of the hands are original. Based on other iconographic examples from the region, however, it is almost certain that the vitarkamudrā was intended with the right hand.

7. See for example Sirén (1998: pls. 38b, 254, 272, 290–1, 393a, 397, 380–1, 461, 486, 490, 493, 499, 514, 529a) and Wong (2008: 144, fig. 5.13 and pls. 13, 16, 17).

8. i use Sanskrit terminology throughout, although some details in the narrative of the great Miracle, such as the appearance of the mango tree, are peculiar to the pāli canon only. according to the theravāda tradition, the Abhidhamma piṭaka was preached in trāyastriṃśa by the Buddha. the other Buddhist traditions evoke the teaching of the dharma indistinctly (Skilling 2008). h.g. Quaritch Wales wrongly identified the scene of the upper register with the first Sermon (1969: 42).

9. the makara throne in fig. 11.4 compares well with the upper part of a bronze figurine kept in the radya pustaka Museum in Solo, Java. Jan fontein suggests that this Javanese bronze fragment may have been modeled after a South indian prototype (fontein 1980: 18–9, figs. 17–8).

10. the data concerning this Buddha image from the collection of the tropenmuseum can be retrieved online at: <http://collectie.tropenmuseum.nl> [accessed 8 aug. 2011].

11. While there are no securely dated images from Southeast asia in the first millennium, many images are firmly dated by inscriptions in China and can surely offer alternative guidelines for dating similar Buddhist imagery in Southeast Asia.

12. a late occurrence of such imagery in the 1st millennium can be seen in the sanctuary of Ðồng dương, central Vietnam (ca. 875). the stone Bhadrāsana Buddha found there, now displayed in the Museum of Cham Sculpture in Đà năng, shows remarkable signs of Chinese artistic influence attributable to the tang period (dupont 1951: 271–2, pl. 51; nandana Chutiwongs 2005: 71–2, fig. 7). gigantic Buddhas in the same posture can be observed in gansu, ningxia and Sichuan provinces, China.

13. See also the work on senbutsu by Yoko Shirai (2006: 111).14. Wang Xuance is presented as a Chinese diplomat who was sent to india three or four times, opening a new route

between China and india by way of tibet and nepal. inscriptions related to Wang Xuance were found in tibet and in a longmen cave-chapel site, near luoyang, where he also dedicated images (Mcnair 2007: 94–9; Wong 2008: 132).

15. in this period, “Kunlun” was a generic Chinese term for Southeast asians often portrayed as “frizzy” or “woolly-haired” natives with black skin. See for example Chavannes (1894: 63–4, fn. 7), Junjirō takakusu (1998: 11–2) or pelliot (1904: 231, fn. 3 and 4).

16. this claim is based on the tentative identification of the people from “tukhāra” (to-ka-ra) as “dvāravatī”. See tatsuro Yamamoto (1979: 1147–8); also Shōji itō (1996). tukhāra, however, is more likely to be associated with a Central asian polity of the tokharians or Sogdian people. for a study about the role of Sogdian traders between india and China via the maritime route, see grenet (1996). the portrait of such Sogdian merchants is apparent in some terracotta reliefs from Khu Bua as well as in stucco remains from u-thong, central thailand (Baptiste and Zéphir 2009: 184, fig. 79; 204–5, figs. 99–100).

17. faxian arrived overland in india in 399 and returned to China in 413–4 by the sea route. 18. One can follow the maritime route as it was recorded in Chinese in the late 8th century during the later tang period.

paul pelliot, who translated and annotated the text, gives a very detailed itinerary of the sea journey (1904: 215–363, 372–3).

19. these regions are mainly in, or in the vicinity of, “Shilifoshi” that is Śrīvijaya, and “heling” (also known as ho-ling); see Chavannes (1894: 36, 42, 53, 60, 62, 64, 77, 100, 126, 136, 144, 158–9, 189–90). the exact nature and location of these polities has been a topic of much debate in scholarship; see for example damais (1964), Meulen


139


(1977) or, for a more recent approach, Jordaan and Colless (2009). Yijing’s accounts allude also to the existence of a circumpeninsular route where travelers would stop over in the city-states of “langyaxiu” or langkasuka (present day Yarang) and “Jiecha” (probably Kedah), although, as Michel Jacq-hergoualc’h has stated, none of these monks “seemed to have given any thought to crossing the Malay peninsula” (2002: 53–4).

20. it occurs to me that this monk could, perhaps, have traveled on one of the many secondary interior lines of communication, departing from the Vietnamese coast, crossing through Campā and eventually reaching “Wendan” or “land Zhenla” (pelliot 1904: 211–5, 372). Some scholars have attempted to locate Wendan somewhere in the north-east of thailand (e.g., Woodward 2010b).

21. Similarly, the adventurous journey of the monk ganjin or Jianzhen (688–763) from China to Japan and his arrival there in 754, after five unsuccessful attempts to cross the sea, is seen as an important milestone in the history of the transmission of Buddhism to Japan. On his 5th attempt, among the disciples that went along with ganjin and the Japanese was Junfali from the “country of Kunlun”, most likely Southeast asia. See Bingenheimer (2004: 161, fn. 50).

22. A bronze finial of a khakkhara or “monk’s rattling staff” has been found in Nakhon Pathom and many others from the first millennium are preserved from Java (revire 2009: 111–9; 2011b). Could this be partial evidence for the circulation of pilgrim-monks in the region?

23. Woodblock printing as well as the practice of stamping images onto paper or silk was already known in China during the 7th century. Yijing also makes reference to “paper” in india and gives testimony of such a form of printing (Barrett 2005: 2–3, 6).

24. apparent motifs of a Chinese silk fabric were depicted on the walls of Caṇḍi Sèwu, Caṇḍi plaosan and at prambanan in central Java (Woodward 1977).

25. angela howard even posits the importance of the maritime route for introducing indian aesthetic and Buddhist models into coastal China as early as the 5th and 6th centuries and emphasizes the role of Oc eo as the hub of the Southeast asian maritime trade at the time. She thus mentions the sending in 519 to the liang court of a funanese envoy bearing the gift of an “auspicious indian sandalwood image” (2008: 76–7). On the matter of portability and mobility of these objects, see Skilling (2006: 234).

26. this embroidered Buddha is from Kajū-ji, Kyoto, and is now kept in the nara national Museum. it is thought to date to the late 7th or early 8th century and was possibly brought to Japan from tang China. the style is also quite close to the hōryū-ji murals (Wong 2008: 144, 153, fig. 5.13). the information on this embroidery and additional data can be retrieved on the nara national Museum’s website: <http://www.narahaku.go.jp/english/collection/d-647-0-1.html> [accessed 8 aug. 2011]. generally speaking, the dated images in a similar posture from China support this dating and allow us to also date by comparison the material from Southeast asia.

27. Woodward feels that the “cloud divider” in the first Sermon socle, as a design that divides, would not necessarily be recognizable as a “cloud” by the dvāravatī sculptor, assuming that he was basing his design on a Chinese painting and making the clouds more of an abstract design. less easy to understand for Woodward is the dvāravatī “space divider” being turned into a “cloud” by a hypothetical Chinese painter (pers. comm., Mar. 2011).

28. Some previous identifications include “Shaka nyorai” or “Śākyamuni preaching” on the Vulture’s peak as in the Lotus Sūtra or, else, in trāyastriṃśa (Yasuo inamoto 1997: 409–11). peter Sharrock proposes that it could represent Buddha Maitreya, seated on his throne with legs pendant, and descending with bodhisattvas to establish and govern Ketumatī (pers. comm., Mar. 2009).

29. Clear evidence of Chinese miniature figurines in bronze, however, has been found in the Mekong delta, southern Vietnam (Malleret 1960: ii, figs. 433–4), and most recently in Kampong Cham province, Cambodia (Cort and Jett 2010: figs. 16–7, 38–9).

30. the earliest dated figure is inscribed: “Monk … [two illegible characters], for his late parents, reverently had made one King Udayana image. May the Dharma realm all share in this blessed deed. Fifteenth day of the tenth month of the sixth year of the Yonghui era (18 nov., 655)” (Mcnair 2007: 175, 5J, my emphasis).

31. a visual count in situ (apr. 2011) reveals that the number does not actually exceed 50. in addition, most of the images are removed from their original niches or are severely mutilated. four similar images with dated inscriptions are also reported from the nearby gongxian caves, henan province, China.

32. On most “udayana” statues, the arms and hands are broken. in cave 440, however, the statue clearly performs the vitarkamudrā with the right hand while the left hand holds the hem of the upper garment and rests on the left leg (Yasuo inamoto 1997: 360, fig. 4; tamami hamada 2006: pl. 4). in spite of this significant detail, we should be cautious of later restorations.

33. diverse competing traditions and texts recount that King udayana was either converted to Buddhism, Jainism or hinduism (niti adaval 1970).

34. for a reflexion of the “miraculous nature” of the Buddhist images as seen by Xuanzang in india, see Brown (1998: 26–7).


140

niCOlaS reVire

35. for other literary sources and further references on the tale of the first Buddha image, see demiéville (1937: 210‒1), Soper (1959: 259‒65) and Carter (1990). a gandhāran relief kept in the peshawar Museum, pakistan, with a royal figure offering a seated Buddha statuette to the Buddha has been interpreted by B. rowland as the “gift of udayana” (1948: 183‒4). Contrarily, M.l. Carter thinks that this scene should be identified as the “gift of prasenajit” (1990: 8, n. 24). the Wat Suthat slab from Bangkok [fig. 11.3] narrates a similar sequence of events with the great Miracle at Śrāvastī and the preaching in trāyastriṃśa. not shown, however, is the making of the first Buddha image by King prasenajit or King udayana which occurred, according to all versions of the legend, while the Buddha was teaching the gods in the heaven of the thirty-three. this legend is also known in Southeast asia although the story differs in many respects. for the Siamese version see Skilling (2007: 78).

36. the various hypotheses for and against such a connection with Xuanzang and the longmen group of images have been recently reviewed by Kwi Jeong lee (2010).

37. the Seiryō-ji image, made in 985 by the Japanese monk Chonen, copied a model from southern China, which in turn was possibly copying an earlier “King udayana” image said to have been brought to China by Kumārajīva in the early 5th century (rhie 2002: 432–45). for alternative stories about the wondrous fate of the “Sandalwood Buddha image” and its several copies, see terentyev (2010).

38. One should remember that the ultimate origin of this pendant-legged posture seems to go back to the Kuṣāṇa period, when portraits of kings are shown in this seated pose (rosenfield 1967: 186–8; revire 2011a: fig. 9).

39. in le Coq’s publication, the central enthroned figure with legs pendant is identified as Mahākāśyapa, not the Buddha, preaching the disciples during the first Council after the demise of Śākyamuni.

40. See Chhaya Bhattacharya (1977: 57–8, fig. 26); härtel and Yaldiz (1982: 118–9, fig. 52); rhie (2002: 694–5, fig. 4.69b).

41. rhie mentions other seated wooden Buddhas with legs pendant: one from Khotan, now kept in the British Museum, london, and one from Kucha presently in the collection of the Musée guimet, paris (2002: 86, 610, figs. 1.5b and 4.10a).

42. for a good discussion of the “lost-wood theory” in Southeast asian art, as opposed to Bénisti’s “moveable-objects theory”, see Brown (1996: 190–2). according to Brown, “the lost-wood theory is particularly attractive for several reasons. it allows for parallel artistic developments that began from shared artistic models, in india and South east asia. the early wooden models shared in both traditions are lost, and we have only the later, but separate, developments in durable materials that echo one another. this explains why we have shared ‘categories’ but detailed differences” (1996: 191).

43. Often designated as a “i image” (倚像) which ordinarily means “to depend on” or to “lean on” a chair. in later Chinese Buddhist terminology, a “ i image” (izō) is always identified as seated in bhadrāsana (Soper 1959: 2; Carter 1990: 2; rhie 2002: 85–6).

44. the bronze image published by pratapaditya pal is one such example (1978: fig. 76). it is kept in a private collection and is said to come from u-thong although the exact find spot is unknown; see also thanpong Kridakorn (1965: pl. 3).

45. this preliminary result may be contrary to frequent assertions by others. Chotima Chaturawong (2009), for instance, sees close relationship between indian and dvāravatī images but does not take into account the Chinese evidence. On the contrary, Kwi Jeong lee (2010) finds that the formative elements of the udayana images in longmen are not directly derived from “original” indian Buddha images although she observes a strong connection between these longmen group of udayana images and Bhadrāsana Buddhas from dvāravatī.

References

Baptiste, p. and Zéphir, t., ed. Trésors d’art du Vietnam: la sculpture du Champa, Ve–XVe siècles. paris: réunion des Musées nationaux, 2005.

______. Dvāravatī: aux sources du bouddhisme en Thaïlande. paris: réunion des Musées nationaux, 2009.Barrett, t.h. did i-Ching go to india? problems in using i-Ching as a source on South asian Buddhism. in Buddhism in

China, East Asia, and Japan, ed. p. Williams. london: routledge, 2005, pp. 1–11 [originally published in Buddhist Studies Review 15, 2 (1998): 142–56].

Bautze-picron, C. The Buddhist Murals of Pagan: Timeless Vistas of the Cosmos. Bangkok: Orchid press, 2003.Beal, S. Si-Yu-Ki. Buddhist Records of the Western World. reprinted, 1st ed. 1884. delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1981.Bernet Kempers, a.J. The Bronzes of Nālandā and Hindu-Javanese art. leiden: Brill, 1933.Bingenheimer, M. a translation of the tōdaiwajō tōseiden 唐大和上東征傳 (Part 2). The Indian International Journal of

Buddhist Studies 5 (2004): 142–81.


141


Brown, R.L. The Dvāravatī Wheels of the Law and the Indianization of South East Asia. leiden: Brill, 1996.______. expected Miracles: the unsurprisingly Miraculous nature of Buddhist images and relics. in Images, Miracles,

and Authority in Asian Religious Traditions, ed. r.h. davis. Boulder: Westview press, 1998, pp. 23–35.Carter, M.L. The Mystery of the Udayana Buddha, Supplement to n. 64 agli annali 50, 3 (1990). naples: instituto

universitario orientale.Chavannes, E., trans. Mémoire composé à l’époque de la grande dynastie T’ang sur les religieux éminents qui allèrent

chercher la Loi dans les pays d’Occident par I-Tsing. paris: ernest leroux, 1894.Chhaya Bhattacharya. Art from Central Asia (with reference to wooden objects from the Northern Silk Route). delhi: agam

prakashan, 1977.Chotima Chaturawong. indo-thai Cultural interaction: Buddha images in pralambapadasana. in Connectivity & Beyond:

Indo-Thai Relations Through Ages, ed. l. ghosh. Calcutta: the asiatic Society, 2009, pp. 55–77.Cort, l.a. and Jett, p., ed. Gods of Angkor: Bronzes from the National Museum of Cambodia. Washington d.C.: Smithsonian

institution, arthur M. Sackler gallery, 2010.damais, l.C. Études sino-indonésiennes: iii. la transcription chinoise ho-ling comme désignation de Java. Bulletin de

l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 52, 1 (1964): 93–141.Demiéville, P. Butsuzô. In Hôbôgirin: Dictionnaire encyclopédique du bouddhisme d’après les sources chinoises et

japonaises. Fascicule III: Bussokuseki-Chi, ed. p. demiéville. paris: librairie d’amérique et d’Orient, Maisonneuve, 1937, pp. 210–5.

Dhanit Yupho. Quartzite Buddha Images of the Dvāravatī Period. Bangkok: fine arts department, 1967.dupont, p. les apports chinois dans le style bouddhique de Ðồng-du’o’ng. Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient

44, 1 (1951): 267–74.______. La statuaire préangkorienne. ascona: artibus asiae Supplementum 15, 1955.______. L’archéologie mône de Dvāravatī. paris: publication de l’École française d’extrême-Orient 41, 2 vols., 1959.fontein, J. a Buddhist altarpiece from South india. Bulletin of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts 78 (1980): 4–21.______. The Sculpture of Indonesia. Washington and new York: abrams, 1990.grenet, f. les marchands sogdiens dans les mers du Sud à l’époque préislamique. Cahiers d’Asie centrale 1 / 2 (1996):

65–84 (also available at: <http://asiecentrale.revues.org/index421.html> [accessed 1 feb. 2011]).Grousset, R. Sur les traces du Bouddha. 1st ed. 1929. paris: l’asiathèque, 1991. härtel, h. Indische Skulpturen I. Berlin: Museum für Völkerkunde, 1960.härtel, h. and Yaldiz, M. Along the Ancient Silk Routes: Central Asian Art from the West Berlin State Museums. new York:

Metropolitan Museum of art, 1982.henderson, g. and hurvitz, l. the Buddha of Seiryōji: new finds and new theory. Artibus Asiae 19, 1 (1956): 5–55.holcombe, C. trade-Buddhism: Maritime trade, immigration, and the Buddhist landfall in early Japan. Journal of the

American Oriental Society 119, 2 (1999): 280–92.howard, a.h. pluralism of Styles in Sixth-century China: a reaffirmation of indian Models. Ars Orientalis 35 (2008):

67–94.huntington, S.l. Some Connections between Metal images of northeast india and Java. in Ancient Indonesian Sculpture,

ed. M.J. Klokke and p. lusingh Scheurleer. leiden: KitlV press, 1994, pp. 57–75.Jacq-hergoualc’h, M. The Malay Peninsula. Crossroads of the Maritime Silk Road (100 BC–1300 AD). leiden: Brill,

2002.Jordaan, r.e. and Colless, B.e. The Māharājas of the Isles: The Śailendras and the Problem of Śrivijaya. leiden:

department of languages and Cultures of Southeast asia and Oceania, 2009.Junjirō takakusu, trans. A Record of the Buddhist Religion as Practiced in India and the Malaya Archipelago. Reprint, 1st

ed. 1896. new delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal publishers, 1998. Khaisri Sri-Aroon. Les statues du Buddha de la galerie de Phra Pathom Chedi / Phra phuttharup thi rabiang rop ong phra

pathom chedi. patani: prince of Songkla university [in french and thai], 1996.Kwi Jeong lee. Chodang gi uijwahyeong ujeon wang sang yeongu [a Study on the udāyana image in pralambapadāsana

of the early tang period]. unpublished Master thesis, Seoul national university: department of archaeology and art history [in Korean with english abstract], 2010.

le Coq, a.V. and Waldschmidt, e. Buddhistische Spätantike in Mittelasien. t. Vi. Berlin: dietrich reimer / ernst Vohsen, 1928.

Lévy, A., ed. Les pèlerins bouddhistes: de la Chine aux Indes. paris: Jean-Claude lattès, 1995.li-Kouang lin. puṇyodaya (na-t’i), un propagateur du tantrisme en Chine et au Cambodge à l’époque de huian-tsang.

Journal Asiatique 227 (1935): 83–100.Longhurst, A.H. The Buddhist Antiquities of Nāgārjunakoṇḍa, Madras Presidency. reprint, 1st ed. 1938. new delhi:

director general archaeological Survey of india, 1999.


142

niCOlaS reVire

Lorrillard, M. Pour une géographie historique du bouddhisme au Laos. In Recherches nouvelles sur le Laos, ed. Y. goudineau and M. lorrillard. Vientiane / paris: publication de l’École française d’extrême-Orient, 2008, pp. 113–81.

luce, g.h. Countries neighbouring Burma. Journal of the Burma Research Society 14, 2 (1924): 138–205.______. Old Burma, Early Pagan, artibus asiae Supplementum 25, 3 vols. new York: J. J. augustin publisher, 1969. ______. Phases of Pre-Pagan Burma, Language and History. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford university press, 1985.lunsingh Scheurleer, p. and Klokke, M.J. Divine Bronze: Ancient Indonesian Bronzes from A.D. 600 to 1600. leiden:

Brill, 1988.Malleret, L. L’Archéologie du Delta du Mékong. T. II: La civilisation matérielle d’Oc-Èo. paris: publication de l’École

française d’extrême-Orient 43, 1960.______. L’Archéologie du Delta du Mékong. T. IV: Le Cisbassac. paris: publication de l’École française d’extrême-Orient

43, 1963.Manguin, p.Y. and agustijanto indrajaya. the archaeology of Batujaya (West Java, indonesia). an interim report.

In Uncovering Southeast Asia’s Past, Selected Papers from the 10th International Conference of the European Association of Southeast Asian Archaeologists, ed. e.a. Bacus, i.C. glover and V.C. pigott. Singapore: nuS press, 2006, pp. 245–57.

Mcnair, a. Donors of Longmen: Faith, Politics, and Patronage in Medieval Chinese Buddhist Sculpture. honolulu: university of hawai‘i press, 2007.

Meulen, W.J. van der. in Search of “ho-ling”. Indonesia 23 (1977): 86–111.Moore, E.H. Early Landscapes of Myanmar. Bangkok: river Books, 2007.Nandana Chutiwongs. Le bouddhisme du Champa. In Trésors d’art du Vietnam: la sculpture du Champa, Ve–XVe siècles,

ed. p. Baptiste and t. Zéphir. paris: réunion des Musées nationaux, 2005, pp. 64–87.Nies, M. Buddharaja, “The King-Buddha”: Sculptures from India, the Himalayas and Southeast Asia. antwerp: Marcel

nies Oriental art, 2008.Niti Adaval. The Story of King Udayana as Gleaned from Sanskrit, Pali & Prakrit Sources. Varanasi: the Chowkhamba

Sanskrit Series Office, 1970. Pattaratorn Chirapravati. Votive Tablets in Thailand. Origin, Styles, and Uses. new York: Oxford university press, 1997. pelliot, p. deux itinéraires de Chine en inde à la fin du Viiie siècle. Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 4

(1904): 131–413.Prapod Assavavirulhakarn. The Ascendancy of Theravāda Buddhism in Southeast Asia. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books,

2010.Pratapaditya Pal. The Ideal image — The Gupta Sculptural Traditions and its Influence. new York: the asia Society,

1978.Quaritch Wales, h.g. Dvāravatī, the Earliest Kingdom of Siam (6th to 11th century A.D.). london: Bernard Quaritch

press, 1969. revire, n. introduction à l’étude des bouddhas en pralambapādāsana dans l’art de dvāravatī: le cas du Wat phra Men-

nakhon pathom. unpublished Master thesis, 2 vols., university of paris: paris 3-Sorbonne nouvelle, 2008.______. À propos d’une ‘tête’ de khakkhara conservée au Musée national de Bangkok. Aséanie 24 (2009): 111–34.______. iconographical issues in the archeology of Wat phra Men, nakhon pathom. Journal of the Siam Society 98 (2010):

75–115.______. Some reconsiderations on pendant-legged Buddha images in the dvāravatī artistic tradition. Bulletin of the

Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association 31 (2011a): 37‒49 (available at: <http://journals.lib.washington.edu/index.php/Bippa/article/view/12053/11876> [accessed 7 July 2012]).

______. Re-exploring the Buddhist “Foundation Deposits” at Chedi Chula Prathon, Nakhon Pathom. A Paper submitted at the Conference Buddhist Dynamics in Premodern Southeast Asia (10–11 March 2011). Singapore: nalanda-Sriwijaya Centre, institute of Southeast asian Studies, 2011b.

Rhie, M. Interrelationships between the Buddhist Art of China and the Art of India and Central Asia from 618–755 A.D. naples: instituto universitario orientale, 1988.

______. Early Buddhist Art of China and Central Asia, vol. 2. leiden / Boston: Brill, 2002.romi hida. Sho-tō jidai ni okeru aikuō zō [the Buddha image of King udayana in early t’ang]. Bijutsu shi [Journal of

the Japan Art History Society] 35, 2 (1986): 81–94 [in Japanese with english abstract].rosenfield, J.M. The Dynastic Arts of the Kushans. Berkeley and los angeles: university of California press, 1967.rowland, B. Jr. a note on the invention of the Buddha image. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 11, 1 / 2 (1948):

181–6.Shōji itō. dvāravatī people in ancient times of Japan. a paper submitted at the 14th International Association of Historians

of Asia Conference (20–24 May 1996). Bangkok: Chulalongkorn university, 1996.


143


Sirén, O. Chinese Sculpture: From the Fifth to the Fourteenth Century. reprint, 1st ed. 1925, 2 vols. Bangkok: Sdi publication, 1998.

Skilling, p. traces of the dharma: preliminary reports on Some Ye Dhammā and Ye Dharmā inscriptions from Mainland South-East Asia. Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 90–91 (2003): 273–87.

______. paṭa (phra bot): Buddhist Cloth painting of thailand. in Buddhist Legacies in Mainland Southeast Asia: Mentalities, Interpretations and Practices, ed. f. lagirarde and Chalermpow p. Koanantakool. Bangkok: princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn anthropology Centre, 2006, pp. 223–75.

______. for merit and nirvana: the production of art in the Bangkok period. Arts Asiatiques 62 (2007): 76–94.______. dharma, dhāraṇī, abhidharma, avadāna: What was taught in trayastriṃśa? Annual Report of the International

Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology at Soka University for the Academic Year 2007, 11 (2008): 37–60.______. des images moulées au service de l’idéologie du mérite. in Dvāravatī: aux sources du bouddhisme en Thaïlande,

ed. p. Baptiste and t. Zéphir. paris: réunion des Musées nationaux, 2009, pp. 107–13.Smith, R.B. Mainland South East Asia in the Seventh and Eighth Centuries. In Early South East Asia: Essays in

Archaeology, History and Historical Geography, ed. r.B. Smith and W. Watson. new York / Kuala lumpur: Oxford university press, 1979.

Soper, A.C. Literary Evidence for Early Buddhist Art in China. ascona: artibus asiae Supplementum 19, 1959.Sundberg, J.r. the Wilderness Monks of the abhayagirivihāra and the Origins of Sino-Javanese esoteric Buddhism.

Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 160, 1 (2004): 95–123.tamami hamada. Chūgoku sho-tō jidai no lakuyō shūhen ni okeru uten ō zō nit suite [On the image of King udayana

from around luoyang during the early tang dynasty, China]. Bukkyō geijutsu [Ars Buddhica] 287 (2006): 45–73 [in Japanese].

tansen Sen. Buddhism, Diplomacy, and Trade: The Realignment of Sino-Indian Relations, 600–1400. honolulu: university of hawai‘i press, 2003.

tatsuro Yamamoto. east asian historical Sources for dvaravati Studies. in Proceedings of the 7th International Association of Historians of Asia Conference, 22–26 Aug. 1977, vol. 2. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn university press, 1979, pp. 1137–50.

terentyev, a. The Sandalwood Buddha of the King Udayana. St. petersburg: narthang, 2010. thanphong Kridakorn. Pramuan phap pratima [A Collection of Sculptures]. Bangkok: Krom Sapsamit [in thai and

english], 1965.tingley, n. Catalogue entries: the archaeology of fu nan in the Mekong river delta: the Oc eo Culture of Viet nam.

In Arts of Ancient Viet Nam: From River Plain to Open Sea, ed. n. tingley. new haven / london: Yale university press, 2009a, pp. 119–77.

______. ed. buddhas. Sacramento: Crocker art Museum, 2009b.Wong, D., ed. The Hōryūji Reconsidered. newcastle: Cambridge Scholars publishing, 2008.Woodward, h.W. Jr. a Chinese Silk depicted at Caṇḍi Sèwu. in Economic Exchange and Social Interaction in Southeast

Asia: Perspectives from Prehistory, History, and Ethnography, ed. K.l. hutterer. ann arbor: Center for South and Southeast asian Studies, university of Michigan, 1977, pp. 233–43.

______. Southeast asian traces of the Buddhist pilgrims. Muse 22 (1988): 75–91.______. The Art and Architecture of Thailand, From Prehistoric Times through the Thirteenth Century. leiden / Boston:

Brill, 2003.______. Catalogue entry on p. 156, fig. 76. in Pilgrimage and Buddhist Art, ed. a.g. proser. new York: asia Society

Museum, 2010a.______. dvāravatī, Si thep and Wendan. Bulletin of the Indo Pacific Prehistory Association 30 (2010b): 87–97 (available

at: < http://digital.lib.washington.edu/ojs/index.php/Bippa/article/view/10808/10668> [accessed 8 aug. 2011]).Yasuo inamoto. aikuō zō tōden kō – Chūgoku sho-tōki o chūshin ni [On the propagation of the Buddha image of King

udayana: With Special reference to the early tang dynasty]. Tōhō Gakuhō [The Journal of Oriental Studies] 69 (1997): 357–457 [in Japanese].

Yoko Shirai. Senbutsu: figured Clay tiles, Buddhism, and political developments on the Japanese islands, ca. 650 Ce–794 Ce. thesis (phd), los angeles: university of California, 2006.


New Perspectives on the Origin and Spread of Bhadrāsana Buddhas throughout Southeast Asia (7th-8th...

Documents

Transcript of New Perspectives on the Origin and Spread of Bhadrāsana Buddhas throughout Southeast Asia (7th-8th...