Presenting the Buddha: images,

conventions, and significance in early

Indian Buddhism
Juhyung Rhi

After the creation of the Buddha image around the begin-
ning of the Common Era, the most critical juncture in the
history of Buddhist icons, at least within India, is probably
the emergence of Buddha images in the middle Gangetic valley
Figure 1 Buddha from Sārnāth, late fifth century, H. 160 cm. Sārnāth Museum.
Photograph: J. Rhi et al.
around the fifth to sixth century CE displaying the preaching
gesture (dharmacakra-mudrā) and the earth-touching gesture
(bhūmisparśa-mudrā) (Figures 1 and 2).1 These two image types
present the Buddha2 clearly engaged in two important events
from his life: the First Sermon and the Enlightenment. This
is in stark contrast to earlier forms of the Buddha in iconic
images, which feature little in the way of narrative. From this
point on, these two types, especially the bhūmisparśa, were the
most common iconic images3 of the Buddha throughout later
Buddhist art from India; they also simultaneously impacted
other parts of the Buddhist world, such as Burma and later
Thailand.4 This phenomenon is presumably related, at least
in part, to the rise of Sārnāth and Bodhgayā, the holy places
of the two great events, as important artistic and religious
centres of Indian Buddhism. But their rise was possibly linked
to the emerging of doctrinal meanings that contemporary
Buddhists attached to these two events. It has been suggested
that the bhūmisparśa type was perhaps equated with the idea
of pratītya-samutpāda, or dependent origination, which the
Buddha supposedly attained at the time of enlightenment
and which was expressed in an immensely popular verse,
commonly carved as a votive formula on stone images or clay
tablets (which were installed inside small stupas).5 Although I
wonder whether this link to pratītya-samutpāda convincingly
explains the phenomenon, I nonetheless believe that the rise
of these two types reflects a contemporary concern among
Indian Buddhists about which moment in the Buddha’s life is
the most crucial in qualifying him as such.6
In this paper, I return to the period before this important
change took place in Indian Buddhism – that is, the centuries
after the creation of the Buddha image (around the beginning
of the Common Era) – exploring the ways in which the Buddha
was presented in iconic images and what significance we may
be able to infer from their iconographic configurations.7 I
touch on all three major centres of Buddhist art in this period
– Gandhāra, Mathurā, and Āndhra, the last one comprising
Amarāvatī and Nāgārjunakoṇḍa – but focus inevitably on
Gandhāra, where a greater variety was shown in a significantly
larger body of productions. Such an exploration is certainly

BAF-01-Rhi.indd 1 04/10/2013 15:43

 Juhyung Rhi
Figure 2 Buddha from Sārnāth, sixth century, H. 52 cm. Sārnāth Museum
Photograph: American Institute of Indian Studies (AIIS).
too broad and too complex to be fully addressed in a short
paper, but I hope to take this opportunity to discuss some of
my preliminary observations.
As mentioned earlier, in independent images of the Buddha
created in any of these three regions during the first few
centuries of the Common Era, we find little of the narrative
intent that would clearly connect the images to particular
incidents in the Buddha’s life. This is striking in light of our
general assumption that early Buddhist art, as seen in aniconic
representations at early monuments, such as stupas at Bhārhut
and Sāñchī, was heavily concerned with the life – and the
previous lives – of the Buddha (Śākyamuni). However, nar-
rative depictions on these early monuments were designed
primarily to embellish the monuments and, strictly speaking,
their significance either in relation to the central monument
itself or within the overall context of the monastery is not clear.
This was also true of Buddhist art in Gandhāra. Although we
have numerous narrative reliefs that once decorated Buddhist
stupas, there is significant discontinuity between these nar-
rative reliefs and the iconic images. This is clearly revealed
by the complete absence of any images that directly relate to
the Defeat of Māra (usually equated with the Enlightenment)
and the First Sermon, which are extensively represented in
narrative reliefs.
In Mathurā, images of the so-called kapardin type are
usually seated against a bodhi tree,8 and this perhaps suggests
that the scenes are in some way connected to the Buddha’s
enlightenment. But their specific narrative implications are
difficult to identify, as the relationship between the image
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 2
and the bodhi tree is open to numerous possibilities.9 Several
standing images of the kapardin type carry an inscription
noting that the image had been placed at a spot where the
Buddha used to practise caṅkrama, or walking meditation,10
giving the impression that the image is linked to the Buddha’s
practice. Again, though, the meaning of such a remark in
the inscription on the image itself is not easy to determine,
as it could simply indicate the location of the image. Among
Gandhāran Buddhas, there are straightforward depictions
of the Buddha engaged in specific narrative moments, such
as images of the fasting Buddha,11 an image of the Buddha
holding a bowl, which clearly represents the offering of dust by
a previous incarnation of Aśoka to the Buddha,12 images of the
Buddha performing the twin miracle (emitting fire and water),
which most likely portrays an occurrence in the Miracle at
Śrāvastī,13 and images of the Buddha showing a snake bowl
to Uruvilvā-Kāśyapa.14 However, these are extremely limited
exceptions and, beyond these, most other images lack clear
signs that would connect them to narrative moments from the
life of the Buddha. Buddha images from Āndhra are even more
monotonous and are almost wholly devoid of any narrative
indications.15
Iconographic configurations of Buddha images during
this early period were largely conventions not necessarily
linked to particular narrative themes from the Buddha’s
life. This is most symptomatic in the prevalent use of the
so-called abhaya-mudrā16 for images from this period. This
mudrā, characterised by a raised right hand with the palm
facing outward, was widely employed for Buddha images in
all three of these regions. Especially in standing Buddhas, its
use was universal and consistent despite minor differences
in positioning (Figures 3–5). Similar hand gestures are also
used in divine or royal figures outside of India, including
Iran and sometimes the Mediterranean, conveying a range
of implications such as benediction, protection or salvation;
the Indian abhaya-mudrā was perhaps adopted from Parthian
Iran and thereby evoked parallel meanings.17 It is clear that
the mudrā was used generically for standing Buddhas with
neither particular narrative associations nor a restrictive tie
to a specific Buddha.18 A handful of standing Buddhas with
abhaya-mudrā from Gandhāra have narrative scenes, such as
the Buddha’s mahāparinirvāṇa, carved on pedestals,19 but it
is clear that such scenes have nothing to do with the figural
forms of the Buddha standing on the pedestal.
Abhaya-mudrā was also commonly used for seated Buddha
images in Gandhāra and Mathurā (Figures 6 and 7).20 In
Gandhāra, the Buddha displaying abhaya-mudrā frequently
appears in narrative reliefs depicting any theme of the Buddha’s
life that requires a seated Buddha (Figure 8). This is less con-
spicuous in Mathurā, where there are fewer extant narrative
depictions and represented themes. But it is clear that abhaya-
mudrā was most commonly used and was not restricted to the
representations of specific themes. A prominent exception is the
Defeat of Māra, in which the Buddha in the pose of touching the
earth was invariably used in both regions (Figure 9).21 In Āndhra,
it is difficult to locate seated abhaya-mudrā Buddhas among
the extant independent images, since most of the remaining
ones appear in a standing pose. However, seated Buddhas
carved as part of the relief decorations of stupas invariably
04/10/2013 15:43
 P R e s e n t i n g t h e B u d d h a : i m a g e s , c o n v e n t i o n s , a n d s i g n i f i c a n c e i n e a R ly i n d i a n B u d d h i s m

Figure 3 Buddha from Sahrī-Bahlol, Gandhāra, second century, H. 264 cm. Peshawar Museum. Photograph: J. Rhi.

BAF-01-Rhi.indd 3 04/10/2013 15:43

 Juhyung Rhi
Figure 4 Buddha from Govindnagar, Mathurā, mid-third century, H. 101 cm.
Mathurā Museum. Photograph: J. Rhi.
show abhaya-mudrā; the seated abhaya-mudrā Buddha, as if it
were a handy device which served all purposes, is commonly
used in narrative scenes (Figure 10).22 Evidently, independent
images of the seated abhaya-mudrā Buddha were not associated
exclusively with any narrative themes, regardless of region. It
could be conjectured, for instance, that in Gandhāra a scene
carved on the frontal face of a pedestal provides a seated Buddha
with a specific narrative association, whereas in images from
Mathurā such scenes are totally absent. But this would then
mean having to face the troubling reality that pedestals of seated
abhaya-mudrā Buddhas from Gandhāra represent few notable
scenes, let alone any narrative depictions.23
Two other major types of seated Buddhas existed in
Gandhāra and Mathurā: those showing dhyāna-mudrā (the
meditating gesture) and dharmacakra-mudrā (the preaching
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 4
Figure 5 Buddha from Amarāvatī, third century, H. 197 cm. Amrāvatī Museum.
Photograph: J. Rhi et al.
gesture) (Figures 11 and 12). Chronologically, the two seem
to have appeared later than seated abhaya-mudrā Buddhas.24
In Mathurā, the earliest securely datable specimen of the
dhyāna-mudrā Buddha shows up during the later first half
of the second century of the Kaniṣka era (starting in 127/8
CE), the third quarter of the third century CE (Figure 13).25
Its appearance in Gandhāran Buddhas must be earlier,
presumably during the second century CE. The precedence
between dhyāna-mudrā and dharamcakra-mudrā in seated
Gandhāran Buddhas is difficult to discern, but it is clear that
the two flourished side by side throughout a very late period in
Gandhāran art, though we seem to see more late specimens in
dharmacakra-mudrā Buddhas.26 From Mathurā, we have only
two examples of the dharmacakra-mudrā Buddha, which date
as late as the fourth to the fifth century.27
04/10/2013 15:43
 P R e s e n t i n g t h e B u d d h a : i m a g e s , c o n v e n t i o n s , a n d s i g n i f i c a n c e i n e a R ly i n d i a n B u d d h i s m

The depiction of the Buddha displaying dhyāna-mudrā has

a longer history in relief carvings that appear to represent a
narrative theme. It was used distinctively in a series of narra-
tive reliefs from Swāt (north of the Peshawar valley) in which a
meditating Buddha is flanked by Brahmā and Indra (Figure 14),
which are usually dated to the beginning of the Common Era
and thus considered to be the oldest Buddhist stone carvings
with anthropomorphic depictions of the Buddha created in
the northwest of the subcontinent.28 The scene is commonly
regarded as the Entreaty for the Buddha to preach by Brahmā
and Indra.29 Yet it was only in the second century that the pose
was adopted for independent images of seated Buddhas in the
Peshawar valley, which we may call Gandhāra proper.
A notable feature of dhyāna-mudrā Buddhas is that many are
seated on grass spread across the top of the pedestal (Figure 11).
The pedestal itself is invariably decorated on each side with a
pair of Indo-Corinthian pillars. This design seems to have
changed with the adoption of the pedestal imitating a wooden
dais topped with a cushion (Figure 15). The stylistic features of
dhyāna-mudrā Buddhas suggest that those seated on a cushion
generally date later than those on grass. This suggests, perhaps,
that meditation in images of the dhyāna-mudrā Buddha was at
first thought of as taking place in a less domesticated setting
or even in the wilderness. We might wonder whether the grass
motif on the image pedestal functioned as a marker for a
particular narrative theme. It might be suspected that, unlike
seated abhaya-mudrā Buddhas, narrative consideration of some
sort was reflected in the creation of this type for independent
images. In narrative reliefs, dhyāna-mudrā was used exclusively Figure 6 Buddha from Gandhāra, second–third century, H. 46 cm. National
Museum, New Delhi. Photograph: J. Rhi et al.
for the Buddha in the scenes of the Entreaty to Preach and the
Indraśailaguhā (more commonly known as the Indra’s visit)
(Figure 16).30 Depictions of the Entreaty to Preach in Gandhāra
proper, rather than those from early Swāt, were equally divided
in terms of hand gestures of the Buddha between abhaya-mudrā
and dhyāna-mudrā, although the former seems to have outnum-
bered the latter.31 On the other hand, in the Indraśailaguhā,
the Buddha invariably shows dhyāna-mudrā. Were some
independent images of the dhyāna-mudrā Buddha meant as
another type of icon that portrays the Buddha meditating in the
Indraśailaguhā? The theme was fairly important in Gandhāra
and Mathurā, and there are several examples from Gandhāra in
which the scene was expanded in compositions in stele format, a
rare moment of privilege for narrative themes.32 I have elsewhere
noted the prominence of the theme in Gandhāra and Mathurā
during the first several centuries of the Common Era.33 Drawing
attention to a textual passage in which the Indraśailaguhā was
presented as part of the Entreaty to Preach, I suggested that the
theme was given such prominence in the two regions because
it represents the anticipation of the Buddha’s first sermon.
This reflected in turn the notion that for an enlightened one to
preach dharma without simply passing into mahāparinirvāṇa
right after enlightenment was a more important prerequisite
for becoming a Buddha than enlightenment itself. Nonetheless I
am hesitant to link independent dhyāna-mudrā Buddhas to this Figure 7 Buddha from Govindnagar, Mathurā, mid-third century, H. 115 cm.
particular narrative theme because no other specific details – Mathurā Museum. Photograph: J. Rhi.
such as a cave setting, Indra or the lyre-player Pañcaśikha – are
present; the presentation of the Buddha in this configuration Buddhas took place outdoors seems to have gradually been
is simply too abstract. In any case, the notion that the Buddha’s forgotten with the adoption of a pedestal styled in the form of
meditation presented in such independent dhyāna-mudrā a wooden dais furnished with a cushion.

BAF-01-Rhi.indd 5 04/10/2013 15:43

 Juhyung Rhi

Figure 8 Entreaty to Preach on a stupa from Sikri, Gandhāra, first–second century, H. 33 cm (relief). Lahore Museum. Photograph: J. Rhi.

Figure 9 Defeat of Māra, from Gandhāra, first–second century, H. 39 cm. Peshawar Museum. Photograph: J. Rhi.

BAF-01-Rhi.indd 6 04/10/2013 15:43

 P R e s e n t i n g t h e B u d d h a : i m a g e s , c o n v e n t i o n s , a n d s i g n i f i c a n c e i n e a R ly i n d i a n B u d d h i s m

Figure 10 Buddha and worshippers from Amarāvatī stupa, third century.

Chennai Museum. Photograph: J. Rhi et al.

Figure 12 Buddha from Gandhāra, second century, H. 75 cm. Peshawar Museum.

After Rhi 1999: pl. 55.

In an intriguing contrast to dhyāna-mudrā Buddhas,

Figure 11 Buddha from Gandhāra, second–third century, H. 61 cm. Chandigarh
Museum. Photograph: J. Rhi.
Buddhas holding hands in dharmacakra-mudrā never sit
on grass spread on a pedestal decorated with a pair of Indo-
Corinthian pillars (Figure 12). The dharmacakra-mudrā
Buddha invariably sits either on a cushion placed on a
wooden dais-style pedestal decorated with a pair of lions or
legs composed of stylised lion paws sometimes with lion heads
on each side, or on a full lotus blossom (see Figure 17). When
sitting on a cushioned wooden dais, the Buddha’s preaching
evidently takes place in a more domesticated setting. In what
appears to be an interesting coincidence, the dharmacakra-
mudrā Buddha is shown with the right shoulder bare in most
instances. This is somewhat peculiar: in the textual tradition,
revealing a shoulder (ekāṃsam uttarāsaṅgaṃ kṛtvā, etc.),
invariably the right shoulder, is prescribed for saluting either
the Buddha or a teacher, and is thus performed by monastics
or lay disciples of the Buddha, not by the Buddha himself.34
Although we have few clues to this puzzle, this manner of
dressing is probably tied to the domesticated setting suggested
by the cushioned pedestal.
Interestingly, dharmacakra-mudrā is relatively rare in
narrative depictions of the Buddha’s life. It appears only in a
small number of depictions of the First Sermon, despite our
common designation of it as ‘the (turning) the dharma wheel’.
It also appears in other themes, such as the presentation of
the first Buddha image created by King Udayana, in which the

BAF-01-Rhi.indd 7 04/10/2013 15:43

 Juhyung Rhi
Figure 13 Buddha from Mathurā, dated year (1)36 (ca. 163 CE), H. 24.4 cm.
National Museum, New Delhi. After GSRB 1988: pl. 7.
Buddha is apparently in the act of approving the first Buddha
image rather than preaching.35 All of these are in a distinctly
late style, much more so than a number of independent
images of this type. I suspect that dharmacakra-mudrā was
first devised for independent images and later adopted, in rare
instances, in narrative relief depictions. The dharmacakra-
mudrā Buddha is also frequently seated on a lotus blossom
in triads accompanied by two bodhisattvas, or at the centre
of complex steles (Figure 17). The same combination of the
mudrā and the lotus throne also appears in independent
Buddha images, which date somewhat later than the earliest
examples in triads. The Buddha in such triads and steles was
once commonly thought to be Śākyamuni Buddha perform-
ing the Great Miracle at Śrāvastī in an incident from his life,
but some have also alternatively identified it as Amitābha
Buddha preaching in his paradise, Sukhāvatī.36 Although the
Great Miracle theory is dubious, the Amitābha theory, which
has been rigorously promoted in recent years, is backed by
neither substantial evidence nor a convincing argument.37 In
any case, I wonder whether our conventional understanding of
this mudrā as the ‘preaching’ gesture fully reflects its original
significance as conceived by Gandhāran Buddhists.38 The
Gandhāran dharamcakra-mudrā was sometimes used for the
First Sermon in the late phase of Gandhāran art, and another
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 8
gesture, also known by the same name by art historians, was
eventually established for the depiction of the Buddha engag-
ing in the First Sermon in Sārnāth and Ajaṇṭā beginning in
the late fifth century (see Figure 1).39 The designation of the
Gandhāran dharmacakra-mudrā may not be too far off the
mark, but I suspect that the mudrā probably conveyed broader
or more profound implications than a mere symbol to signify
preaching.
In the mid-to-late phase of Gandhāran art, the dhyāna-
mudrā Buddha and the dharmacakra-mudrā Buddha emerged
as two dominant types of seated Buddhas. These were not
simply, however, two concurrent types; instead, the two might
have been related, or even used in contradistinction. The
contrast between the two types is tantalising, and Gandhāran
Buddhists possibly perceived their diverging significances,
or even sometimes constructed it, through their mutual
relationship, by the time the dharmacakra-mudrā Buddha
was established as another popular type. In dhyāna-mudrā,
the Buddha is apparently deeply absorbed in meditation and is
cut off from the outside world. In such depictions, the Buddha
is static, withdrawn in the bliss of impenetrable enlightenment
or solitary mental concentration (samādhi). Most images of
the dhyāna-mudrā Buddha are shown in an abstract form, but
the Buddha sometimes appears in the extraordinary narrative
setting of the Indraśailaguhā framed in a magnificent stele
(Figure 16). On the other hand, in dharmacakra-mudrā, the
Buddha is active – whether the action is preaching, reception
or approval, if it can be glimpsed in examples, though limited
in numbers, of its use in narrative depictions. He is no longer
in a state of self-absorption, but conspicuously engages with
the imaginary audience or viewers. In its advanced form, in
complex steles, for instance, such as one from Mohammed-
Nari, the dharmacakra-mudrā is coupled with a grandiose
lotus seat with which the Buddha overlaps (Figure 17). In
this act of the Buddha, its original significance – whatever it
was – was further exalted, or perhaps even another layer of
meaning was added. The rolling water from which the lotus
emerges suggests fluidity, as if violently moving toward crea-
tion. It reminds one of an ocean, highlighted in a number of
Buddhist scriptures, rather than a tranquil pond of Sukhāvatī,
as the Amitābha theorist would have us believe. The Buddha
seems to emerge from the rolling water along with or like the
lotus. Or, viewed in contrast with dhyāna-mudrā Buddhas –
particularly one that appears in a magnificent depiction of
the Indraśailaguhā (Figure 16) – this Buddha looks as if he has
been roused out of meditative quiescence (even if the Buddha
in the Mohammed-Nari stele appeared decades, if not at least
a century, later).
In the Indian Buddhist tradition, the lotus is a symbol of
purity and sacredness, while the lotus seat is often thought
to be a symbol of the Buddha’s supernatural power.40 It
was also used in Buddha images commonly dedicated by
Mahāyānists.41 In Indian mythology, the lotus is a symbol
of creation, a meaning eloquently illustrated in the crea-
tion of the world by Brahmā seated on a lotus.42 A similar
metaphorical usage is found in the Buddhist tradition as well.
The Tathāgatotpattisambhavanirdeśa (the Rising Emergence
of the Tathāgata) preserved in a Chinese translation by
Dharmarakṣa in 291 – which dates closely to the Gandhāran
04/10/2013 15:43
 P R e s e n t i n g t h e B u d d h a : i m a g e s , c o n v e n t i o n s , a n d s i g n i f i c a n c e i n e a R ly i n d i a n B u d d h i s m

Figure 14 Entreaty to Preach probably from Swāt, first century, H. 30 cm. Museum für Asiatische Kunst, Berlin. Photograph: J. Rhi.

dharmacakra-mudrā Buddhas seated on a lotus – recounts the

following passage in an elucidation of one of the 10 causes and
conditions for the emergence of the Buddha:

When the destruction by water [apsaṃvarta] takes

place, it ubiquitously pervades the space in the three
thousand/great thousand worlds. A number of lotuses
called the ‘Virtue-Fulfilled Treasure’ are naturally born.
All of them cover the places where the destruction by
water took place. If lotuses are naturally born, Mahādeva
and Śuddhavāsadeva immediately know that as many
Buddhas must emerge in the eon. [Then, winds by
various names blow and create diverse realms, heavenly
palaces, mountains, oceans, treasures, trees, etc.]
Bodhisattvas think, ‘Now the Tathāgata emerges to edify
all bodhisattvas. For this reason, he appears himself in
the world.’ [Then, by emitting light the Buddha teaches
living beings in various ways. This is recapitulated in a
verse.]

As the lotus is born, the Buddha emerges.

All the rejoicing devas saw Buddhas of the past.
...
The best of men (narottama) likewise attains the
kingship of dharma,
And becomes the adoration and recourse of all living
beings.43
Figure 15 Buddha from Loriyān-Tangai, Gandhāra, third–fourth century, H.
65 cm. Indian Museum, Kolkata. Photograph: J. Rhi et al.

BAF-01-Rhi.indd 9 04/10/2013 15:43

 Juhyung Rhi
Figure 16 Buddha meditating in Indra’s cave (Indraśailaguhā) from Mamane-Ḑherī, Gandhāra, dated year 89 (ca. 216 CE), H. 96 cm. Peshawar Museum. After
PGC: pl. 1.
This scene apparently takes place at a cosmogonic moment
after everything has been destroyed and submerged by water.
Two later translations of this text, dated to 420 and 712, specify
the time as ‘when the world is about to be created’. They also
name the lotus(es) the ‘Emergence of the Tathāgata (Adorned
with Various Virtuous Treasures)’.44 As the identification of the
emergence of the Buddha with the birth of the lotus becomes
clearer, so too does the contextual significance of the Buddha
in the cosmogonic tale.45 Although this passage is only a textual
parallel, rather than a source, it nonetheless evokes a spirit that
underlies the imagery of the dharmacakra-mudrā Buddha on
the lotus. We cannot of course simply equate the dharmacakra-
mudrā Buddha with the one on the lotus. But this passage does
suggest that the so-called dharmacakra-mudrā was used to rep-
resent the active aspect of seated Gandhāran Buddhas with
broader, and potentially more profound, implications than
10
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 10
could be presumed on the basis of its conventional definition
as ‘preaching’.
In considering this problem, we cannot fail to notice the
apparent similarity between the Gandhāran dharmacakra-
mudrā and the distinctive mudrā of Vairocana or
Mahāvairocana, the Buddha of ultimate reality formulated in
the Avataṃsaka or the esoteric Vajradhātu tradition, which
becomes standardised in later esoteric iconography (the
mudrā is often identified with the Sanskrit term bodhyagrī-,
bodhyaṅgī-, or bodhaśrī-mudrā but is better known by the
Japanese chikenin, the Wisdom Fist mudrā; bodhyagrī-mudrā
is used here despite some confusing problems46) (Figure 18). In
the Gandhāran dharmacakra-mudrā, the right fingers, often
the little and ring fingers, loosely embrace or cover the upper
portion of the left fingers (the thumb and the index finger
usually touch each other, though not as distinctly as the fingers
04/10/2013 15:43
 P R e s e n t i n g t h e B u d d h a : i m a g e s , c o n v e n t i o n s , a n d s i g n i f i c a n c e i n e a R ly i n d i a n B u d d h i s m
Figure 17 Buddha on a lotus from Mohammed-Nari, Gandhāra, third–fourth century, H. 105 cm. Lahore Museum. Photograph:
J. Rhi.
in the so-called vitarka-mudrā or vyākhyāna-mudrā, and not
consistently in all examples); in the bodhyagrī-mudrā, the left
index finger is raised straight and held by the right fist. Despite
this difference, the configuration of fingers shows a resem-
blance between the two, as some scholars have observed.47 The
Gandhāran dharmacakra-mudrā is extremely rare in other
parts of India: I can cite only two examples: a depiction of the
First Sermon from Mathurā (fourth century)48 and a seated
image of what appears to be Mahāvairocana from Udayagiri in
Orissa (tenth century).49 On the other hand, bodhyagrī-mudrā,
probably devised in eastern India by the seventh century, is
known mostly in Java, East Asia (particularly Korea and Japan)
and Tibet.50 It is possible that bodhyagrī-mudrā was created in
reference to, if it is not a derivation of, the earlier Gandhāran
dharmacakra-mudrā, or that the two developed out of the same
prototype that existed in the non-Buddhist Indian tradition.
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 11
This means neither that the Gandhāran dharmacakra-mudrā
has an exclusive tie to Vairocana (or Mahāvairocana) nor
that any of the Gandhāran dharmacakra-mudrā Buddhas
portray such Buddhas from the advanced esoteric Buddhist
system, which would be obviously too early for the period of
Gandhāran Buddhas. Yet this does suggest that the Gandhāran
dhamacakra-mudrā possessed greater semantic potential,
which eventually helped to bring forth a distinctive gesture
for the esoteric cosmic Buddha.
We should also note the scenes carved on the frontal face
of the pedestal in dhyāna-mudrā Buddhas and dharmacakra-
mudrā Buddhas from Gandhāra. In seated abhaya-mudrā
Buddhas, the most common motif is two–five-petalled rosettes
or lotuses (rather than a lotus throne).51 I suspect that they were
not simply auspicious or decorative motifs but also potentially
carried symbolic meaning related to the enlightenment of
11
04/10/2013 15:43
 Juhyung Rhi
Figure 18 Mahāvairocana Buddha by Unkei, Japan, 1176, wood, H. 99 cm. Enjōji,
Nara. After GNB 1970: pl. 50.
the Buddha, although this awaits further corroboration.52
Rosettes or lotuses are virtually non-existent among Buddhas
of the dhyāna and dharmacakra types. Ordinary narrative
scenes from the Buddha’s life are also utterly absent from
these groups. Instead, in dhyāna-mudrā Buddhas, the most
prominent is a series of meditating Buddhas (Figure 19);53
in dharmacakra-mudrā Buddhas, we see most frequently
a bodhisattva in meditation (Figure 20).54 The motif of a
bodhisattva in meditation is also found in the pedestals of
a number of dhyāna-mudrā Buddhas, though not as often as
a series of meditating Buddhas. It is difficult to make sense
of the significance of a series of meditating Buddhas on the
pedestal of a dhyāna-mudrā Buddha. A possible explanation is
that they highlight the universality of the Buddha’s meditation:
the Buddha of the present meditates in the main image above,
just as Buddhas from the past or those residing in various other
buddhafields in the pedestal meditate. The Buddha does not
meditate alone; all other Buddhas from other times and other
worlds join him.
Both in Gandhāra and Mathurā, the bodhisattva in medi-
tation is usually identified as Prince Siddhārtha practising
the first meditation under the shadow of a Jambu tree.55 If
we accept this identification, we are then faced with a new
question: how does this scene function on the pedestal of a
Buddha? Although it is just as common among the scenes
carved on the pedestals of dharmacakra-mudrā Buddhas, it
also appears in those of dhyāna-mudrā Buddhas and those of
standing Buddhas.56 It is not found in abhaya-mudrā Buddhas,
but this is probably due to the fact that carving the theme on a
12
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 12
pedestal started relatively late in Gandhāran Buddhist imagery
when abhaya-mudrā Buddhas were no longer popular. The
choice of the theme for pedestals, then, may merely reflect its
growing importance during this late phase. Prince Siddhārtha’s
first meditation is given considerable importance in textual
accounts of the Buddha’s life. When the Buddha gives up
austerities to look for an alternative path to enlightenment, he
recalls his first meditation under the Jambu tree and decides to
switch methods.57 The so-called Four Encounters – that is, the
prince’s encounters with four major aspects of life outside the
four gates of Kapilavastu: old age, illness, death and mendicant
practice – may have exposed the vanity of earthly life; but it
was the First Meditation under the Jambu tree when he first
engaged seriously in a meditative practice through which to
reflect on life.58 Yet we have relatively few depictions of the
theme in narrative reliefs. A fair number of independent
images depict the bodhisattva in meditation, but the number
is not as large as that of the bodhisattva holding a water vase,
which is conventionally identified as Maitreya.59 However, the
prominence of the theme on pedestals with Buddha images,
and its predominance in the case of dharmacakra-mudrā
Buddhas, is quite remarkable, whereas the bodhisattva
holding a water vase has a much more limited presence as far
as seated Buddha images are concerned. The theme of the First
Meditation was presumably added to the pedestals of Buddha
images to mark the very first moment of the Buddha’s awaken-
ing as a religious practitioner, even before the Great Departure.
Gregory Schopen has drawn our attention to multiple pas-
sages from the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya concerning the image
under the shade of the Jambu tree. One such passage reads:
When the Householder Anathapiṇḍada went to the
Blessed One, he, arriving there, paid deference to the
feet of the Blessed One with his head and sat down at
the one end of the assembly. So seated the householder
Anathapiṇḍada said these words to the Blessed One: ‘… if
the Blessed One were to order it, I will make an image of
the Sitting in the Shade of the Jambu Tree.’ The Blessed
One said: ‘By my order you must have one made!’60
A number of other passages in this vinaya and the related
texts speak of ‘an image of the Sitting in the Shade of the Jambu
Tree’.61 These passages were apparently developed out of the
following, well-known passage from the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya,
which I once cited as evidence for the period when only
images of the bodhisattva (in the pre-enlightenment stage of
Śākyamuni) – like those of the kapardin type from Mathurā –
were present in Buddhist art prior to the emergence of images
of the Buddha. The passage reads:
The householder Anathapiṇḍada said, ‘The Blessed
One, since it is not permitted to make an image of the
Buddha’s body, I pray that the Buddha will grant that
I make an image of the time [when the Buddha was] a
bodhisattva. Is that acceptable?’ The Buddha answered,
‘You may make an image of the bodhisattva.’62
It seems apparent that the ‘bodhisattva image’ in the
Sarvāstivāda-vinaya was changed to or equated with the ‘image
04/10/2013 15:43
 P R e s e n t i n g t h e B u d d h a : i m a g e s , c o n v e n t i o n s , a n d s i g n i f i c a n c e i n e a R ly i n d i a n B u d d h i s m
Figure 19 Detail of a seated Buddha (Figure 11): a series of meditating Buddhas on the pedestal. Photograph: J. Rhi.
sitting in the Shade of the Jambu Tree’ in the Mūlasarvāstivāda-
vinaya. I suspect that the change or reinterpretation coincides
with the prominence of the First Meditation on the pedestals
of Buddha images. Either the popularity of the convention in
images influenced the creation or modification of the textual
passages or vice versa.
We have examined thus far diverse aspects of Buddha
images prior to the emergence of icons of the Buddha that
highlight major events of the Buddha’s life. What appears to be
an anomaly in this phase is the total absence of Buddha images
displaying bhūmisparśa-mudrā in the localities (Gandhāra and
Mathurā) where the Defeat of Māra was invariably depicted
with the distinctive hand gesture.63 One possibility is that
the Defeat of Māra was not equated with the Enlightenment
and thus the bhūmisparśa-mudrā Buddha was not considered
important enough to be deployed in independent images.
However, in Gandhāra there is at least one example in which
the Defeat of Māra was apparently used for representing the
Enlightenment as one of the four major events in the Buddha’s
life.64 The Gandhāran mode of representing the Enlightenment
with the Defeat of Māra was also adopted in a Mathurā relief
panel of the four major events along with the Descent from
the Trāyastriṃśa heaven.65 Among independent Gandhāran
Buddha images, the First Sermon is also not identifiable, as
we do not find any dharma wheel or antelopes on pedestals
of seated Buddhas; with the Buddha alone, detecting the
theme would be difficult, given the lack of a distinctive sign
like bhūmisparśa-mudrā for enlightenment. In fact, I doubt
whether any dharmacakra-mudrā Buddhas were meant
to represent the First Sermon. The absence of an explicit
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 13
indication of, or even an allusion to, the Enlightenment or the
First Sermon in independent images can perhaps be attributed
to the general lack of narrative concern in the conception of
Buddha images, though such a concern was prominent in
narrative reliefs. Or perhaps for Buddhists in Gandhāra, if
not for those in Mathurā, where fewer specimens exist, the
Enlightenment and the First Sermon did not enjoy prestigious
positions as they did for later Buddhists in the middle Gangetic
valley. Whatever the case, we need to admit that the concep-
tion of the Buddha’s sacred history and his sacred icons differ
markedly from the newer, more prominent changes that took
place in the centuries that followed and with which we are
more familiar today. 
We know little about the circumstances surrounding the
invention of another dharmacakra-mudrā at Sārnāth. But the
Gandhāran dharmacakra-mudrā had been adopted in narrative
representation of the First Sermon in Mathurā by the fourth
century.66 It was about a century later that another gesture,
which we also call dharmacakra-mudrā, began to be used in
Buddha images in Sārnāth and Ajaṇṭā (see Figure 1). Combined
with the motif of the dharma wheel and the antelopes, it
clearly declares its connection to the First Sermon – though
what the ‘First Sermon’ means precisely in this case is poten-
tially problematic. The efflorescence of this type has given rise
to our practice of calling a similar Gandhāran gesture by the
same name. The bhūmisparśa-mudrā had also been adopted
from Gandhāra in narrative representations in Mathurā by
the third century and developed into a separate icon possibly
in Sārnāth by the end of the sixth century (see Figure 2).67
The bhūmisparśa type was used as the central icon at the very
13
04/10/2013 15:43
 Juhyung Rhi
Figure 20 Detail of a seated Buddha (Figure 12): a bodhisattva in meditation. Photograph: J. Rhi.
spot of the Enlightenment, Bodhgayā, and the icon produced
numerous replications in vast areas of the Buddhist world in
the East. The emergence of these two types parallels a growing
predilection for iconographic specificity, which was increas-
ingly prominent with the rise of esoteric Buddhism during
this period. The prominence of the two types perhaps reflects a
belief in the inherent mystic power involved in these two great
acts of the Buddha. Buddhist art was thus entering a new era.
Notes
1. By the ‘dharmacakra-mudrā’ in the above sentence, I mean the
mudrā that first appeared in Buddha images from the middle
Gangetic valley around Sārnāth and may be more properly called
as such, rather than a similar gesture used earlier for Buddha
images from Gandhāra, though I also use it for the latter in my
discussions below. The date of the emergence of this dharmacakra-
mudrā and bhūmisparśa-mudrā in independent Buddha images
is difficult to pinpoint; but at least according to extant material
evidence, the former was established by the late fifth century in
Sārnāth, and the latter seems to have been employed for images,
again at Sārnāth, during the sixth century. For the emergence of
bhūmisparśa-mudrā Buddhas in the middle Gangetic valley, see
Leoshko 2000/2001.
2. I use the word ‘Buddha’ here with the definite article in the
conventional way, which designates the founder of Buddhism or
the historical Buddha, Śākyamuni, as in the common phrase ‘the
life of the Buddha’, or represents Buddhas in the collective sense,
although I admit that this may be somewhat awkward. Obviously
14
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 14
more than one Buddha is known in textual and epigraphical
sources relevant to the period. Nonetheless, Śākyamuni was no
doubt predominant in the visual imagery of Buddhas and, as I
have argued elsewhere (Rhi 2010), other Buddhas were often
presented with virtually no iconographical distinction from
Śākyamuni, especially during the early period of Buddhist art.
3. In this paper, I use the word ‘image’ in the sense of independent
images verging on three-dimensional statues. I do not use the
word ‘statue’ because, strictly speaking, many images are carved
as reliefs rather than as truly three-dimensional statues, and some
images, such as those of the seated kapardin type from Mathurā,
have subsidiary attendant figures carved on the same relief.
4. Luce 1969: 130–35; Boisselier 1975.
5. Leoshko 2000/2001: 70–75; for the verse, Boucher 1991.
6. A parallel concern about a historical moment of the Buddha’s life,
probably also generated on doctrinal grounds, may be seen in
the predominance of another type from outside India, the image
of the Buddha’s mahāparinirvāṇa in Central Asia; Miyaji 1992:
482–524.
7. This paper is written in close connection with my two other
works, Rhi 2010 and forthcoming. The former argues that
Buddha images in Gandhāra were made with little concern for
the iconographic specification of different Buddhas, and the
current paper is part of a preliminary answer as to how, then,
they should be read. The latter concerns the peculiar prominence
of a narrative theme in Gandhāran art, Indraśailaguhā, and the
current paper is conscious of the role that the theme may have
played in Gandhāran Buddhist imagery. I would also like to note
that my analysis of Buddha images is restricted to stone images
because I believe that stone images were the dominant form of
image-making and dedication in Gandhāran monasteries.
8. Sharma 1995: figs 60, 65, 74, 88.
9. Noting the fact that most images of the kapardin type are called
‘bodhisattva’ in the inscriptions, I have suggested that the type –
04/10/2013 15:43
 P R e s e n t i n g t h e B u d d h a : i m a g e s , c o n v e n t i o n s , a n d s i g n i f i c a n c e i n e a R ly i n d i a n B u d d h i s m
strictly speaking, of bodhisattva images, not Buddha images – was
a representation of Śākyamuni as a bodhisattva, that is, in the
pre-enlightenment stage (Rhi 1994). In this case, the bodhi tree
could have simply signified the ultimate goal of the bodhisattva’s
pursuit; or, if one is tempted to read the scene in terms of greater
narrative spirit, it could have marked the bodhisattva being at the
moment just prior to enlightenment.
10. For example, the relevant part on a famous image dedicated by
the monk Bala at Sārnāth in the third year of Kaniṣka (129/130
CE) reads: ‘bodhisatvo chatrayaṣṭi ca pratiṣṭāpito bārāṇasiye
bhagavato caṃkame’ ([namely, an image of] the bodhisattva
and an umbrella with a post, erected at Vārāṇasī, at the place
where the Blessed One used to walk) (reading and translation
based on Vogel 1908: 176–7 but with slight modification, cf.
Tsukamoto 1996: Sārnāth 4; for the image, Sharma 1995: fig. 84).
For other examples, one from Kauśāmbī, Chandra 1970: no. 85
and Tsukamoto 1996: Kosam 2; one from Śrāvastī, Sharma 1995:
fig. 130 and Tsukamoto 1996: Saheṭh-Maheṭh 2.
11. Ingholt and Lyons 1957: nos. 52, 53.
12. Ingholt and Lyons 1957: no. 222. This Buddha is identified as
the Buddha receiving the offering of the previous incarnation
of Aśoka in comparison with narrative depictions of the theme
(Ingholt and Lyons 1957: nos. 110, 111).
13. Rhi 1999: pl. 52. Besides this sole example probably from the
Peshawar valley, several examples are known from the Kapiśi
valley in Afghanistan.
14. Ingholt and Lyons 1957: nos. 87, 88, 89; Kurita 2003: I, fig. 312.
Buddha images that portray this theme are relatively small in
size. Besides these, images of Dīpaṅkara Buddha – thus, not
Śākyamuni  – giving a prediction to a previous incarnation of
Śākyamuni, identifiable by a small prostrating figure at the right
foot of the Buddha, are known from the Kapiśi valley (Auboyer
1968: pl. 42). In this paper, I provide – in addition to Ingholt and
Lyons 1957 – Kurita 2003 (2 vols) as references for Gandhāran
works that cannot be illustrated because Kurita’s book is easily
available and also includes objects from outside Pakistan.
Nonetheless, my citations are restricted to pieces dependable in
authenticity since, as many experts agree, the book contains a
number of dubious pieces, especially among those from private
collections, unlike Ingholt and Lyons 1957, which consists mainly
of works from Pakistan, long before the forgery became such a
serious problem in the Gandhāran art market and scholarship.
15. Buddha images in Āndhra are usually in the standing pose,
showing abhaya-mudrā, with little variation in detail. SBDT 2000:
pl. 121, figs 112, 123. There must have been seated images such as
those carved in large relief panels featuring a stupa, although few
examples are known in actual images, and they invariably show
abhaya-mudrā. For those carved as part of larger reliefs, Knox
1992: nos. 69, 72 (standing Buddhas), 52, 53, 70, 71, 83, 85, 86, 131
(seated Buddhas).
16. It is not clear when the term abhaya-mudrā (shiwuweiyin in
Chinese) was first used in the Buddhist textual tradition. In the
Sūtrālaṅkāra attributed to Aśvaghoṣa and preserved only in
Chinese translation by Kumārajīva, a thief who was saved from
punishment through the generosity of the deeply devout Buddhist
king says: ‘Why do the artisans of the world, with exquisite skills
and sacred heart, represent an image [of the Buddha] as raising
the right hand and showing the form of consolation? This is for
one who has fear to remove the fear when seeing the image. How
numerous would those saved by the Buddha have been, when he
was in this world? I just met great suffering and misfortune, but
the image saved me from it’ (T201, 4: 263b; Huber 1908: 34–5;
cf. Foucher 1918: 327–8; Saunders 1960: 59). This passage clearly
shows the understanding of the Buddha image with the raised
right hand as an iconographic type. In characterising the raised
right hand, the text uses the phrase anweixiang (the form of
consolation or appeasement) instead of shiwuwei (granting the
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 15
absence of fear). Since no Indic or Tibetan version is extant, it
is not possible to determine what was used as the original word
for anwei. Considering that anwei was often a translation of
āśvāsa or related words (Hirakawa 1997: 374b), the original Indic
may not have been abhaya. This means that by the time of the
Sūtrālaṃkāra there was a similar conception but the designation
abhaya-mudrā did not yet exist. In the Chinese textual tradition,
which is easy to look up through the Taishō canon, the word is
not found in any text translated before the mid-seventh century,
when it first appears in a text translated in 653, the Guanzizai
pusa suixinzhou jing (T1103, 18: 460a, 465c; trans. Zhitong, 653).
The creation of the term or its regular usage in the Buddhist
context would not have appeared earlier than then.
17. For the western parallels, L’Orange 1953: 139–97, cf. Saunders
1960: 55–6. For the examples from Parthian Iran, Ghirshman
1962: figs 36, 100, 104–106, 110. Royal portraits from Parthia
show remarkable similarities to Buddha images from Gandhāra,
not only in the positioning of the hand but also in the strict
frontality of the statues. In terms of its establishment, the
distinctive Parthian hand gesture could have slightly preceded
the abhaya-mudrā of Gandhāran Buddhas, or alternatively it was
a parallel development in Iran and northern India. A slightly
different gesture with the right had stretched with the palm
facing outward is also found in Āndhra as early as the second
century BCE (Coomaraswamy 1929).
18. According to Dale Saunders, providing Toganoo Shōun as a
reference, ‘Traditionally, the position of the hand in the semui-in
[abhaya-mudrā] derives from the legend of the malevolent
Devadatta, who, wishing to hurt the Buddha, caused an elephant
to become drunk’ (Saunders 1960: 58). However, Toganoo simply
mentions, citing three textual sources of the theme, that the
Buddha raised the right hand and stretched his five fingers (a
gesture corresponding to abhaya-mudrā) in subduing the drunken
elephant, as a natural act in such incidents (Toganoo Shōun 1932:
483), and neither Toganoo’s remark nor the textual descriptions
he has in mind (T211, 4: 596a; T1545, 27: 322b; T1546, 27: 429a)
have anything to do with the ‘derivation’ of the gesture from a
narrative, which clearly has no historical basis. Alfred Foucher
notes that in Gandhāran representations of the Buddha’s life,
abhaya-mudrā was used for various purposes in multiple themes
(Foucher 1918: 326), a fact that Saunders also admits (Saunders
1960: 15, 43). Saunders also suggests that ‘in Gandhāran art, one
may already notice the habit of assigning certain mudrā to certain
personages, doubtless in order to differentiate among the various
Buddhas and bodhisattvas’; ‘already in Gandhāra gestures had
begun to designate specifically certain Buddha’ (Saunders 1960:
15, 44). These observations of course are not acceptable based on
the evidence we have, and Saunders also admits this, calling it the
‘uncertainty of Gandhāran usage’ (Saunders 1960: 15–16).
19. Bhattacharyya 2002: no. 263; Foucher 1905: fig. 280.
20. It may be noted that in Gandhāran Buddhist imagery, abhaya-
mudrā Buddhas are relatively small in number, and few of them
were made during the most productive period (cf. Rhi 2008). On
the other hand, in Mathurā, Buddhas of this type are relatively
more common, although the overall number of independent
images from this region is much smaller than that from
Gandhāra.
21. For other examples from Gandhāra: Foucher 1905: fig. 201;
Ingholt and Lyons 1957: no. 63; Kurita 2003: I, figs 226, 229, 235.
For examples from Mathurā: Sharma 1995: figs 106, 168, 170.
22. See Foucher’s remark in note 18 above.
23. See for example Ingholt and Lyons 1957: figs XI.4, XII.1, XII.3, XII.4;
Kurita 2003: II, figs 229, 260, 264. There is only one example in
which a narrative theme, the Buddha’s meditation in Indra’s cave,
is carved on the pedestal (Ingholt and Lyons 1957: fig. XII.2).
24. For the relationship of the three seated Buddha types to five visual
types, see Rhi 2008: 49, 53, 61, 64, 71.
15
04/10/2013 15:43
 Juhyung Rhi
25. The Buddha is inscribed with the year 36. The year must belong
to the Kaniṣka era, but the 36th year of the era is obviously too
early for the image, which shows a much more developed stage
in Mathurā than examples from the first half of the first century
of the era, which was dominated by the kapardin type. It seems
more reasonable to think that it dates from a century later, the
136th year of the Kaniṣka era (with the application of the so-called
‘omitted-hundred’ theory) or the 36th year of the second Kaniṣka
era, which started around the 98th year of the original Kaniṣka
era (following John Rosenfield’s suggestion). Cf. Sharma 1995:
198–9.
26. Whereas there is no precisely datable piece among dhyāna-mudrā
Buddhas from Gandhāra, the dharmacakra-mudrā Buddha
appears at the centre of a triad inscribed with the year 5 (Czuma
1985: no. 109; Kurita 2003: I, pl. P3-VIII). Whether it should be
dated to the fifth year of the Kaniṣka era or a century later, as with
some Mathurā Buddhas, has been debated. The former date seems
too early.
27. One (datable to the fourth century) is in the Lucknow State
Museum (Sharma 1995: 201 and fig. 123), and the other (early fifth
century) in the Cleveland Museum of Art (acc. no. 1973.214). In
the earlier example in Lucknow, the hands are lost, with only their
traces visible on the chest. Sharma questions the identification
of the hand gesture as dharmacakra-mudrā, instead suggesting
the possibility of abhaya-mudrā: ‘The left hand was raised up to
support the hem of the drapery in the parallel position to the
right hand in the protection pose.’ However, it seems impossible
that the traces were of the hands of abhaya-mudrā.
28. Lohuizen-de Leeuw 1981.
29. Carter 1988: 23–4.
30. For the Entreaty to Preach (featuring the dhyāna-mudrā Buddha),
Foucher 1905: fig. 213; Ingholt and Lyons 1957: no. 73; Kurita
2003: I, fig. 266. For the Indraśailaguhā, Ingholt and Lyons 1957:
nos. 128–35; Kurita 2003: I, figs 333–5, 337, 340.
31. For depictions of the Entreaty to Preach (featuring the abhaya-
mudrā Buddha), Ingholt and Lyons 1957: nos. 70–72.
32. Ingholt and Lyons 1957: nos. 130, 131; Kurita 2003: I, fig. 334.
33. Rhi forthcoming.
34. Śāriputraparipṛcchā (Sherifuwenjing), T1465, 24: 901a; BD: 4969b;
MBD: 4535b–4536a.
35. Cf. Foucher 1918: 328. I can recall four examples of the First
Sermon depicted with the dharmacakra-mudrā Buddha (ruling
out dubious pieces): two in the Museum für Asiatische Kunst,
Berlin (I577, I588), one in the National Museum, Karachi, and one
formerly in the Islamabad Museum. For the sole extant depiction
of the presentation of the first Buddha image, see Ingholt and
Lyons 1957: no. 125. Other examples of the dharmacakra-mudrā
Buddha used in different or unknown themes include a depiction
of the conversion of the nāga Elapatra (Museum Volkenkunde,
Leiden), two reliefs in the Peshawar Museum (Ingholt and Lyons
1957: no 165A; Kurita 2003: I, fig. 559), and a relief in the Lahore
Museum (unpublished).
36. For an overview of the issue, Rhi 1991; for the Great Miracle
theory, Foucher 1909; for the Amitābha theory, Higuchi 1950
and Huntington 1980.
37. For the most recent attempt on the Amitābha theory, Harrison
and Luczanits 2011.
38. The term dharmacakra-mudrā was probably first used for
Gandhāran Buddhas by Foucher in its French translation ‘la
mudrā qui fait tourner la roué de loi’ (Foucher 1918: 328, cf.
Foucher 1900: 68, which explains the dharmacakra-mudrā of
the middle Gangetic type).
39. The Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang, who reached Mṛgadāva (Deer
Garden) at Sārnāth in the early 630s, describes a Buddha image
in the main shrine as ‘taking the posture of turning the dharma
wheel’ (T2087, 51: 905b, cf. Beal 1884: 46). Although Xuanzang
uses the phrase zhuanfalunshi with the character shi (posture)
16
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 16
rather than zhuanfalunyin with the character yin (mudrā), it
seems likely that the name for the mudrā was established by that
time.
40. Lamotte 1981; Tsukamoto 1979; Rhi 1991: 110–22.
41. Rhi 2003: 168–71.
42. Zimmer 1946: 17, 61, 90; Bailey 1983: 90–92.
43. T291, 10: 596c–597b.
44. The two later Chinese translations appear as part of the
Avataṃsaka-sūtra: Buddhabhadra’s translation (420), T278, 9:
613b–614a; Śikṣānanda’s translation (712), T279, 10: 264a–c (cf.
Cleary 1993: 976–8); see also a Tibetan translation, P.761 Śi 84a4-5
(I am grateful to Kim Seongcheol for helping me check this part
in the Tibetan translation).
45. In the Tathāgatotpattisambhavanirdeśa passage cited above, the
comparison to Brahmā is not clearly stated, though I believe that
there is an allusion to the cosmogonic myth of Brahmā on a lotus.
However, a passage in a text called Samyuktāvadāna (Zapiyujing)
in Chinese translation (by Daolüe, early fifth century) speaks
explicitly of the myth by mentioning both Brahmā and Viṣṇu,
from whose navel the lotus sprouts. It says at the end: ‘Because
this Brahmā king has removed covetousness, anger, and delusion
without remainder, it is said that if a person practices meditation
and pure conduct and cuts and removes sensuous desire, the
conduct is called the brahmā path. The Buddha’s turning of the
dharma wheel is called [the turning of] the brahmā wheel. Because
this Brahmā king sits on a lotus, all the Buddhas, following the
custom of the world, also sit cross-legged on a lotus and preach
on the six pāramitās’ (T207, 4: 529b).
46. For the Indic equivalent for chikenin, or the mudrā that appears for
Vairocana or Mahāvairocana in the esoteric Buddhist iconography,
M.-Th. de Mallmann refers to bodhyagrī (‘la “fine pointe” de Éveil’
or the pinnacle of enlightenment), while considering bodhyaṅgī
(the member of enlightenment) as incorrect (Mallmann
1975: 33, 393). Susan and John Huntington call it bodhyaṅgī
(Huntington 1985: 402–3). Saunders gives, with hesitation,
vajra-mudrā, jñāna-mudrā and bodhaśrī-mudrā (Saunders
1960: 102). Frederick Bunce presents the same terms cited by
Saunders as corresponding to chikenin, but his description and
illustration actually show that he means by them what is known
as vitarka-mudrā or vyākhyāna-mudrā (Bunce 1997: 132 and fig.
342). In the textual tradition, bodhyagrī seems best documented
in numerous texts such as the Sarvadurgatipariśodhanatantra
and the Mañjuśrīmulakalpa, while bodhyaṅgī is also found in
the Sādhanamālā and Niṣpannayogāvalī (both in Benoytosh
Bhattacharya’s editions). What these terms actually meant in
relation to visual images is of course debatable. I thank Alexander
von Rospatt for the information about the textual tradition.
47. Getty 1914: 168; Huntington 1984: 155–7. Citing Getty’s idea,
Saunders admits that the two are ‘sculpturally very close’, but
he expresses scepticism about the derivation of the Japanese
chikenin from the Gandhāran dharmacakra-mudrā (Saunders
1960: 103).
48. Williams 1975: fig. 13c.
49. Donaldson 2001: I, 106; II, fig. 144. Donaldson calls this hand
gesture bodhyaṅgī-mudrā, without pointing out its resemblance
to the Gandhāran dharmacakra-mudrā or its difference from the
proper mudrā by the same name of Mahāvairocana.
50. Actual examples from India are extremely rare. Bak Hyeongguk
cites a relief figure carved in Cave 12 at Ellora (eighth century)
(Bak 2001: 144 and fig. 62). Another example is a small metal
image from Nālandā (eleventh century), which actually holds
a vajra as well (Huntington 1985: fig. 18.18). For lesser-known
examples from Java and Korea compared with those from Japan
and Tibet, Fontein 1990: pl. 68; Kim 2007: 91–9.
51. The following discussions of the scenes carved on the pedestals
of Buddha images are based on my own database of works
dependable in authenticity. I will cite only representative
04/10/2013 15:43
 P R e s e n t i n g t h e B u d d h a : i m a g e s , c o n v e n t i o n s , a n d s i g n i f i c a n c e i n e a R ly i n d i a n B u d d h i s m
examples or readily consultable examples. For seated abhaya-
mudrā Buddhas carved with rosettes or lotuses on the pedestals,
see Ingholt and Lyons 1957: fig. XII.3; Zwalf 1996: II, pl. 20;
Kurita 2003: II, fig. 264. These motifs also appear commonly in
the pedestals of standing Buddhas. Ingholt and Lyons 1957: fig.
XVII.4, nos. 195, 209, 215, 225; Kurita 2003: II, fig. 222.
52. The motif of three rosettes appears distinctively with the seated
abhaya-mudrā Buddha in the two scenes immediately following
the Enlightenment among 13 reliefs decorating the Sikri stupa,
while the Enlightenment itself is not represented in this stupa.
Ingholt and Lyons 1957: nos. 68 (Offering of Four Bowls), 70
(Entreaty to Preach).
53. Ingholt and Lyons 1957: fig. XIII.3, no. 234; Zwalf 1996: II, pl. 32;
Bhattacharyya 2002: figs 615, 616.
54. Ingholt and Lyons 1957: figs XVI.1, XVI.2, nos. 248–249, 251; Zwalf
1996: II, pls 24, 26; Kurita 2003: II, figs 223, 240.
55. The identification of this type as Prince Siddhārtha’s first
meditation is based on a ploughing scene carved on the pedestal
of an image in the Peshawar Museum (Ingholt and Lyons 1957: no.
284). For other examples, Ingholt and Lyons 1957: no. 318; Kurita
2003: II, fig. 124. For narrative depictions of the First Meditation,
Ingholt and Lyons 1957: no. 36. For similar seated bodhisattvas
from Mathurā, Sharma 1995: figs 70, 115.
56. Ingholt and Lyons 1957: nos. 233, 236 (dhyāna-mudrā Buddhas),
206 (standing Buddha); Kurita 2003: II, fig. 199 (standing
Buddha).
57. Mahāvastu, Jones 1952: 195; Buddhacarita, Johnston 1936: 184;
Lalitavistara, Goswami 2001: 246.
58. For the Four Encounters, there is only one extant depiction from
Gandhāra: Kurita 2003: I, fig. 135.
59. For seated bodhisattvas in the meditation pose, Ingholt and Lyons
1957: no. 318; Kurita 2003: II, fig. 124.
60. Schopen 2005: 128.
61. Schopen 2005: 129–34.
62. T1435, 23: 352a, 355a; this translation is based on Soper 1950: 140a,
with significant modification. In the original text, the phrase I
translate here as ‘an image of the time [when the Buddha was]
a bodhisattva’ (pusashixiang) literally reads ‘an image of the
attendant bodhisattva’ as Soper translates it. The difference in
understanding this phrase depends on the character shi. The shi
(with the radical ‘human’) in the original has the meaning of
‘attendant’, but, following Lin Li-kouang’s suggestion (Lin 1949:
97 and n. 2), I believe that it was a scribal error for the shi (with
the radical ‘sun’) meaning ‘time’, which makes better sense; Rhi
1994: 221.
63. Ingholt and Lyons 1957: nos. 63, 66; Kurita 2003: I, figs 226, 227,
229, 235; Sharma 1995: figs 168, 170, 175.
64. Four reliefs in the Freer-Sackler Gallery in Washington, DC: Kurita
2003: I, figs 31, 226, 280, 483.
65. Sharma 1995: fig. 168.
66. See note 48 above.
67. Leoshko 2000/2001.
References
Auboyer, J. 1968. The Art of Afghanistan, P. Keebone (tr.). Feltham: Paul
Hamlyn.
Bailey, G. 1983. The Mythology of Brahmā. Delhi: Oxford University
Press.
Bak, H. 2001. Vairochanabutsu no zuzōgakuteki kenkyū (Iconographical
study of Vairocana Buddha). Tokyo: Hōzōkan.
BD -- Bukkyō daijii (Dictionary of Buddhist vocabulary), Ryūkoku
University (ed), 2nd edn. Tokyo: Fuzanbō, 1936.
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 17
Beal, S. (tr). 1884. Si-yu-ki: Buddhist Records of the Western World, vol.
2. London: Trübner & Co.
Bhattacharyya, D.C. (ed). 2002. Gandhāra Sculpture in the Government
Museum and Art Gallery, Chandigarh. Chandigarh: Chandigarh
Museum and Art Gallery.
Boisselier, J. 1975. The Heritage of Thai Sculpture. New York and Tokyo:
Weatherhill.
Boucher, D. 1991. ‘The pratītyasamutpādagāthā and its role in the
medieval cult of the relics’, Journal of the International Association
of Buddhist Studies 14(1): 1–27.
Bunce, F.W. 1997. A Dictionary of Buddhist and Hindu Iconography. New
Delhi: D.K. Printworld.
Carter, M. 1988. ‘A Gandharan bronze Buddha statuette: its place in the
evolution of the Buddha image in Gandhara’, Mārg 39(4): 21–38.
Chandra, P. 1970. Stone Sculpture in the Allahabad Museum: A
Descriptive Catalogue. Poona: American Institute of Indian Studies.
Cleary, T. (tr). 1993. The Flower Ornament Scripture: A Translation of the
Avatamsaka Sutra. Boston and London: Shambala.
Coomaraswamy, A.K. 1929. ‘A royal gesture; and some other motifs’, in
Feestbundel uitgegeven door het Koninklijk Bataviaasch Genootschap
van Kunsten en Wetenschappen bij gelegenheid van zijn 150 jarig
bestaan, 1778–1928, vol. 1. Weltevreden: G. Kolff, 57–61.
Czuma, S.J. 1985. Kushan Sculpture: Images from Early India. Cleveland,
OH: Cleveland Museum of Art.
Donaldson, T.E. 2001. Iconography of the Buddhist Sculpture of Orissa, 2
vols. New Delhi: Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts.
Fontein, J. 1990. The Sculpture of Indonesia. New York: Harry N. Abrams.
Foucher, A. 1900. Étude de l’iconographie bouddhique de l’Inde d’après
des documents nouveaux. Paris: Ernest Leroux.
Foucher, A. 1905. L’Art gréco-bouddhique du Gandhâra, vol. 1. Paris:
Imprimerie nationale.
Foucher, A. 1909. ‘Le grand miracle du Bouddha à Çrâvastî’, Journal
asiatique 13 (Jan–Feb): 5–78.
Foucher, A. 1918. L’Art gréco-bouddhique du Gandhâra, vol. 2, pt. 1. Paris:
Imprimerie nationale.
Getty, A. 1914. The Gods of Northern Buddhism. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Ghirshman, R. 1962. Persian Art: The Parthian and Sassanian Dynasties,
249 BC–AD 651, S. Gilbert and J. Emmons (trs). New York: Golden
Press.
GNB 1970. Genshoku nihon no bijutsu (Japanese art in colour), vol. 9:
chūsei jiin to kamakura chōkoku (Medieval temples and Kamakura
sculptures). Tokyo: Shogakukan.
Goswami, B. (trs) 2001. Lalitavistara. Kolkata: The Asiatic Society.
GSRB 1988. The Grand Exhibition of Silk Road Civilizations: The Route
of Buddhist Art. Nara: Nara National Museum.
Harrison, P. and Luczanits, C. 2011. ‘New light on (and from) the
Mohammed-Nari stele’, unpublished paper presented at the
Conference on Pure Land Buddhism at Otani University, Kyoto,
November 2011.
Higuchi, T. 1950. ‘Amida sanzonbutsu no genryū’ (‘The origin of the
Amitābha triad’), Bukkyō geijutsu 7: 108–13.
Hirakawa, A. 1997. Bukkyō kanbon daijiten (Buddhist Chinese-Sanskrit
dictionary). Tokyo: Reiyukai.
Huber, É. (tr.) 1908. Sûtrâlaṃkâra. Paris: Ernest Reloux.
Huntington, J.C. 1980. ‘A Gandhāran image of Amitāyus’ Sukhāvatī’,
Annali dell’Istituto Orientale di Napoli 40 (n.s. 30): 652–72.
Huntington, J.C. 1984. ‘The iconography and iconology of Maitreya
images in Gandhāra’, Journal of Central Asia 7(1): 133–78.
Huntington, S.L. 1985. The Art of Ancient India: Buddhist, Hindu and
Jain. Tokyo: Weatherhill.
Ingholt, H. and Lyons, I. 1957. Gandhāran Art in Pakistan. New York:
Pantheon Books.
Johnston, E.H. 1936. The Buddhacarita, or, Acts of the Buddha, part 2
(translation). Lahore: University of the Punjab.
Jones, J.J. (tr.) 1952. The Mahāvastu, vol. 2. London: Luzac & Co.
17
04/10/2013 15:43
 Juhyung Rhi
Kim, L. 2007. Buddhist Sculpture of Korea. Elizabeth, NJ, and Seoul:
Hollym.
Knox, R. 1992. Amarāvatī: Buddhist Sculpture from the Great Stūpa.
London: British Museum Press.
Kurita, I. 2003. Gandhāran Art, rev. edn, 2 vols. Tokyo: Nigensha.
Lamotte, É. 1981. ‘Lotus et Buddha supramondain’, Bulletin de l’École
Française d’Extrême-Orient 69: 31–44.
Leoshko, J. 2000/2001. ‘About looking at Buddha images in eastern
India’, Archives of Asian Art 52: 63–82.
Lin, Li-kouang 1949. L’Aide-mémoire de la vraie loi (Saddharma-
smṛtyupasthāna-sūtra). Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve.
Lohuizen-de Leeuw, J.E. van. 1981. ‘New evidence with regard to the
origin of the Buddha image’, in South Asian Archaeology 1979, H.
Härtel (ed.). Berlin: Museum für Indische Kunst, 377–400.
L’Orange, H.P. 1953. Studies on the Iconography of Cosmic Kingship in
the Ancient World. Oslo: H. Aschehoug & Co.
Luce, G.H. 1969. Old Burma, Early Pagan, vol. 1. Locust Valley, NY:
Artibus Asiae and the Institute of Fine Arts, New York University.
Mallmann, M.-T. de 1975. L’Introduction à l’iconographie du tântrisme
bouddique. Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve.
Miyaji, A. 1992. Nehan to miroku no zuzōgaku (The iconography of
the mahāparinirvāṇa and Maitreya). Tokyo: Yoshikawa kōbunkan.
MBD – Mochizuki bukkyō daijiten (Mochizuki Buddhist dictionary),
Mochizuki Shinkō (ed.), 2nd edn (rev. Tsukamoto Zenryū). Kyoto:
Sekai seiten kankō kyōkai, 1954–63.
P – Tibetan Buddhist canon Peking edition (reprint, Tokyo, Seizō
daizōkyō kenkyūkai, 1955–1961), number, box, page.
PGC 2002. Pakisutan gandāra chōkokuten (Exhibition of Gandhāran
sculpture). Tokyo: NHK Promotion.
Rhi, J. 1991. Gandhāran Images of the Śrāvastī Miracle: An Iconographical
Assessment, PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Rhi, J. 1994. ‘From bodhisattva to Buddha: the beginning of iconic
representation in Buddhist art’, Artibus Asiae 54(3/4): 207–25.
Rhi, J. (ed.) 1999. Kandara misul (Gandhāran art) (exhibition
catalogue). Seoul: Seoul Arts Centre.
Rhi, J. 2003. ‘Early Mahāyāna and Gandhāran Buddhism: an assessment
of visual evidence’, The Eastern Buddhist 35(1&2): 152–89.
Rhi, J. 2008. ‘Identifying several visual types in Gandhāran Buddha
images’, Archives of Asian Art 54: 43–85.
18
BAF-01-Rhi.indd 18
Rhi, J. 2010. ‘Does iconography really matter?: the iconographic
specification of Buddha images in pre-Esoteric Buddhist art’,
unpublished paper presented at the conference New Research in
Buddhist Sculpture, Victoria and Albert Museum, November 2010.
Rhi, J. forthcoming. ‘Vision in the cave, cave in the vision: the
Indraśailaguhā in textual and visual traditions of Indian
Buddhism’, in Buddhism across Asia, T. Sen (ed). Singapore: Institute
of Southeast Asian Studies.
Saunders, E.D. 1960. Mudrā: A Study of Symbolic Gestures in Japanese
Buddhist Sculpture. New York: Pantheon Books.
SBDT 2000. Sekai bijutsu daizenshū tōyōhen (New History of World
Art: Asia), vol. 13: India (1). Tokyo: Shogakukan.
Schopen, G. 2005. ‘On sending the monks back to their books: cult
and conservatism in early Mahāyāna Buddhism’, in Figments and
Fragments of Mahāyāna Buddhism in India, G. Schopen. Honolulu,
HI: University of Hawai’i Press, 108–53.
Sharma, R.C. 1995. Buddhist Art: Mathura school. New Delhi: Wiley
Eastern and New Age International.
Soper, A.C. 1950. ‘Early Buddhist attitudes toward the art of painting’,
Art Bulletin 35(2): 147–51.
T – Taishō Buddhist canon (Taishō shinshū daizōkyō, Tokyo: Taishō
issaikyō kankōkai, 1924–1934), number, volume, page.
Toganoo, S. 1932. Mandara no kenkyū (Study of maṇḍalas). Koyasan:
Koyasan University Press.
Tsukamoto, K. 1979. ‘Rengejō to rengenza’ (‘The birth on the lotus and
the lotus seat’), Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 28(1): 1–9.
Tsukamoto, K. 1996. Indo bukkyō himei mokuroku I: Text, note, wayaku
(A comprehensive study of the Indian Buddhist inscriptions, part
1: text, notes, and Japanese translation). Kyoto: Heirakuji shoten.
Vogel, J.Ph. 1908. ‘Epigraphical discoveries at Sarnath’, Epigraphia
Indica 8: 166–79.
Williams, J.G. 1975. ‘Sārnāth Gupta steles of the Buddha’s life’, Ars
Orientalis 10: 171–92.
Zimmer, H. 1946. Myths and Symbols in Indian Art and Civilization.
New York: Pantheon Books.
Zwalf, W. 1996. A Catalogue of Gandhāra Sculpture in the British
Museum, 2 vols. London: British Museum.
04/10/2013 15:43