WOODEN STANDING IMAGE OF PADMAPANI FORM OF AVALOKITESVARA
Composition: Wood, gesso, pigment, traces of gold
Dimensions: 64cm
Origin: Western Tibet
Date: 12-13th cent.
The first feature to strike the viewer of this piece is the
large and exaggerated headdress
towering above the rest of the figure. A closer examination
discloses the fact that what one should expect to see in the
headdress, a diminutive figure of Amitabha – the head
of Avalokitesvara’s spiritual family – is not in
evidence. This might be a reason for some concern except that
in the place where Amitabha would have normally been located,
we find perhaps as a symbolic substitute, a lotus blossom. This
is entirely appropriate, if unusual, because Amitabha is in
fact the head of the spiritual “grouping” known
as the “Lotus family.” If the apparent colour of
the lotus is red, as appears from the photograph, then this
is further confirmation of the correctness of the iconography
as the colour of the lotus family is red. It might be suggested
that what we are looking at is iconographically correct in this
respect but that it employs a somewhat unusual way of displaying
that iconography.
Further disclosure of the colour of the image’s body
as being white is also entirely appropriate as Padmapani is
said in the earliest Buddhist texts from the 3-5th cent CE,
to be the colour of the pale moon. This pale colour may be seen
for example in Whitfield and Farrer (1990 p.62.) where we see
a pale Padmapani, again without an Amitabha in its crown, but
instead with a red gem (or perhaps even, a diminutive lotus)
dating to the early 9th cent. A.D. A Western Tibetan version
of Padmapani from the 11-12th cent. may be seen in Kilmburg-Salter
(1997) p.59.
Although the relatively large size of the headdress immediately
strikes the viewer, it is quite typical of the location and
period which I believe the piece may be attributed to. Comparisons
may be made with images showing such large ornamental headdresses
in Huo and Li (2001) p. 130; Huntington (1990) plates 143, 144
146-148; Author ??? (2000) p.130.
There are also questions to be asked about the facial characteristics
of the piece which do not appear to offer an easy answer at
all. We note that the facial style bears some resemblance to
that found in Chinese stucco art of the Dunhuang area in the
7-8th cent. (see Whitfield and Farrer, p. 183) Traces of this
style may be seen later in Tibet in stucco in the 11th-12th
cent. (see Author ???, p. 27, images 29 and 30.) and Pal (2003)
p.161.
If the facial features are derived in some manner from Chinese
models (and this is not certainly established) then the question
must be asked, “What do we know of Chinese and Central
Asian influences in Tibetan and/or Nepalese sculptural work
of the period to which the piece is attributed?” For further
information on this topic the reader is referred to Tucci (1941/1989)
Part 3, Figures 42-43, 50, Pal (2003) image 110 on p. 171, and
to Vitali (1990) especially Chapters 1, 2 and 4. What can be
said here with some certainty is that the image to hand shows
a measure of Chinese (or possibly Central Asian) influence in
two main areas – the face and the base. Other than that
the piece remains largely in the Indian /Nepalese/ Tibetan tradition
of sculpture – but nevertheless with certain reservations
discussed below.
The base is most unusual in as much as the floral scroll motif
above the lower edge of the base appears to be quite similar
to that found in much T’ang dynasty art, especially in
the silverwork and silks. This is discernible in any good book
dealing with T’ang dynasty art. Moreover the shape of
the decorative area below the floral scroll work is also typically
found in that same period. Of course such designs and motifs
travel widely and easily and there is no implied suggestion
here that the piece itself dates from the T’ang period,
merely that design of that style was appreciated beyond the
period of the dynasty and in an entirely different location.
The attention paid to the delightful facial features is extended
to the rest of the figure to a somewhat lesser degree. On a
Padmapani image one might expect (especially in such an image
from Nepal) a great deal of attention to have been paid to the
deity’s princely robes and accoutrements. These details
would normally include things such as the luxurious textiles
which are appropriate to his role as a bodhisattva, and the
manner of displaying his elegant and sensual tribangha “triple
flexed” pose which reminds the viewer of his princely
and aesthetically developed background. Both these are present
but to a limited degree. We find the usual tribangha flexion
we certainly have the forward motion lent to it by the flexed
left leg, almost as if the image is about to step off the base.
What is not found is the full sensuality of the flexion itself
in which the body changes direction at three places. This suggests
to me that the image was created in a cultural area in which
elegant robes such as those worn in the Indic world, were known
about inn the place of manufacture from hearsay only. Moreover
it was a place where dance poses such as the tribangha triple
body flexion were unknown except for textual references which
most craftsmen would have been unable to have read. The same
sort of observation applies to the hairstyles which might have
been textually described as “such and such a deity with
his hair piled up like Mount Meru itself.” In an image
from the Indian world such a hairdo might have appeared as aesthetically
balanced as the example of Maitreya found in Pal (1975) p.131
and in Pal (2003) image 111 on p. 171.
One would also expect that the robes, as diaphonous as the artist
would care to make them, should have had some outline to delineate
where they drape on his upper torso and where they end, usually
just above the ankle. However such niceties are not to be seen
here (at least in the photo) again suggesting that the artist
was unfamiliar with such cultural artifacts as the Indian dhoti
and its necessary manner of being draped.
These observations in no way detract from the piece itself
but instead allow us to suggest a locale for its manufacture,
lending the piece a sense of place and history.
All this points in some way to Western Tibet.
I rule out Nepal simply because I do not know enough about Nepalese
(Newari) woodwork in that period and the influences exerted
upon it. Also the Nepalese knew precisely how drapes hung and
how poses were related to Indian dance and so I believe it is
unlikely that they would not have incorporated them into such
an important image. However the Tibetans were largely unaware
of these things, except from texts and even then to a limited
extent, and that is why I believe that the piece might well
derive from Western Tibet, from some time after at the period
known as the Second Diffusion of Buddhism which was generated
there. I believe a safe estimate for the piece would be the
turn of the 12th cent. with a latest reasonable date of the
turn of the 14th cent.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Author ??? (2000) Ruins and Glories: A Journey to Ancient Civilization
in mNgav ris Tibet. 2 Vols. (Publisher and Place ???)
Huntington, S.L. and Huntington, J. (1990) Leaves From The
Bodhi Tree: The Art of Pala India (8th – 12th centuries)
and Its International Legacy. Dayton Art Institute and University
of Washington Press. Seattle and London.
Huo W. and Li Y. (2001) The Buddhist Art In Western Tibet.
Sichuan People’s Publishing House.
Klimburg-Salter, D. (1997) Tabo - a Lamp for the Kingdom: Early
Indo-Tibetan Buddhist Art in the Western Himalaya. Skira Editore.
Milan.
Pal, P. (1975) Bronzes of Kashmir. Munshiram Manoharlal. New
Delhi.
Pal, P. (2003) Himalayas: An Aesthetic Adventure. The Art Institute
of Chicago and University of California. Chicago and Berkeley.
Tucci, G. (1941/1989) Gyantse and its Monasteries - Parts 1-3.
Reprint – Aditya Prakashan. New Delhi.
Vitali, R. (1990) Early Temples of Central Tibet. Serindia
Publications. London.
Whitfield, R. and Farrer, (1990) A. Caves of the Thousand Buddhas:
Chinese Art from the Silk Route. British Museum Publications.
London.
