A HYBRID 11th CENTURY PADMAPANI IMAGE FROM TIBET

This image is of some considerable interest as it appears prima facie to combine several characteristics not generally found together in the same piece.

I propose discussing this piece under several headings, namely General Comments, The Genre of Kashmiri and Tibetan Bronzes,  Iconographic Details and Specific Points Concerning this Piece.

In approaching the bronze this way it will be thoroughly contextualized before the specifics of the image are discussed.

General Comments

The image presents itself as being made by a first-rate craftsman who had an aesthetic command of his both his vision and his material.  There is no hesitation in the piece at all.  There is a harmonious balance in the relative proportions of the limbs and appendages and the overall position of the stance is that of a relaxed and entirely credible tribhanga (triple flexioned) dancing pose.

The execution of the image is mature in its approach and does not fall into the extremes which may be found in much Kashmiri art and some of that of western Tibet influenced by that genre.  One of these extremes is that of sentimentality wherein the piece is intended to raise feelings of nobility and majestic dignity but instead gives rise to bathos.  Another extreme is that of a certain over-fussiness in the execution of the image which detracts from its intended spiritual power by focussing the viewer's attention on realm of sheer craftsmanship rather than on that of its presiding spirit. This image falls into neither extreme, being rather, a piece of work created by one familiar with the genre and what it attempted to accomplish.  Hence I referred above to the piece having "no hesitation" about it.

The harmonious and pleasingly detailed front of the piece contrasts with the extremely cursory unachieved rear side.  It is reasonable to suggest that it was never intended to be seen from the rear and was possibly made for use in a fixed position in a shrine or temple and was therefore never intended to be circumambulated. The unachieved back is sometimes taken as a sign of an image belonging to the nascent western Tibetan genre of early bronzes from the 11-12th.cent.a.d., because even Indian (including Kashmiri) images intended to be seen only frontally, more often than not have fully worked backs.  Sometimes the workmanship is cursory but nevertheless it is "completed".

In terms of the "finesse" of the image, there appears to be little evidence of the aspects which often go to make up a so-called "fine" image, namely electrum or silver-inlaid eyes, bands of several metals to highlight details of the dhoti, the lower garment or the body ornaments themselves.  These details are found on Kashmiri and Tibetan images and there appears to be little difference in the basic ways in which such decorative inlay was worked.

The image has had cold gold applied to the portions which represent the skin of the deity. The lapis lazuli blue applied to the hair regions clearly suggests its residence in Tibet, as does the more or less illegible inscription in Tibetan "headless" letters in ink on the base. There is no suggestion that the image was ever intended to have precious or semi-precious stones inlaid in its otherwise solid cast body jewellry.

The Genre of Kashmiri and Tibetan Bronzes.

The workshops of Kashmir, active in bronze making from at least the 7th cent a.d. to the 12th cent a.d. were renowned for both the extremely high quality of their output but also for the wide range of image sizes they produced.  Records in the Royal Annals of Kashmir, the Rajatarangini tell of images created many metres in height, cast from gold and silver and brass.  None of these have survived.  What has survived are the images which were more portable, many of which found their way into the monasteries of Tibet in the 11-13th cent..  These were deemed by the Tibetans to be masterpieces worthy of presentation on altars and those Tibetans who had travelled to Kashmir certainly brought many of these images back home with them.  However, more importantly for our purposes, as will be discussed later, Kashmiri craftsmen are believed to have set up their ateliers in Tibet. Tibetans, especially those from western Tibet, valued these pieces highly and the subsequent influence of the art of Kashmir upon that of Tibet is well chronicled.

Buddhist images from Kashmir are often varied in their iconographic forms. This is possibly due to the fact that the period of the height of Kashmiri artistic production was also a time of great ferment in the forming of individual sadhanas or creative visualizations. As master's visions of deities varied somewhat so too did the artistic portrayal of them. Hence there are many images for which identifications are only tentative.  Moreover there also appear images which seem to run counter to the accepted iconographies as set down textually.

As with Kashmiri painting, bronze imagery from Kashmir has distinctive features which make it fairly easily recognizable.  Its influence was so strong that many of its characteristics may be found in the products of workshops of Swat, Gilgit, Ladakh and parts of Himachal Pradesh.  Some of the more common aspects of Kashmiri-style bronzes are;

• a sense of the image "looking inwards".
• attention to a certain way of modelling the belly, featuring a series of frequently vertical folds.
• elaborate and detailed adornments, often inlaid, and crowns which often feature rounded solar motifs but which also may depict exaggeratedly pointed palmettes.
• lips which are often pursed and rich in appearance.
• eyes which seem to "start" out of the face. 
• in standing images, a left foot which projects over the edge of the immediate plinth.  
• bases are often extremely elaborate and frequently depict animals amidst rocky landscapes.  

When Tibetans learned to "reinterpret" the Kashmiri style, they effected certain changes to the genre.  So slight are these changes and so minimal are they in their overall effect on the pieced that it is only in the last ten years that experts have been able to confidently suggest either a Kashmiri or a Tibetan origin for certain pieces.  Some of the changes which Tibetans made in their reinterpretation of Kashmiri bronzes were;

• changes in the style of the crowns which favoured the pointed palmette style rather than the more  rounded solar style.
• the removal of a solid aureole around the figure and its replacement by a series of floating scarves.
• a more solid placement of both feet well within the confines of the base itself.
• a reaffirmation of the Kashmiri use of bronze as the "favoured" metal.
• a more sober approach to the Kashmiri exuberance in the bases on which images sat.
• a willingness to amend the Indian/Kashmiri textual sources which defined an image's form in the light of Tibetan meditative experience.

 

Iconographic Details

It is at this point that anything said about this particular piece becomes hard to verify because iconographically speaking, the image is apparently full of contradictions.  I will address some of these contradictions  later in both this section and the next in an attempt to make sense of the piece.

In my opinion this image is of immediate interest because of the mixed metaphors it embodies.

It contains elements of both Maitreya, the Buddha of the Future and of Padmapani, the two-armed form of Avalokiteshvara, the embodiment of compassion.  These points are demonstrable through the iconography of the piece.

Main elements which clearly belong to the accepted forms of Maitreya are;

• the stupa/chaitya worn as a crown. The stupa is a symbol of Maitreya's future Enlightenment, the shape representing pure gnosis.
• the pendant right arm with palm facing outwards. This may also be held at waist height, palm out.

Main elements which clearly belong to the accepted forms of Padmapani are;

• the left hand on the left hip, holding the stem of a lotus,
• the pendant right arm with palm facing outwards. This may also be held at waist height, palm out.
• the shawl made from the skin of a black antelope slung over the shoulder. The shawl is the sign of a reclusive ascetic, being the mat upon which he engages in meditation practice.

This image clearly contains elements of both iconographies, and therein lies the difficulty in a positive identification.

However there are some suggestions which may be made in an attempt to resolve the issue.

 

Maitreya

There is evidence in Tibet in at least two cases that I have found, that images of Maitreya from the period to which this piece belongs, that is 11-12th cent.a.d. held the water pot in the image's right hand rather than the left.  A small piece from western Tibet in my collection clearly shows this feature, which to my knowledge is never, ever found in Maitreya's Indian iconography. 

This suggests the possibility that if the piece under consideration shows signs of having held a pot in its right hand, then it may well be understood as being a Tibetan understanding of Kashmiri iconography. 

In the small image referred to above the water pot seems to be attached to the rear of the hand by brazing rather than being held in the fingers as one would expect, and it hangs pendant from the tips of the fingers.  Examination of the image at present under consideration shows no clear sign of there ever having been anything hanging pendant from the finger tips.  Therefore we may reasonably suggest that in the major figure here under discussion, despite the stupa/chaitya as a crown, the secondary feature of Maitreya, the water pot, is not in evidence.

Of immediate interest here is the illustration on page 82 of Essen, G-W. and Thingo, T.  Die Gotter des Himalaya (vol  1) (Prestel-Verlag, Munich, 1989).   While purporting to show the renowned "Rig sum Gonpo" (Tib. Rig gsum mgon po), "The Three Families of Protector" being Manjusri, Padmapani (=Avalokiteshvara) and Vajrapani and referring to them as such, what in fact is being depicted is Manjusri, Maitreya and Vajrasattva, a completely different combination.  However for our purposes, what is of direct interest is the central figure which purports to be Padmapani but is in fact Maitreya.

This central image is extremely similar to the small figure discussed above inasmuch as it has a triple-flexioned body, the left hand on the hip, holding the stem of a lotus and a pendant right hand holding a water pot, hanging from the tips of the fingers.  To connect this image further with the one under discussion at present, there is a stupa placed above the figure's head on the aureole of cosmic flames which surround the figure.  Perhaps then it is possible to suggest that there are at least two examples of Tibetan understandings of Maitreya in which the water pot's position has been reversed. Or could it be that this form is one of Padmapani which was popular in western Tibet between the 11th and 12th centuries a.d. and thereafter became infrequently used, eventually fading into disuse?

Padmapani

An example of a "pot holding" Padmapani may be found in the Christie's Indian and Southeast Asian Art sale of 17 September 1999, New York.  In the catalogue item 68 shows a tenth century a.d. figure of a two-armed Avalokiteshvara, left hand on hip, holding a lotus stem and right hand pendant holding delicately between thumb and forefinger, the tiniest water pot!  It  seems not unreasonable to suggest then that at the formative stage of Tibetan art, there existed a form of Padmapani which held a water bowl, possibly in some acknowledgement of the other forms of Avalokiteshvara (see below) which did indeed hold such an item.

However due to the sheer prominence of the stupa-crown, it is difficult to discount its importance. It clearly has a significance as an emblem of the future Buddha, thereby defining the form as that of Maitreya.  However it is incorrect to assume that the main distinction between Maitreya and Padmapani is that only the former employs of a stupa crown.  As pointed out by D.C. Bhattacharyya, Tantric Buddhist Iconographic Sources (Munshiram Manoharlal, New Delhi, 1974) there exist at least two forms of Avalokiteshvara which have stupas either on top of their crowns or as an integral part of the crown itself.

There are several images of Avalokiteshvara in his six-armed form with stupas clearly located above his head.  One may be seen in Pal,P.  The Art of Tibet (Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1983) page 192 and another in Oriental Art , Vol XLVI No. 2 (2000), p. 43, fig 18.

As to the stupa itself, we note that it is of an early type, similar in some respects to those shown in the crowns of contemporary Maitreya images.(see for example Pal,P. Bronzes of Kashmir, Munshiram Manoharlal, New Delhi, 1975, Illustration 42.) The major difference between this stupa and several others in the above mentioned book is the clear lack of detail in the pendant scarves which float down from the stupa's top.

Were we to consider the image to be a variant form of Padmapani, we might be on safer ground for there are at least two elements pertaining to that figure present in this image.  The left hand on the hip, holding the stem of a lotus is a seminal identifying mark of Padmapani and although a pendant right arm is not usual (it is more frequently seen in the "boon-bestowing" gesture of bent at the elbow with palm facing outwards) it is nevertheless acceptable and not an unknown form.  The black antelope skin, known in

Sanskrit as harina, is also a clear identification point for Padmapani, identifying his yogic antecedence.  However the element which would clearly and irrevocably identify the image as Padmapani and which is not present is a small figure of Amitabha Buddha which is always found in Padmapani's hair chignon.  I have rarely, if ever seen an image of Padmapani without this defining feature.

Perhaps then we have here a curious combination of two major figures.  Combination of several iconographic features is not "forbidden" in Vajrayana Buddhism, but it is relatively unusual.

A distinct possibility which may well explain this apparent combination is the fact that there do exist certain forms of Padmapani in his Avalokiteshvara form known as Amoghapasa, in which one of the eight key objects held in his hands is a water pot.  Perhaps then the apparently Padmapani forms we see holding a water pot (my own western Tibetan example and that in the Essen Collection, both referred to above) are in fact a form of Padmapani with an Amoghapasa attribute. An example of the four-armed form holding among other items, a lotus and a water pot, may be seen in the four armed form of Avalokiteshvara in Pal,P. Indian Sculpture (Vol. 2)  (Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1988) page 183.

Specific Points Concerning This Piece

As mentioned above, the figure's back is unachieved and therefore it is possible to suggest something about its initial function and/or location.

In my opinion one of the hallmarks of the early Tibetan attempts to emulate Kashmiri and other Indian styles of image making was their great attention to the frontal form of the piece and their unwillingness to show any (or much) attention to completing the rear.  This could be possibly linked to the way in which the image was intended to be viewed or housed.  It is certainly not an indication that the image maker was in any way less than competent.

In this image the jewellry is relatively unelaborated and almost simplistic in its execution, and the stupa lacks some details such as steps and plinth types which suggest a non-Indian origin to the piece.  (Compare for example the type of stupa commonly found on Kashmiri pieces which often reflect Gandharan stupa types in Sotheby's Indian and Southeast Asian Art sale of Sept. 24, 1997, Item 46.)  Tibetans in this early period appeared to work for a wide variety of client "pockets".  Some with more money had images cast with large apertures to contain precious and semi-precious stones, but these are rare.  Most seem to have been made with jewellry as part of the casting process itself, a veritable tour de force of the caster's art.  (see for example the Tibetan cast of Avalokiteshvara in the Pritzker Collection, reproduced in Heller, A. Tibetan Art , Jaca Book, Milan 1999, plate 34.)  The current piece, while not displaying cast jewellry of that detail is nevertheless notable for the relatively aesthetic restraint it demonstrates.  The jewellry on the upper body is of an elegant nature….perhaps the best example is the superb manner in which the knot in the deerskin shawl has been tied at the chest level, with the hooves hanging delicately downwards.

The talisman box (similar basic shapes may be found as early as the stone work in Gandharan art) reflects that seen on images of Manjusri, whose talisman charm box has tiger claws as decorations.  More than most others, this reflects that same basic shape.

The figure's armlets are of an appropriate height to demonstrate that they were created by a craftsman who was aware that such items had to be worn at an upper arm level if they were to have a functionality to them.  Any lower and they are downright unwearable! As Tibetans did not wear such armlets they would have had to observe princely and aristocratic Kashmiri people closely to get the idea of how they were worn. This suggests to me that either the piece was created in a Kashmiri workshop where such details about ornaments was a fact of life and incorporated in art works quite naturally, or that it could have been made in Tibet in the workshop of a Kashmiri master, who set the form of the model himself.  A final suggestion is that is the work of a Tibetan who had emulated a Kashmiri piece he held as being of great value. 

Another superb feature of the piece is the modelling of the dhoti, the lower garment.  Here it is typical of western Tibetan detail rather than Kashmiri.  Such alternate rows of floral rondels and wave-like designs is very common on Tibetan interpretations of Kashmiri art.  The Pritzker piece referred to above reflects this well, as does the 10-11th cent western Tibetan Bodhisattva in the Rockerfeller Collection. (Treasures of Asian Art Selections from the Mr and Mrs John D. Rockerfeller 3rd Collection , Asia Society, New York, 1999.  Page 43) 

However, it is the third striation in the lower garment that is of interest here. Clearly displayed is a lozenge-shaped motif which although possibly merely a fabric design in the Indic world, became in Tibet an extremely popular motif on early book covers and early Tibetan painted ceilings which themselves reflected fabric designs. By the 13-14th cent. a.d. these lozenge shapes had all but died out. (For the lozenge design on book covers see Casey Singer,J. An Early Tibetan Painting Revisited in Orientations Oct. 1998, and items 159-166 in Sotheby's Indian and Southeast Asian Art sale catalogue 16/17 Sept. 1998, New York.  For the lozenge design on painted western Tibetan ceilings see Klimburg-salter,D. Tabo, a Lamp for the Kingdom, Skira Editore, Milan, 1997. Figure 192.) This employment of the lozenge motif further hints at a Tibetan origin for the piece. I am informed that many of the designs painted on Tibetan temple ceilings from this period (it was easier than getting metres of Indian cotton cloth imported) was in fact a reflection of very ordinary, common, "working class" cotton print designs in India.  To the Tibetans they possibly appeared as "fit for princes" and so they incorporated these ostensibly humble designs onto their ceilings, and in many cases, onto the dhotis of their deities!  An Indian might have used an altogether different type of design.

• There is some further evidence that the image was either created and/or used in Tibet and this may be found specifically in  three main features;
• in the application of cold gilding which was relatively rare in India.
• the use of lapis lazuli paint applied to the hair, including the pendant braids.
• a small and only partly legible inscription on the base in Tibetan "headless" (lower case) black ink.
• A certain "stiffness" in the legs suggests a Tibetan manufacturing origin.  Such "stiffness" is one of the more common hallmarks of the Tibetan interpretation of Indian, but more specifically Kashmiri, standing pieces.  This "stiffness" contrasts markedly with the well proportioned Nepalese standing figures from the period which more often than not the Tibetans appear unable or unwilling to reproduce.

Summary

The image appears to represent a hybrid form of Padmapani, the deity of compassion in his two-armed form.  Certain elements of the Buddha-to-be Maitreya are also noticeable in the stupa crown.

I believe that this image is of Tibetan manufacture and dates to about the 11th century a.d.

The image has much in common with others known to be from this period in terms of manufacturing style and aesthetic attitude.

It is impossible to say whether it was created by a Kashmiri master working in Tibet, by a Tibetan working under a Kashmiri master's tutelage, or even by a Tibetan faithfully reproducing a well known Kashmiri masterpiece.