Chapter 4 - Śālā-houses

General characteristics—the meaning and classification etc.

In the last chapters something has been said of these śālā-houses. I have distinguished them as private houses, residential houses suitable abodes of the common man, the middle class people and the humble people who according to the stratification of society belonged to different castes and professions as opposed to the uncommon houses, the ostentatious buildings and the extra-ordinary houses, the. great edifices like temples—Prāsādas, Vimānas, etc., best suited only to kings, to the rich and to the divinity.

Though from the point of view of the Śāstra, a full-fledged code of house-architecture in relation to the common residential houses did not attain its maturity by the time of the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra, it nevertheless, cannot be said that this class of buildings did not exist in India. Numerous references in the Epics—Rāmāyaṇa and Mahābhārata (cf. C.I.A. pp. 37.45), the Jātakas (ibid 53) and Kauṭilya’s Artha-Śāstra (ibid 81) illustrate the fact that these ordinary dwellings were undoubtedly similar to those which are found in the villages of India even today—thatched houses with wooden construction of the roofs and the masonry of mud-walls haying verandah (Alinda) in front and the Koṣṭhas (the śālās) all round the court. They were mostly the Catuśśāla variety, and abounded in the country. Although the plans of these exhibited considerable variety, they were all based on the same principle. According to the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra, (18.18—19), the unit of their design is the open quadrangle surrounded by chambers (śālās) and this unit is repeated two, three, four or more times according to the needs of the accommodation of the occupants.

Again it also cannot be said that the Śālā-architecture is completely absent from these works, but the śālā-buildings as described in works like Mānasāra, Mayamata and Kāmikāgama, etc., are at par with the lofty harmya or vimāna class of many-storeyed mansions and thus they represent a later phase of Indian architecture when the use of stone was not taboo in private residential houses. The Kāmikāgama is helpful in supporting this view-point, as will be presently shown. Religious buildings must not and could not be made in the same fashion as the civil ones. All ornaments, all profusion of decorative architectural motifs were reserved in the templearchitecture. The Viṣṇudharmottara clearly lays down that Sudhā and Śilās should be used in houses of gods: Sudhā and Śilā should not be given in gṛha (the residential house) (ibid 30). It is for this reason that ostentatious Prāsādas survive, while no specimens of civil-architecture in stone of the ancient Hindus have survived to our times. Indians did not care to build their residential houses in the ostentatious fashion. They lavished all energy and money in the building of temples, the high edifices, the crowning achievement of Indian architecture, both in the manuals and the monuments.

Śālā class of buildings on which the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra has bestowed so much attention means a residential house and differs not only in shape, materials and construction but also in the use.

Now the question arises: how do we explain the characteristic of stone architecture in Śālās as works like Mānasāra attribute to them; but before proceeding with the examination, let us take a brief notice of the characteristics of Śālā buildings as presented by these works.

Take for instance the Mānasāra chapter (XXXVI) named Śālā, In this chapter Śālā is used mostly in the sense of a house. Śālās imply both temples and residential buildings for Brāhmaṇas, Kṣatriyas, Vaiśyas and Śūdras.

Their characteristic features as single buildings may be seen:—

śālāyāḥ parito'lindaṃ pṛṣṭhato bhadrasaṃyutam
purato maṇḍapopetam......... |
ekānekatalāntaṃ syāt?ulalīharmyādimaṇi?tam |

Like villages, Śālās are divided into six classes, namely:

1. Daṇḍaka,
2. Svastika,
3. Maulika,
4. Caturmukha,
5. Sarvatobhadra and
6. Vardhamāna.

Some of these, with a certain numbers of halls are stated to be temples, while others varying in number of rooms are meant for the residences of different Castes. A distinction is made with regard to the number of storeys they should be furnished with. The maximum number of storeys a śālā has, is twelve as usual. All the storeys of all these śālās are described in detail. Thus this is the picture in bare outline, presented by the Mānasāra as summarised by Dr. P. K. Acharya (vide Encly. of Hindu Architecture, page 485)., It may be noted that these Śālās—the many-storeyed mansions, consist of rows of buildings from one to ten, and as pointed out they arc many-storeyed Structures, the number of storeys varying upto twelve. Regarding their use, Dr. Acharya adds, “The huge buildings arc naturally meant for kings, to the nine classes of whom they are assigned in accordance with the importance of the mansion and the rank of the king” (Hindu Arch. In India & Abroad, page 121). In my opinion this, is a very advanced stage of the evolution of the Śālā type of structure. Its architectural affinity with temple-like super-structure is beyond doubt. The underlying characteristic of the Śālā structure—the rows of buildings from one to ten, moreover, is preserved here. Also their essential components like Alindas and Bhadrās are also there, but the application of the storeys in the śālā houses is against the genius of this class of architecture, as primarily it was meant as an abode of men with limited means and limited requirements.

The Kāmikāgama as referred to before, is more helpful. There are two important notices to be taken as is evident from the following quotations (Ch. XXXV. 1.193a):

(i) ekadvitracituḥsaptadaśaśālāḥ prakīrtitāḥ
tadūdhvaṃ tritrivṛddhayā yāvadiṣṭaṃ pragu??ām ||
tā eva mālikāḥ proktā mālā?t kriyate tathā |
(ii) śilāstambhaṃ śilākuḍyaṃ nrāvāse na kārayet |
  (cf. Ency. H. A. p. 485-6)

In the first quotation, the rows of the Śālā are termed as Mālikā—the garland, and the Mālikā is a class of many-storeyed mansion. Therefore, the previous thesis, that these indicate a very advanced development of the śālā-architecturc, again illustrated here. But Kāmikāgama does take śālās to be the residential houses for men; otherwise, tabooing the stone pillars and stone walls in the construction of the śālā buildings must not have come forth (vide second quotation). Because the use of stone in buildings for men was a very late introduction (cf. G. I. A. ch. XXVIII).

This contention that śālā buildings were primarily meant to be human dwellings for men, is further supported by the Vāstu-Vidyā. It says

mānavānāṃ gṛhāḥ proktā vasavaste kakubgatāḥ |
saṃsthānabhedena te jñeyāḥ pañcadhā syuḥ pramāṇataḥ ||
svayonivyāsagatayo digvidikṣu ca saṃsthitāḥ |
bhinnaśālā ca sā proktā manujānāṃ śubhapradā ||
digvidikṣvekayonisthā paryastena tathaiva ca |
kṣeyā catuśśāleti śilpaśāstranidarśibhiḥ || (VIII, 1-3)

Śālās in the Purāṇas like Matsya (Ch. CCLVI, V. 35) and Skaṇḍa, (Vaiṣṇava-Khaṇḍa II Ch, XXV, vv. 3.26) also favour this conclu-sion. I am, therefore, of opinion that these Śālā structures in the shape of storeyed mansions are a later phases of development, their prototypes being Maṇḍapas—the pavilions for piety, alms, rest, sermons, education, amusement (cf. dancing halls and theatre etc.) and so on. They, therefore, in their later phase of development, took the Gopura-super-structure, the most common feature of the South Indian temples. Works like Mānasāra and Kāmikāgama—representative compendiums of South Indian architecture, must mirror this phase of development. Śālā as a hall or pavilion architecture is corroborated by a number of inscriptions (vide Ency. Hindu Arch. page 487-^a89) wherein the word Śālā has been used for halls or pavilions like Nāṭyaśālā, Bhakta-śālā, Japaśālā, Dāna-śālā, Yajña-śālā, and Virūpākṣa-śālā (temple). This is one way in which we can explain this character of the Śālā architecture quite divergent from that of the North Indian works like Viśvakarmīya Śilpa, the Pūrāṇas and the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra, the most representative works of this school.

The most distinctive feature of the residences of men, the Śālā-houscs as developed in the Samarāṅgaṇa, is their courts as opposed to the storeys, the latter commonly associated with Prāsādas, Vimānas and Harmyas which are lofty super-structures.

Meaning and classification of Śālā-houses.

It may be noted here, that though there are as many as ten classifications of the Śālā buildings—from Ekaśālas to Daśaśālas, the text takes up the fourth classification, namely the Catuśśālas both for its definition and classification. This may be because the Catuśśāla houses arc often mentioned in literature and this is the most characteristic type of ancient Indian buildings as the bulk of the middle class people used to live in this type of śālā-house.

As regards the definition of these śālā-houses, the text defines Catuśśāla, Triśāla, Dviśāla and Ekaśāla in the 18th Chapter, entitled “Nagarādisañjña [Nagarādisaṃjña]” (verses 18-19). That is, a Catuśśāla occupies the four sides of a quadrangle, which is an open space in the centre, the Aṅgaṇa, the Triśāla the three sides, while Dviśāla the two sides and Ekaśāla only one side. These are the principal types, the different combinations of which, give as many as ten broad classifications as we will presently see.

In the Catuśśāla buildings, there were four rooms arranged on the four sides of a quadrangle which was the open space in the centre. Śālā, as we have seen, is a long structure of one span only. I have remarked that this class of śālā house was most common. Sir John Marshall’s account of the ancient city of Sirkap corroborates this: “The city of Sirkap (in the ruins of Taxila) shows several large blocks of dwellings, separated one from the other by narrow side streets. Although the plans of these houses exhibited considerable variety, they were all based on the same principles. The unit of their design is the open quadrangle surrounded by chambers (Catuśśāla) and this unit is repeated two, three, four or more times, according to the amount of accommodation, required by the occupants (A guide to Taxila pages 70-1).

This leads us to the surmise that these buildings were planned under a systematic code of town-planning and presented a facade both symmetrical and pleasant-looking.

“The Triśāla and the Dviśāla can be so adjusted as to accommodate an open space in their front along the road which can be laid out as a flower garden. Thus if all the houses on one or both sides of street recede in the middle as a Triśālā or a Dviśālā contemplates, we get gardens by the roadside. We have no definite materials at hand to inter that such gardens existed in ancient India. Certainly there were open spaces; and the branching blocks of the buildings abutting on the streets relieve the monotony of a wall-like front of the thick-set structures or of the long rows of gardens that otherwise would have been the result (T. P. In Ancient India page 250).

Now coming to the classification proper, it has already been pointed out that the śālā-buildings admit of ten broad classifications in the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra, (vide Ch. 19, 21, 22, 23, 25). Kāmikāgama (already referred) is right when it says that they can be classified into any number (Yāvadiṣṭam Pragṛhyatām), The Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra however, restricts it to only ten, for the simple reason that the people of divergent means and needs, from an humble dweller to his honoured and fortunate counter-part, can all be accommodated in them.

These ten broad divisions are:

1. Ekaśāla,
2. Dviśāla,
3. Triśāla,
4. Catuśśāla,
5. Pañcaśāla,
6. Saṭśāla,
7. Saptaśāla,
8. Aṣṭaśāla,
9. Navaśāla,
10. Daśaśāla.

It has also been pointed out that among these only the first four are the principal types and the others are only different combinations of them. They are tabulated below to present at a glance their combinations.

Pañcaśālā:
1. Dviśāla and Triśāla.
2. Catuśśāla and Ekaśāla.

Saṭśāla:
1. Dviśāla, Ekaśāla and Triśāla.
2. Triśāla and Triśāla,
3. Dviśāla and Catuśśāla.

Saptajāla:
1. Two Triśālas and one Ekaśāla.
2. One Ekaśāla, one Dviśāla and one catuśśālā.
3. Triśāla and Catuśśāla

Aṣṭaśāla:
1. Inner Catuśśāla and outer Catuśśāla,
2. Two Triśālas and one Dviśāla.

Navaśāla:
1. Two identical Catuśśālas and one Ekaśāla,
2. Two dissimilar Catuśśālas and one Ekaśāla.
3. Triśāla, Triśāla and Triśāla.

Daśaśāla:
1. Two identical Catuśśālas and one Dviśāla.
2. Three identical triśālas and one Ekaśāla.
3. Two identical Triśālas and one Catuśśāla.

The Varieties.

This is only a broad indication of the classification. All these buildings of one to ten śālās can be further divided into their principal varieties together with their innumerable sub-varieties and their tabulation is given in one of the appendices. This will give at a glance the different varieties of the different śālā-houses.

It may be remarked here that the principal criterion of these sub-varieties numbering as many as fourteen lacs (vide Appendix, Tabulation of Śalā varieties) is the application of Mūṣā or Bhadrā. Every śalā-house (including the Triśāla also, where though the principal criterion of its classification is the absence of one śāla on one oṛ the other direction, the Mūṣā application makes it yield so many subvarieties) right from Catuśśālas to Daśa-śālas have Bhadras, as many as eight to twenty—the Catuśśālas can have from one to eight, while the Daśa-śālās from one to twenty and hence these Bhadrās varieties come to this incredible number.

Now the question is: what this Bhadrā is? The Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra (19) calls it Mūṣā also:

Mūṣā originally denoted a crucible for melting gold or silver. It was cylindrical in shape with a round bottom and open at the other end. The hole in the wall to admit light and air resembling exactly the shape of such a crucible or Mūṣa, used to be laid horizontally into the walk From the original connotation of an apperture in the wall to admit light and air was developed the meaning of Mūṣa, as a full-fledged ventilator or window. It is this meaning which applies in Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra The Vāstu-sāra (verse 67) also takes the same meaning.

Other criteria of these sub-varieties are the different and manifold applications of the Alinda, Vīthī Prāgrīva Niryūhaka and Gavākṣaka which if worked out would result into a number beyond calculation (cf. Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra 19. 38-40). Thus these varieties and sub-varieties may not be taken very seriously. The principal varieties will be noticed in a subsequent Chapter (—vide House Plans and Building byelaws).

A Critical Estimate.

All these varieties and sub-varieties as we have seen, come to an incredible total of about fourteen lacs. A natural query is: Is it actually possible to have such a vast number of architectural designs translated into practical operations? I have already pointed out that the science of architecture is both a science and an art. As a science it is a normative science which prescribes norms, the standards to be worked out in the art. These norms, however, must have some fundamental basis, the starting point from which we can work out. This is what the ancient masters have formulated in what is technically called the Prastāra—the ramifications of the Guru and Laghu viz, Alinda-prastāra, Bhadrā-prastāra, Mūṣā-prastāra and so on.

Let us take a typical Prastāra of Catuśśāla houses. We have already noticed the different arrangements of the Mūṣās or Bhadrās in one or several or all directions of the house as the distinguishing criterion among these and Alinda—all these denote porticos or corridors of a house placed in one or many directions of the house. These in relation to a Catuśśāla house are eight-fold, In the Prastāra, the first resultants or the former ones are deemed auspicious and the latter ones inauspicious. The resultant varieties of an auspicious and inauspicious nature take corresponding names literally—good or bad. How to know it? It can be ascertained from the Prastāra.

In the first place, place all the eight Gurus and then place Laghu under the first guru and fill up the remaining places in the second line as per those in the first. Go on doing it till all become Laghu, but mind that the first beginning should be made with guru in all the cases (Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra 19. 35. 6). The attached chart in the Appendix will illustrate it more clearly.

The purpose of this Prastāra is to find out the place of the Mūṣā in the house. Mūṣā for the matter of that any other component part (besides Śālā) is to be placed in Laghu and the Śālā is to be placed in Guru. The Mūṣā varieties alone amount to as many as two hundred fifty six (already tabulated). Similar ramifications can be obtained from Alinda-Prastāra, Vīthī-Prastāra and from many others, resulting in number beyond calculation. Thus this is all mathematical gymnastic. Its practical value is only to avoid wrong orientation and misplacement of any of the component parts in the building of the śālā in order to provide the maximum of comfort and the fullest of space together with conformity to the mystic ideas of the doctrine of Orientation.

The second point to which I would like to draw attention here, is, the names of these varieties. Most of these read like synonyms of the principal variety (—vide Dviśālas). Now what is its significance? The architecture as I had an occasion to point out at several places, has evolved and assimilated the regional and religious features and the consequent adaptation of the nomenclature of different classes of buildings was done either in consonance with the particular bias to the adorable deities or the particular surroundings. But both these things we do not find here in the naming of these buildings. What then the basis is? I, therefore, may suggest that these names are in accordance with the inauspicious or auspicious nature of the buildings. Therefore, all the varieties of Divśālas except the first eleven are naturally to be called by some terrible aspect of nature or deity. The Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra itself says it at many places (vide Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra 23. 2 3, 27). There are certain exceptions too. The names of the principal Catuśśāla-houses like Sarvatobhadra, Vardhamāna and Nandyāvarta. etc. are of traditional nature and also auspicious in character.