Some Guhyas and Ganas

SOME GUHYAS AND GANAS
Their Character and Prowess

Dr. I. K. SARMA
Superintending Archaeologist, Archaeological Survey of India
Excavations Branch, Nagpur

Yakshas. Yakshas, their Ganas and Guhyas are self-born primordial beings. They were associated with Panchabhootas. Their earliest abodes (Sadanaa), were sky, water and trees. They enjoyed supernatural powers. As cult divinities among the common folks Laukikadevatas(these godly creatures were vested with both) benevolent and malevolent powers and occupied a sumptuous and colourful place in early Indian art, thought and literature. They are among the earliest known iconographic creations and common to many religious faiths. Their forms and functions, character as well as prowess, have undergone modifications over a vast period and in different cultural and geographical contexts. Yakshas as gods existed in Rigveda, as also their worshippers and places of worship. Saayana described them as Poojaneeyaand Punyajanaor Itarajana(Atharvaveda, VIII 10.28). An idea of their aquatic origin is explained in Rigveda¹(VII. 4.12, 13; Salilasyaprishthe),as well as Atharvaveda(X. 7.38 and XI. 2.24). A. K. Coomara­swamy stressed the close connection of Yakshas² with Brahma whose world is water. The functions of the Yaksha’s was attributed to Varuna, then the greatest among the Vedic gods in earlier texts (Rigveda, I, 24.7). The Yakshas, together with apsaras(ap-saraani)and Gandharvas, moved in waters (seas, rivers and tanks), as well as over the sky. The Vedic Raakshasa and Pisaacha stood in close proximity to the Yakshas. Kubera-Vaishravana was the king of Raakshasas as well as the Guhyakas and a guardian of a dik. A passage in Rigveda(X. 88. 13) refers to Agni as the Lord of Yakshas (Yakshaadhyaksham),and the latter received the oblations at the Sraadharituals (Grihyasutra) along with other demi-gods. In the later Vedic texts, they have been described as beautiful as well as invincible. In the epic period Yakshas appear as repositories of knowledge Yakshaprasna(cf. Mahabharata, III. 313.45), and beautiful looking.

In the Mauryan phase of Indian art, we find a class of massive stone statues in round, as also independent, small figures of folk style in other media like stucco and terracotta. During the post-Mauryan phase till the late Kushan times, these other-worldly divinities are subordinated, or better say tamed, in the Buddhist legend and to a lesser extent among the Brahmanical and Jaina themes. The standing Yakshas and Yakshis are thus mostly seen in relief on rail uprights or within the other architectural embellishments, their smaller versions like Guhyasand Ganaswere vested with lesser functions as dwarf atlantes or caryatides to the higher cult gods. During the subsequent period a vast growth in the cult and iconography is seen side by side, linked with the evolution and expansion of Buddhist-Jaina and Brahmanical pantheon. The unlimited and mysterious character of these Yakshas sets suffused before the great avataara purushas like Buddha and Bodhisattvas, Jinas as well as a plethora of Hindu gods and goddesses. At the outset, a sort of functional as well as spiritual identity underlies these depictions, notwithstanding their diverse sectarian associations. I propose to dilate here on an important group of Guhya and Ganas found in early Indian sculpture.

A Coping (Ushneesha) from AmanH’ati: Guntur Dt. (A. P.)

This limestone coping now exhibited in the open quandrangle behind the main galleries at the Amaravati site Museum has acquired a special significance to the students of Indian art. This is a sculptured rail member originally found in two fragments by Jas Burgess and now in Madras Govt. Museum. Both Ananda K. Coomaraswamy and C. Sivarama Murti published them. One more fragment was recovered by (late) R. Subrahmanyam in the year 1958 from the digs around the Mahaastoopa. By a careful study and skill of the modeller, the three fragments were found to fit into a larger coping measuring 3.35 m. length; 66 cm. wide and 19 cm. thick and an upper part is still to be recovered to complete the architectural piece. However, the sculp­tured theme is complete now and reveals a scene of maalaavaahakascarrying the lotus rhizome. The roll is carefully carved, the downward bends marked by half-rosette, the upper border has twisted cord over a row of leaves and bells alternated, while the lower border which has rosettes interlaced by a creeper on alter­nately petalled flower within square panels. The top of the coping is plain and rounded off. At the extreme left is the Brahmi inscription in first century B. C. characters recording the gift of the slab. The figures depicted on this coping have earlier been discussed by the above scholars fragment-wise but the forming of the three pieces together proved to be of immense value to evaluate better the iconographic significance in its correct pers­pective. To begin with, from the extreme right, the first standing figure has an elephant face and fan-shaped ears, short statured stumpy physique with prominent paunch, the navel in the shape of a willow leaf – a characteristic obtained in some early dwarf figures from Amaravati itself The stylised trunk gently curves to right, the tusk is inconspicuous. The tassels of the dhoti (loin­cloth) extend above the knees and held up between the thighs. A single stringed maalaawith a heavy ghata-shaped central pendant rests over the paunch. The figure wears prominent wristlets. The stumpy garland is borne over the , the right hand upraised somewhat, whereas the corresponding left palm twisted and held at the hip, due to the superload. The next figure is an obese female dwarf shown frontally with a similar lower garment, heavy breasts, the facial part mutilated. She takes the heavy garland on the across the shoulders.

The third, figure is extremely interesting and important too. He is a male dwarf walking sidereally to right, the heavy garland held up by both the hands He has certain distinct features like moustache, wrinkled brow and a close-fitting cap, a Vaamakireeti, two twigs emerging out of it, one above the forehead, the other at the rear. Possibly a number of such Sikhasmight be there, besides a nilotpala. He wears a close striped nicker. The fourth figure is again a full-bodied female facing left at the terminal end of the panel. Seated at ease on the pericarp of a bloomed lotus, she wears striped drawers, adorns a star-shaped jewel on the forehead, makutamani, its lace securing the bi-partitioned hairdo (dhammillaa), which is finely combed. She has bulging breasts, wide eyes, heavy anklets, multiple wristlets, a beaded maalaaand jewel-studded ear-lobes. The figure reveals its striking similarity in style and ornamentation to the Bharhut and Sanchi Lakshmi figures and the Amaravati Yakshinis of c. 2nd century B. C. What is of more significance is the carving of an owl (ulooka), the vaahanaof this goddess at the sectional face, of the slab.

The first ganais a true representation of Gajaananabeing the very first in the sequence, he is definitely a Ganaadhipa. The next female figure obviously stands for his consort Ganesani. Although evidence is meagre in respect of the consort of Ganesa in early iconography, attention might be drawn to some rare examples, like the ones from Rairh, Mathura and Bhumara. The nearest and an early Kushaan find is reported from Chandraketugarh. Here he is two-handed, holds his consort on lap. The third figure is that of Dhanada, i. e., Kubera who is a Lokapaala, the regent of the North, and also a Guhyapati. Kubera standing as an attendant of Lakshmi is not uncommon in early Indian art. Close connection exists between goddess Sri and Yaksha ganas. The eight nidhiswhich are associated with Kubera are the aadhaarasof Padminividyaand the presiding deity was goddess Sree. So the penultimate figure is regarded as Lakshmi. Here she is shown drawing out the maalaafrom the mouth of a makarawhich again is the Vaahanaof the goddess. Hence Makara Lakshmi.It might be of interest to note that in some later passages of the Mahabharata, Lakshmi is expressly stated as the consort of Kubera, thus envisaging a sort of union with the goddess of Prosperity. But the Sree here, with all her lakshanasand laanchanasis performing the task of a garland-bearer, rather unbecoming of her character and prowess. S. Paranivatane described a vaahalkadaor frontispiece from Kantakachetinga stupaat Mihintale, District Kandy, Ceylon, wherein an elephant-faced two-handed seated ganais shown amidst ganaswho are paying obeisance to their leader although the entire group are Vaahakas. This elephant-faced God has a single tusk, ekadantinand Paranivatane says that the figure is “undoubtedly a prototype of the classical Ganesha”, datable to second century A. D.

In the Hinayaana Buddhism, Braahmanical deities were always shown as acolytes of Buddha. The Mahaayaana and later Vajrayaana sects not only transformed the character of these deities but effected changes in nomenclature, cosmogony and myths. Adoration of Ganesha is known to Buddhists and a mystic mantra called Ganapatihridayawas said to have been disclosed to Ananda by Buddha himself at Rajagriha. Aasamaga (400 A. D.) Fa-hien (383-413 A. D.) and other Chinese Buddhist monks introduced the worship of Ganesha to China as well. At Dunhuang (province Gansu), in Cave No. 285 dated to 535-538 A. D., Braahmanical deities like Siva, Kaartikeya and Ganesha were found among the painted murals. In the Yunkang grottoes (province Shani), in Cave No.8 dated A. D. 465-494, besides several Yakshas, Gandharvas and Kinnaras, Mahesvara and Kumaara (six-headed) were carved in relief flanking the doorway. Lokapaala representations particularly Vaisravana (Kubera), on the silk-scroll paintings from Dunhuang are noteworthy. In all these cases the Braahmanical deities were subordinated to the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. By all means, the depictions on the Amaravati coping are the earliest known examples and perhaps inspired the Ceylonese and subsequently the Chinese Buddhists along with the spread of Mahaayaana and Vajrayaana sects.

A Stupa Slab from Dhulikatta: District Karimnagar: (A. P.)

An interesting aayakapataslab was reported from an excavated stupain the village of Vatakapur, a hamlet near the fortified early historical place, called Dhulikatta. The stupais a remarkable example of Hinayaana affiliation and was found encased with sculptured and inscribed aayakapatas. The earliest phase of the stupadates to mid-3rd century B. C. The extant height of the drum is reported to be of two metres while the andais preserved to a height of five metres and crowned by harmikaaand chhatras. As many as 47-carved slabs were found encased along the periphery of the drum. On one such limestone slab covering the eastern aayakaplatform, a Gana of the atlantes type is found in relief. The scene portrays the ganaholding up a carved pillar base like the goblins of the Pitalkhora Cave No. III, as well as the Sanchi toranaexamples (Western side). But this stumpy dwarf reveals certain unique and early characteristics not met with anywhere. The short trimmed hair above the forehead is arranged in a semi-circular comb-pattern, his awful eyes (eyeballs coming out), snub nose and burly cheeks, small chin and thick wide lips, leaf-shaped outsized ears with distended ear-lobes made up of a cluster of pearls or precious beads (or could be decorated spiral rings) rest on the shoulder. The bi-partitioned navel and the prominent gourd-shaped paunch atypical of the early Yakshas of Bharhut and Patna reliefs. The uplifted palm is not clearly carved but appears like a human type while the seated-on-foot posture as well as rounded Paadawith well-marked elephant toes have no parallel in the realm of Indian art. The displayed folds of the broad piece of lower cloth, covering the nudity: (the Kaupina)with visibly no ornamental girdle string emphasizes his tribal character. Another significant factor is that this slab adorns the east facing aayakapata. Can we not regard this ganaas an airaavatapersonified? Indra the regent of the East rides on this elephant. But that is not all! The most noteworthy feature is the cult mark on the forehead, Urdhva-tripundra, which is aligned to the later Vada Kalai, i.e., the northern sect, among the Sri Vaishnavas. This forehead mark incised between the eye­brows consists of two side lines, the tops flaring outward with the central vertical line corresponding to the ridge of the nose naasikaagra. There is no doubt that this relief figure belongs to second century B. C. on various archaeological evidences apart from stylistic considerations.

Gudimallam Guhya:

As a result of a stratigraphical probe within the garbhagrihaat the famous Parasuramesvara temple of this place, certain rare evidences have come to light. The earliest phase of this Sivasthalawas characterised by a Savedika Linga in open, datable to 3rd-­2nd century B C. Those interested in the exciting discoveries within this living temple might refer to my latest publication, “The Development of Early Saiva Art and Architecture.” The discussion here is restricted to the seated dwarf (guhya) carved in two-thirds relief at the lower part corresponding to the top of the Brahmabhaagaof thit tall-facetted Lingaof 1.68 m. high. On the shoulders of this guhyastands a full-bodied Agni-Rudra (80 cm. high) shown as if emerging out of a YupaThe figure is awe-inspiring and reveals splendorous movement but the goblin like devayaanabelow is disinclined to carry the mighty God. The latter is bent on his knees, measured only 46 cm. height, body shrunken, palms resting on the hips due to the superload. His ruffled brow, tight-teethed grim face, cheeks, nostril folds and the eyes impart a scouling look. The ears are pointed and shaped like a leaf as in the case of Dhulikatta and Bharhut guhyas. The lobes of the ear are elongated by conical drops studded with pearls or precious stones. He has a Kanthamaalamade up of fine strings with a long barrel-shaped pendent at the centre set between two rudraakshabeads spanned the chest. He wears simple circular wristlets and armlets (kankanas). The bi-partitioned navel and the lower garment fairly above the knees is tied by the mekhalastring below the navel. The vastrafolds outwardly, its double-line tassels fall on the ground between the legs. His head-gear is curious and embellished with a bunch of flowers and stalks tied to a crest composed of two sun flowers to . This feature, along with the erect ears as those of a Sasa (hare) suggestive of alertness and swift movement also emphasise the arabareal nature of the Gana. The short comb-like trimmed hair falling on the forehead looks the same as on Dhulikatta Yaksha as well as Begram ivory figure. By far the most outstanding feature of the depiction lies in the feet. The folded leg, specially its sweep and the terminal-end feature recalling the tail of a stumpy mermane or whale, a minavaajior maatanga nakra. The right side foot is somewhat unfinished while the left one is clear. This feature has not been clearly visualised so far anywhere else as in the present example. The sharp vertical incised forehead mark (tilaka), is distinctly clear above the knot between the eye-brows.

A Limestone Trimurti Plaque from Kunidene: District Guntur (A. P.)

T. V. G. Sastry published a stone plaque measuring 26.7 x 19.1 cm. which contained in relief Brahamanical deities as follows: The extreme right trimukhaBrahma seated on a calyx of a Lilly, in vyaakhyaanamudra; Siva Lingawith Nandi below inset in a square base; Sakti seated close by the left side in pralambapaada, her head part is symbolised by a large lotus, the pericarp of it stands for the head – hence Devyascha mastake padmam. She is Sree as well as Sakti here. A guhyais below her feet as a caryatide like in the Bharhut rails or the Mathura Yakshini. He bas broad shoulders but shrunken and grim-faced. Next to this figure is a standing male, perhaps Kaartikeya, with his spear (Saktidhara), while seated Narasimha at the end of the plaque possessed as usual animal head and human body. The prowess of the main gods, Siva and Sakti is specially highlighted by their vaahanas–theBull in case of Siva symbolised here as Lingapithaand a crouching naravaahanain the case of theriomorphic Sakti.

Other examples in Indian Art

This study will be incomplete without considering certain comparable examples from other regions. The foremost that comes to my mind is the Bharhut rail, now in Indian Museum, Calcutta. Here, two examples have revealed certain unique features roughly identical to the examples discussed above, from Amaravati, Dhulikatta and to a meagre extent Gudimallam also. The first example is a male gana, only the bust part, within the lotus pericarp. Such ganasare ingeniously depicted over the Bharhut rail to emphasize their emergence out of the blossoming padma. This grotesque ganapossessed long conical asinine ears, lower part distended due to the heavy spiral lobes, and is somewhat similar to Gudimallam and Dhulikatta example’s. Besides, the grim face, canine teeth, snub nose, broad nostrils, large eyes with the cornea prominently emphasized by the skin folds, shown by sharply incised lines. The most distinctive feature, however, lies on his forehead. In between the eye-knot and touching the bindu, amidst the lozenges decorating the forehead band, i.e., the lalaatabandhais the urdhvapundrakanmark incised in double vertical lines.

Another example of a guhya, like the Gudimallam one, is best illustrated over a vertical of the same rail (No. 106). Here the crouching stumpy semi-human dwarf is bent on knees, both his hands touching the ground, and shrunken due to the superload of the standing “Kupira-yaksha” on his shoulders. A closer view of this bhaaravaahakarevealed certain unique features. He has elephant ears, oblique long eyes, broad chin and stumpy long nose and bi-partitioned combed hair (dhammilla). The forehead (phaalabhaaga) has incised triangulakahorizontal mark topped by a chandrakala, i. e., crescent with a binduin its curve corresponding to the central line of the hairdo. The fan-shaped ears, in this example, as well as that of the Amaravati Ganesha, and the toes of the ganaon the Dhulikatta slab clearly display an underlying commonness in their affiliation or say origin from the elephant, the airaavata, regent of the East and the vaahanaof the Vedic God Indra. If the above urdhvapundraka(vertical) or triangulaka(horizontal) marks on the foreheads of the ganascited above have any sectarian significance or origination, it would then be that these Vedic or Braahmanical ganashave been subordinated in the Buddhist legend right from third century B. C.

Shashi Ashthana recently published a patravaahaka gana obtained from Mathura-Agra areas, now preserved in the National Museum. The youthful figure carries a bowl-cum-dish on the head. He is a Kumbhodaraseated in bhadraasana,the vastraroll encircles the paunch (udarabandha) and tied to the upheld right leg. Similar figures are reported from Aghapur and Ahichchatra also. The Aghapur ganahas a moustache, in addition, characteristic of the Gandharan style. A very important characteristic lies in the Sankhukarnatype of ears with the lobes. In three cases, the presence of horizontal tripundramark on the forehead, fairly above the eyebrows is specially noteworthy. As rightly observed by Shashi Ashthana these horizontal lines are not wrinkles of the forehead but clearly incised marks of some sectarian affiliation. We cannot, however, be certain whether in case of Govindanagar example (Mathura Museun) of the same period, these marks exist on the forehead, as the part suffered damage, but the ears are of the Sankhu Kama type. R. N. Misra illustrated a standing two-handed male from Gosnakhera, District Mathura. He is a pot-bellied nude figure, holds a lakutain his right hand and a high-necked miniature vase in the left. He has big pendulous bells in both the ears and hence characterized as ghantaa-karna. An important aspect, viz., the triangulakamark on the forehead is erroneously taken by the author as a third eye. The figure cannot be taken merely as an Yaksha-ganabut seems to be that of LakutapaaniSiva. Such horizontal Vibhuti-like marks are also noticed on a terracotta figure from Sahet-Mahet, among the Lucknow Museum collections, and dated to post-Kushaan period. Among other examples cited by Shashi Ashthana, a Kushaan terracotta male-head with tripundra, now in Allahabad Museum; a Paatravaahakafrom Mathura: another example bearing Panchaangulaka, rather than tipundra, assignable to the Gupta period are most interesting.

Then about the significance of the Patraborne on the head, K. Coomaraswamy held it as an “aachamana kumbhi” for storing water by the devotees at the Buddhist shrine. But the depression is not that purposeful. It could be merely a plate for placing the flowers and other auspicious things like haldi, kumkum or vibhutiat the threshold of the sacred place. Whether these Paatravaahakasare seated or standing the function appears to be the same, but on their present showing the crouching dwarfs are earlier in date. They are mostly on the uprights of Buddhist rails, under a standing Yaksha or Yakshini or rarely a Vedic God, Rudrayajamaana, as on the Gudimallam Linga.

Discussion

Let it be clearly stated that we do not regard these dwarf bhaaravaahakasas independent divinities at least in respect of the above cases. The characteristic marks on the forehead reveal the existence of an eka urdhvapundra mark on Gudimallam bhaaravaahaka Guhya, an urdhvatripundra ka on the Dhulikatta caryatid: a horizontal triangulakawith a Chandrakalaon the Bharhut rail. All these three examples belong to c. mid-third to second century B. C. while at Gudimallam, the example is conceptually Vedic or proto-puraanic, the others are from Buddhist contexts. In respect of the Kushaan and post-Kushaan examples noted above, specific contextual details are lacking. We cannot therefore pronounce any valid hypothesis whether the urdvapundrakaor triangulakaor panchaangulakain these cases signify the Vedic or the later Saiva, or Vaishnava cult. The earliest trace of what appears to be a triangulakamark is seen on the receding forehead of a terracotta human figure obtained from Kalibangan excavations in the year 1960-’61. The deeply incised horizontal lines, though somewhat blurred due to passage of time, cannot be regarded as aberration in the modelling of the object, but clearly drawn marks and the bead is a clean shaven one. Several other cult objects (fire altars; other aahavaniyas, terracotta triangular cakes with religious purport and depiction of gods, cut animal bones specially of Boswithin these (Kundis) and sacrificial remains from the excavated Harappan habitation anticipate the later Brahamanical cults.

The Gudimallam guhyais unwillingly carrying the God. The Eka pundra on his forehead and the mermane leg emphasize his association with paataala. Vedic Rudra is described as the over­land of goblins (Rg. I. 114, 6). Bhutanaamaadhipatih, while in the Puraanas, Yakshas were regarded as offsprings of the ganasof Mahaadeva (Vaayu.Ch. 8, p. 106). The Bhutas and others were stated to be borne out of sweat of Siva who is the cause of dual creation.

The urdhvatripundrakaof Dhulikatta and Bharhut ganas,might symbolise Vaishnavitic origin. The leg feature of Dhulikatta gana as well as the elephant ears of Bharhut and Amaravati ganasconnect them to lndra’s airaavata. The Amaravati coping visibly displays how certain other important Vedic-­Braahmanical gods and goddesses were made to serve as maala vaahakas. In spite of this there is no doubt that in Buddhism, Yaksha-Kubera, Indra and Lakshmi continued to enjoy a superior status than others. The Udichyaveshaof Kubera explicit on Amaravati coping finds mention in Vishnudharmottara, the Kulah(Cap), in particular, has close parallel to a terracotta specimen from Allahabad Museum (No. 772) as well as the Nagarjunakonda Roman guards on the palace pillars. The patrakaears are distinct from the SankhukarnasThese can be clearly contrasted between Gudimallam-Dhulikatta examples on one hand and the Bharnut. Mathura-Govindanagar-Aghapur ones on the other. The former is a characteristic present among the caryatids of the earlier phase on Bharhut rails, Gudimallam, etc., of 2nd century B. C. The latter widely occur from Kushaan and post-Kushaan periods in North India.

Curiously this Sankhukarna Yaksha is found among the ten Kshetrapaalaka images (bronzes), taken in procession before the regular Utsavaof Lord Sri Ranganaatha at the famous Srirangam temple. These are assigned places in the Tiruvannaali Pradakshina surrounding the circular sanctum, according to Pancharaatraagama vedhi. This ritual might have a hoary past and originated perhaps in the Mathura-Achichchatra region.

It is from about 10th-11th century A. D. the urdhvapundrakaboth single or three (eka or tripundra), becomes an exclusive Vaishnava cult mark and sub-sects grew basing on the manner and composition of this symbol. Whereas the triangulakaor panchaangulahorizontal forehead marks, signified Saivite or more commonly Smaarthasfrom the times of Adi Sankara (early 9th century A. D.). We have noted about Gosnakhera, that these marks are well adopted on the images of Siva at least from post-Kushaan and Gupta times. Yet another factor that eludes proper explanation is with what material these marks are applied on the forehead-whether of kumkum, haldi or sandal paste or simply ash of burnt cowdung. The former was exclusively used by the Vaishnavas, while the latter by Saivas from a very early period. We have known about the wandering group of Sivabhaagavatas(Patanjalis) who besmeared ash all over the body Vedic budi or Vibhuti, the ash out of burnt cattle dung, stood for power and auspiciousness (aisvarya). Amara tells “Vibhutir budi rasivaryam animaadhika mashtadhaa anima mahima chaiva, garima, laghima, tatha praaptyaih praakaamya misatvam vasitvam chashta siddhayah.

Thus super human powers consisting of eight faculties (animaadi ashra siddhis), as narrated above were attributed to the Vibhudi, The practice of adorning Vibhudion the forehead with the Right-­hand, three or all the five fingers put together, has perhaps originat­ed with the Neolithic herding communities in Protsohitoric India.

Their choicest deities (laukikadevatas) appear to be the various Yakshas and Yakshinis, their guhyasand ganaswho were inhabiting the hills, forests and natural abodes. A pantheon among these grew up slowly and steadily and took deep roots into the religious beliefs through art and literature in ancient India. The cult regimentations, resulting out of the growth of disparate rituals practices, led to a large variety of popular deities. Their character, attributes, modes of worship and decoration were adapted basing on the associated religious faith, viz., Brahmanical. Buddhist or Jaina. On the present showing, till about the Kushaan or even little later it appears that-cult marks on the forehead, as detailed above, had no such strict sectarian moorings but were merely in general vogue and stood as symbols of power and auspiciousness.