What does the Kirtimukha mean?

The Kirtimukha or the ‘face of fame’ is a familiar piece of sculpture, which is found in some form or other from the rise of Indian architecture up to the late nineteenth century. In certain periods, it is the favourite of the sculptors, while, in others, it is overlooked. It generally occupies a prominent place either on the door-slabs or at the corners of the pillars and pilasters.

It is generally found as a component of decorative design in religious and ritual accessories, like other motifs such as the ‘Makara Torana,’ the ‘Gajalakshmi,’ the ‘Hamsas’ and the ‘Elephant.’ Very often, it is of an intensely poetic character and raises the aesthetic side of its appeal. It has long captured the imagination of the Indian sculptor, and is repeated in many stereotyped forms, both in religious and monumental edifices. Essentially it is a conventional lion’s face, generally found with arabesque. Its eyes seem to protrude and are closely set. Often the face is surmounted by a decorative line of triform arch which represents the eye-brows. The arch beautifully curves and ends in the fanciful shape of two horns. The ears of the lion are shown below the horn-like arch. The flying locks of the manes are pictured by an ornamental device as waving lines radiating upwards. The mouth is generally open and the rows of teeth are thus displayed. They are flanked by two large fangs shaped like two curved tusks. In artistic specimens of the Chalukyan kind, the beaded tassels or festoons of pearls, shaped like garlands, symmetrically dangle from beneath the fangs. Later on, the festoons develop into two long-necked stems, in ‘makara’ faces. The motif persistently occurs in Hindu, Buddistic or Jaina monuments and temples, either as a sacred symbol, as a mere artistic device or as an architectonic in temple architecture.

The ‘Kirtimukha’ literally means the "face of glory"; and it has almost always occupied a position of awe and honour in Indian temples and other edifices. The architects have expressed in concrete form what they contemplated in devotion. The Indian mind generally hankers after God and expresses the dualism of the physical body and the spiritual soul. A close association between the physical and the philosophical conceptions could more easily be brought about by carving or painting such figures, though it may sometimes seem erotic. The respect for the figure would be increased by enclosing it in religious garb. Accordingly the significance of the ‘Kirtimukha’ is described in the seventeenth chapter of the ‘Skanda Purana’ (Siva Kanda) as follows:

There was a very powerful king of the Daityas named Jalandara. He had conquered all the three worlds. At that time, the great Lord, Siva, had intended to wed Parvati, the daughter of the king of the Himalayas. Jalandara, incensed with pride, sent a messenger to Siva and contemptuously commanded the latter to give up his claims for Parvati’s hand. For, the beggar-Siva, so thought Jalandara, was not a proper match for the lovely princess who could but be a spouse of such a great king as himself. When the courier, Rahu, delivered the message to Siva, the great god became so angry that a terrible being shot forth from between the eye-brows of the Lord. The being was roaring like thunder, and had a face like that of a lion, a protruding tongue, eyes burning with fire and its hair raised upwards. Though it had an emaciated body, it seemed like another Narasimha, the man-lion incarnation of Vishnu, in strength. The terrible being ran up to eat Rahu, whereupon the latter prayed to Lord Siva to save him. Siva dissuaded the being from eating up Rahu, but the being complained to Siva of intense hunger and begged him for food. Siva ordered the being to appease its hunger by eating its own flesh; and the being forthwith did the same, leaving only its face intact. This pleased the Lord Siva, very much; and he addressed the terrible face which had saved his honour that thenceforth it would be known as ‘Kirtimukha.’ Further, it was ordained that the ‘Kirtimukha’ should always remain at the doorways of Siva temples, and that whosoever failed to worship the ‘Kirtimukha’ would never acquire Siva’s grace.¹ That is the reason why the ‘Kirtimukha’ has had a permanent place onthe doorways of Siva temples.

In the Karnataka Province, where, as well as in Guzerat, the the ‘Kirtimukha’ is very conspicuous, there is another story of the origin of the ‘Kirtimukha.’ In the "Seven Lingayat Legends," Rev. Kittel quotes the following legend put into the mouth of Gautama Rishi who relates it to King Gambhira of Ratnagiri. The legends are taken from the ‘Anubhava Sikhamani’ which was a popular composition in Kannada. The story of the ‘Kirtimukha’ runs as follows:

"To the demon (Daitya) Hiranya, Prahlada was born, and he paid devotion to Hari. His father said, ‘Pay devotion to Hara,’ and gave him various instructions. Nevertheless, when the boy called Hari, the latter heard it; he was born in the form of Narasimha (man-lion) in a pillar, tore open the belly of Hiranya, took his entrails, decorated his own ‘vanamala’ with those entrails and lapped the blood of the Daitya, became excessively proud and attacked the hosts of the immortals. The teased immortals prayed to Lord Siva. When Sankara, who breaks the teeth of the proud, heard it, he boiled with extreme rage and said, ‘Come, master Sri Virabhadra, go thou. Narayana is not my equal, Courageously go and break the display of pride of him who has overstepped his boundary. Thereafter return.’ Virabhadra went in the form of Sarabha, seized the neck of Hari and whirled him on high. He (the wicked one) came to Hara’s feet, and falling down praised him, uttering, ‘Hara, Hara.’ Parameswara was pleased and said, ‘I will give thee a boon, Ask.’ The wicked one (Hari) said, ‘Take up my body.’ Then he made the ‘Kirtimukha’ of the head; and of the skin of Hari, which he had taken up, he made a seat (‘asana’.) On earth it got the name of ‘simhasana’ (lion throne), and it appears under your hips, King Gambhira, look there. ²

The Kannada Jain Poet, Pampa alludes to the ‘Kirtimukha’, in his ‘Pampa Bharatam’ or ‘Vikramarjuna Vijayam,’ Pampa lived in the tenth century and was greatly patronized by the renowned Chalukyan prince, Arikesari II. The Chalukyas had been for some time overcome by the Rashtrakutas; but the power of the latter did not last long. However, both the dynasties encouraged Kannada literature wherein poets tried to excel one another in eulogising the fame and prowess of their respective patrons. Pampa enumerates the ‘Kirtimukha’ as an ornament on the tusks of elephants. The incident cited from the ‘Mahabharata’ was after the completion of the ‘Rajasuya’ sacrifice. All the guests had departed to their respective countries, Krishna was describing to Dharmaraja the latter’s great achievement. "You have conquered," said Krishna, "the whole country encompassed by the HImalayas on the north and the Setu (Cape Comorin) in the south; you have rendered every part of it free from danger. You have showed your prowess; and with the abundant riches acquired by your brothers, you have performed the ‘Rajasuya’ sacrifice in a glorious manner; and your fame has been like the ‘Kirtimukha’ ornament on the tusks of the elephants in the form of the four cardinal directions: in other words, your fame has spread to all sides." ³

Again in the ‘Pampa Ramayana’ or ‘Ramachandra Charita Puranam’ of the Jain Poet, Nagachandra Kavi, who flourished at the end of the eleventh century under the Chalukyas, reference is made to the ‘Kirtimukha.’ It is again described as an ornament over the tusks of the guardian elephants, and King Vijayaratha’s fame was such a ‘Kirtimukha’. That king is pictured as "fulfilling the desires of all, with lotus face, himself the royal swan, delighting with his song, with his fame spreading so far and wide as to become ‘Kirtimukha’ ornaments over the tusks of the guardian elephants of the distant regions, and with the title ‘Jagajjana kanthabhushanam’." ⁴

Etymologically too, the word ‘Kirtimukha’ may be translated literally as the ‘Fall of glory.’ The motif, very frequently found at the entrance to temples, might have had the origin as a decorative carving even before the Puranas had been written; and then it might have been transformed to glorify the gods or great personages. The word ‘Kirti’ in Sanskrit has the meaning, ‘a temple,’ too, The words ‘Kirti’ and ‘Kirtan’ are derived from the Sanskrit root, ‘Krit,’ meaning ‘celebrating, praising.’ ‘Kirti’ stands for fame, renown, glory; and when it is a noun, ‘Kirtanam’ stands for a temple or any work of art, which proclaims the glory of the architect.

Mr. Fleet has taken to the theory that ‘Kirtanam’ is meant for a temple, in proof whereof he quotes Mr. M. K. Telang as well as Dr. Bhandarkar. "Mr. M. K. Telang first brought to notice, on the authority of Bhagwanlal Indraji,⁵ that, in certain connections, ‘Kirtana’ has the meaning of a temple."⁶ He then allots the meaning ‘temple’ to ‘Kirti’ too. "Dr. Bhandarkar has, however, recently suggested to me that ‘Kirti’ and ‘Kirtanam’ are hardly to be actually translated by the word ‘temple,’ or by any of the specific terms, but denote generally ‘any work of public utility, calculated to render famous the name of the constructor of it.’⁷ This is in accordance with the etymology of the words, from the root ‘krit’ to mention, to commemorate, to praise.’ And the particular work referred to may be a temple, a tank or anything else of a suitable nature. The word ‘Kirtim’ is often used for famous buildings in the current inscriptions as for instance of the Gwalior Prashasti of Bhoja–‘….nata jagatimiyam arya kirtim.’ " ⁸

Prof. Kielhorn quotes⁹ from the Chandela inscriptions that the illustrious Devalabdhi erected the temple (‘Kirtana’). Not only ‘Kirtanam,’ but even the word ‘Kirti’ sometimes assumed the meaning, a ‘palace’ or ‘temple’ (‘Prasadakirtana’). "Sthite yena Svena yaso-dhvajena ghatitan-vansa (nisa) v–udichipathe, Sopana margam-iva muktip (uras) ya Kirtim-etam (m) Vidhaya kusalam-yad-upattam-asmat II"¹⁰ –"Whatever merit bas been acquired by the erection of this edifice (which is) as it were a stair-case to the City of Salvation, may through that the whole assemblage of men, headed by the circle of his elders (and) including his parents, attain to perfect wisdom." The interpreter of the inscription, in a foot-note, supports the meaning of the word ‘Kirti’–a temple, on the authority of Hemachandra’s ‘Anekarthasangraham’ where the word ‘Kirti’ also means a ‘palace’ or ‘temple.’

The latter half of the compound, ‘mukha,’ means literally a face; but it denotes sometimes the chief, principal or prominent part, when it comes at the end of a compound. ¹¹ We have already stated that the motif was originally employed in Siva temples. It must have been later used both as an ornament and also as a sign to distinguish Siva temples from others. It was generally placed at the entrance doors in the centre of the jaurbs or lintels so that it could easily attract the attention of the visiting devotees. Sometimes it was to be found on the pilasters and the corners of the ceilings of the roofs. Still later on, it was placed on the head-dresses of the images of deities. In every case almost, the ‘Kirtimukha’ occupied a very prominent and respectable position. The placing of the ‘Mukha-bhadras’ or front tabernacles is mentioned in the ‘Manasara,’ which is the Manual of Hindu Architecture. The monumental face was the one generally employed, which certainly must have been some plain flowery or ornamental design in the beginning; but when the rivalry between the Saivites and the Vaishnavites ran high, the Saivite architects must have naturally sought for an emblem to distinguish their temples and other buildings from those of the Vaishnavites. When a theory or new suggestion is hatched, it gains voluminous strength when it emerges from the pen of a dreamy poet or from the awe-inspiring lips of the narrator of the ‘Puranas’. In India, especially, such an idea is better grasped and adopted by the people, when it is clothed in religious garbs. The writer of the ‘Skanda Purana’ found an easy avenue for the expression of what he felt in the ‘Glory of the Kirtimukha.’ And ever since then it has assumed an important position in Indian architecture, ancient and mediaeval, up to the late nineteenth century. In connection with the ‘Mukha-bhadra’ or front tabernacle, the ‘Manasara’ lays down the following rule: ‘Tadurdhwe Kirtivaktram tu nirgamakirtir-bhavet’–‘the renowned face should spring forth above that.’¹² So that, once more a prominent place was allotted to the ‘Kirtivaktra’ or ‘Kirtimukha’, as ‘mukha’ and ‘vaktra’ are synonyms. It may be inferred, therefore, that in ancient Indian architecture, emblems like the grotesque face or similar flowery ornamentations might have been in vogue; and later on, to attach much importance to it, the compiler of the ‘Puranas’ must have woven an interesting legend around it, so opines Syt. O. C. Gangoly. "It is impossible that the form of the gorgon face was an inevitable component in decorative designs of religious and ritual accessories, and that was a persistent and an ever persistent element in all forms of Asiatic art, including ‘Vedic’ or pre-historic Indian art, which the Indian iconographer, when he set to compile or compose the ‘Skanda Purana,’ could not ignore or explain away, and he might have been compelled to weave an interesting legend round a form which was already existing."¹³

The ‘Kirtimukha’ is regarded with much respect by devotees in Gujerat. When they see it on the threshold of the shrine, they sprinkle on it before entering the temple. "They do not step on it but carefully leap over it."¹⁴ The Gujarati ‘Salats’ or masonry workers consider the ‘Kirtimukha’ as the face of some sea-monster, and they call it ‘Grasa’ without attaching any meaning to it as a face of glory. The word ‘Grasa’ stands for a ‘mouthful,’ and may, therefore, mean a fully developed and ferocious face. Or, it might have been derived from the word ‘graha’–‘one who holds’ or ‘a planet.’ As one holds, the ‘Kirtimukha’ must have been meant for preventing all enemies of Siva in the initial stage from entering the Siva temples. The other supposition, that it might have represented a ‘graha’ or planet, is also possible; for, auspicious planets are always sought for before performing any ceremony. It is likely, therefore, that the ‘grasa’ face might have been used to denote some favourable planet by the Gujerati ‘Salats.’ "The Gujerati ‘Salats’ regard the face of ‘Kirtimukha’ as the face of some fabulous sea-monster, which they call ‘grasa’ and account for it quite differently from the myth." And again in a foot-note on the same page: "This may be connected with ‘grasa’–a mouthful, or with ‘graha’–one who seizes and a planet."¹⁵ The idea of a planet seems to be common both in Gujerat and in Orissa. In Orissa, the ‘Kirtimukha’ series are called ‘Rahur-Mukher-Mala.’ Such pronounced types of ‘Kirtimukhas’ are noticeable in Buddhist sculptures at Buddba Gaya, as can be seen in Plate XLIX, Figs. 4 and 5, in Dr. Mitra’s ‘Buddha Gaya.’ The same has been quoted by Sri Man Mohan Gangoly in his ‘Orissa and her remains, ancient and mediaeval.’

The ‘Kirtimukha’ at times has still different names in different places. In Gujerat, for instance, it is called ‘Graspati’ and in Kathiawar ‘gras-da’ which latter may sometimes be pronounced ‘Hras-da’ too, and will then mean ‘one who gives sweet fruits.’ It reminds one of the significance of the face as an auspicious sign; history traces it there as far as the Buddha Caves. "In all the receding compartments of the ‘Muni Bawas’ temples in Kathiawar, are figures of a curious non-descript animal, a sort of griffin–‘grasda,’ which occurs in a much less prominent form at Gumli, but figures in Indian sculpture from the age of the Buddhist Caves downwards." ¹⁶ In Gujerat, the ‘Kirtimukha’ is often called ‘Graspati,’ whether it is a close resemblance of ‘Brahaspati’ or ‘Grahapati’, is not clear. In any case, it stands for an auspicious sign at the entrance to buildings, protecting the inmates from any danger.

Or, is the name ‘Graspati’ a connotation for the lion face? For, ‘Gras’ or ‘Ghas’ may represent the wood, so that ‘graspati’, may mean the lord of the woods or the lion. It is likely, because, in the Hoysala architecture of the South, the ‘Kirtimukha’ face is called the ‘Simhalalate’–the lion-forehead. In South Indian styles too, it is called the ‘Simha-mugam’ or the lion’s face.

The ‘Kirtimukha’ mostly occurs in the Far Eastern architecture of Java, Sumatra, Cambodia, etc. There it is termed ‘Banaspati’ or ‘King of the woods’ or the lion. "The Dutch archaeologists, adopting the native popular tradition, have preferred to call these gorgon faces ‘Banaspati’ (lit., king of the woods) instead of ‘Kirtimukha,’ although no reasons have been assigned for the meaning or significance of the title."¹⁷ In the province of Bali in Eastern Java, the motif is called ‘Karang Boma,’ which in contrast with the Javanese name in general, indicates some sort of monster or mythological demoniac person. Dr. Vogel calls the ‘Kirtimukha’ with the ‘Makara-Torana’ sprouting from it, which is profoundly found in Java and Sumatra, as the ‘Kalamakara Torana’; he merely seems inclined to call it "an effigy of the terrible god ‘Kala’."¹⁷ It is evident from all these cases that the Kirtimukha indeed denoted a remarkable symbol–‘the face of fame.’

1 SkandaPurana–Siva Kanda–Chap. XVII.

2 Kittel: Seven Lingayat Legends, Indian Antiquary, Vol. IV, p. 216

3 Pampa Bharatam, Chap. VI–66.

4 Pampa Ramayana, Chap, I–141.

5 Apte: Sanskrit-English Dictionary, p. 405.

6 Fleet: Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum. Vol. III. p. 212. note 6.

7 Ibid: p. 212, note. 6.

8 Epigraphica Indica, Vol. XVIII, p. 110.

9 Kielhorn: Chandela Inscriptions Indi. Antiq. XVIII, p. 236-237.

10 Kielhorn : A Buddhist Inscription from Ghessawa. Indi Antiq XVIII, p. 310-312.

11Apte: O. C. p. 868.

12 Manasara: XVIII, 293.

13 C. Gangoly: Rupam. No. 1, p. 19.

14 Burgess & Consens. Arch. Survey of Northern Gujerat, p. 26.

15 O. C. Gangoly: Rupam No. 1, p. 13.

16 Burgess: Repnrt of the Arch. Surv. of Kathiawar and Kachhi. p. 93.

17 O. C. Gangolly: Rupam. No.1, p. 17.

18 Vogel: Indian and Arts Letters, Vol. III, p. 28.