Amaravati Art in the Context of Andhra Archaeology

by Sreyashi Ray chowdhuri | 2018 | 90,477 words

This page relates ‘Chaddanta Jataka’ of the study on Amaravati Art in the Context of Andhra Archaeology, including museum exhibitions of the major archeological antiquities. These pages show how the Buddhist establishment of Amaravati (Andhra Pradesh) survived from 4th century BCE to 14th century CE. It includes references and translations of episodes of Buddha’s life drawn from the Avadanas and Jatakas which are illustrated in Amaravati art.

[Full title: Jātakas and Avadānas in the Amarāvatī Art: Chaddanta Jātaka]

Story:-

Once Boddhisattva was born as a noble elephant and dwelt near lake Chaddanta. He had two chief queens named Cullasubhaddā and Mahāsubhaddā. One day the royal elephant struck the sala tree. At that moment both the queens were present under the tree. Dry twigs, leaves and red ants fell upon Cullasubhaddā whereas green leaves, flowers and fresh stalks fell upon Mahāsubhaddā. Cullasubhaddā conceived a grudge against the Great Being about his disparity of love between the two queens. Similarly at the time of bathing in the lotus lake the royal elephant presented a flower twin to Mahāsubhaddā. This further resulted in resentment of Cullasubhaddā against the Great Being. One day when Bodhisattva was entertaining five hundred Pacceka Buddhas, Cullasubhaddā offered wild fruits to them. She put up a prayer asking for rebirth as a royal maiden Subhadda so that she could take revenge from the Bodhisattva. From that moment she refrained from taking food and died of starvation. She was born as the royal maiden of Banaras. One day she remembered her former birth and decided to take revenge on Bodhisattva. She smeared her body with oil, put on soiled robe and lay in the bed pretending to be sick. On hearing this, the king entered the royal closet and asked her about her health. She demanded to have all the hunters around her and expressed the desire to get the tusk of the six tusked elephant which she saw in her dream.

Amongst all the hunters, Subhaddā chose the wicked hunter Sonuttara to fulfill her desire. The hunter went to the dwelling place and dug a pit. As the elephant passed from that place the hunter hit a poisoned arrow at him. The elephant crumbled with pain in the pit. The Great Being asked the hunter the reason for such an act. The hunter told him about queen Subhaddā’s desire. Hearing this Bodhisattva realized that this was the work of Cullasubhaddā who actually desired to take revenge and kill him. The elephant asked the hunter to cut off his tusks. The hunter hesitated to saw the tusks. The elephant volunteered to cut the tusks. He gave the tusks to the hunter explaining him that he did value them but was giving them away as a meritorious act which will result in the cause of his attaining omniscience[1].

Depiction:-

At Amarāvatī a crossbar roundel depicts the Jātaka in synoptic narrative mode from bottom to top. It is preserved in the Madras Government Museum. In this panel there are seven scenes arranged in three episodes. Chaddanta is shown approaching the lake with his retinue. The elephant are shown sporting in the lake full of lotuses while some one holds the royal parasol for the elephant king. To the right, Chaddanta presents his chief queen Cullasubhaddā leaving the pond. Beyond the pond is shown jealous queen lying down to die. To the extreme left the elephant king slowly emerges from the water pond and walks away. Further higher up on the right side is the kneeling elephant shot by the wicked hunter. The next scene depicts the hunter sawing the tusks of the elephant king. The top of the medallion portrays the hunter departing with tusks[2] (Pl 17a).

The jātaka is also reported on the dome panel at Amarāvatī preserved in the British Museum[3]. In this relief one can see the tusks being carried to the royal couple. The Jātaka is also seen in a panel from Goli[4] and Gummadidurru.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Cowell E.B, Op.cit, vol V-VI, no 514, pp 20-31

[2]:

Sivaramamurti C, Op.cit, pp 207-209, pl XXVI, fig 2.

[3]:

Subrahmanyam B, Op.cit, Pl 12, Pl 12a

[4]:

Ramachandran T.N, Op.cit, Pl I C.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: