Published in Journal of the Indian Society of Oriental Art, Vol. IX, 1941
Deogarh in Central India is well known for its monuments which throw considerable light on Gupta art, architecture and religious tendencies. But it is not so well known for its later and more numerous monuments which enable one to trace the course of Gupta, and post-Gupta Jainism. Particularly its yakshi iconography and Jain religious order. There are no less than thirty-one Jain temples, a number of loose Jain sculptures and over 200 inscriptions, the majority of which are dated. But, besides a cursory description of the sculptures, no attempt seems to have been made to study the temples or the sculptures as a whole. Recently a few of the sculptures have been studied and reproduced, but being taken out of their context they do not add materially to our knowledge of later Deogarh (Jain) architecture, sculpture or iconography. A complete study of the monuments at Deogarh would comprise the evolution of architecture as exhibited by the temples, showing how far these are Gupta, Gurjara, Pratihara, Chandratreya (Chandella) and even later than the last; the study of the sculptures in a similar manner and of their iconography, particularly of the Jain yakshi and lastly the paleography of its scores of inscriptions and its contribution to the development of the Nagari. In the present article a study of the Jain yakshi is made and of the paleography as far as it is relevant for their study.
It is not possible to ascertain the nature and prevalence of Jainism at Deogarh during the Gupta period or the pre-Gupta period because as yet no archaeological evidence has come forth. But the existence of the sculptures and inscriptions on the pillar at Kahaum numerous images of Jain Tirthankaras from Kosam and other places in the neighborhood of Allahabad (and now placed in the Municipal museum there); similar images strewn all over at Eran and other places in Central India, and finally the Jain temples and sculptures at Deogarh permit us to postulate that even in the pre-Gupta and Gupta periods, Jainism might have flourished at Deogarh.
The Deogarh ruins supply abundant evidence for the existence of Jainism. There, in the period which extends over thousand (c. 800- 1800 A.D.) the evidence consists of temples, images of Jain , yakshi and other and over two hundred large and small inscriptions, some of them still in site.
The inscriptions contain the names of the images, the names of the donors of the images and sometimes the various categories of the Jain teachers - ‘acharya’, ‘gani’ and ‘pandita’. These details show that from the 9th century onwards Jainism flourished at Deogarh. No inscriptions have been found of the period preceding this date, but it is probable that even then, in the 7th and 8th century A.D., Jainism was a living religion there.
The available material does not allow to decide the character of the Jainism, whether Digambara or Shvetambara when we get the first abundant evidence of its existence at Deogarh. For the earliest inscription V.S. 919 (862 A.D.) mentions only the temple of the Shantinatha and gives the names of acharya Kamaldeva and his sishya Deva, who set up a pillar near the aforesaid temple. This Acharya, the writer has been unable to identify, so far from the known list (pattavalis) of Jaina teachers.
Jainism of the succeeding centuries however seems to be preponderantly Digambara. For an inscription of V.S. 1016 (959-60 A.D.) mentions Sarasvati gaccha and the mulasangha, whereas the Jinas are nude. It is not improbable that Jainism at Deogarh was mostly Digambara. The names of the Jaina yakshis as well as the iconographic features of the majority of them are different in Deogarh, as the writer has shown before from those of the traditional Digambara or Shvetambara yakshi. The question is whether these yakshis are different from either of these yakshi groups because they confirm with a canon of the iconography prevalent in Central Indian or whether they are merely women attendants with names added afterwards, and not the traditional yakshi, because they seem to be associated with the 24 jinas.
These questions may be answered to some extent by considering the position of temple no 12 in the Deogarh group of Jain temples, its architectural style and the place which the yakshis occupy there, the figures of the yakshis and the paleography of the inscriptions on the yakshi sculptures.
The Jaina temples occupy the eastern portion of the Deogarh fort and are enclosed by an inner surrounding wall, the date of which is not known. Nor is it possible to fix its place and date epigraphically. For the earliest dated inscription, no 19 from the temples no 12, is of the V.S.1105 (948-49 A.D). Inscriptions of exactly the same period are found from temple no 11 and an earlier inscription from temple no 2. Nevertheless it is possible that temple no 12 is one of the earliest of the group. For to the west of it is a porch, one of whose pillars has the earliest inscription in the entire collection, viz. S. 919 (A.D. 862-3 A.D.), belonging to the reign of the Bhojadeva, the Gurjara-Pratihara king of Kanauj. From this it is clear that the first construction of the Jaina temples can be assigned to, at least, and the 9th century A.D.
Stylistically, the massive columns and walls, and the simple ‘chaitya’ window which adorn the slab over the Jain are seated and below which the yakshis are sculptured seem to succeed immediately and the Gupta ‘chaitya’ window, as noticed at Sanchi, Bhumara and Deogarh itself.
The yakshis which require discussion are 24 in number. They are carved on monolithic slabs in the inter-columniations of the verandah of temple no 12, beginning from the west end of the south side. Others, as will be shown below, can be assigned a more or less regional and dynastic date on stylistic and other grounds. Out of the 24 yakshis only 20 are briefly noted by the ‘report’, “the remaining 4 being hidden from view by the addition of a later porch”.
The figures are regarded as 24 Jaina yakshis, special women attendants of the Jina, because each one of them has the name of the yakshi engraved on it, and is accompanied by a figure of the corresponding Jina. The names as well as iconographical features of many of them differ from the yakshi of the Shvetambara and Digambara Jains, described at length in certain works on the subject. Very few of them possess even the essential iconographical features of the yakshis, a number of arms bearing weapons, etc., usually a sitting in lalitasana posture, and the characteristic ‘vahana’ (vehicle) of each. None of them seems to be accompanied by a yakshi,asisgenerallythecase.
Would it be possible that the monolithic sculptures were subsequently inserted in the temple? Were it a cave-temple it would have been thought that the sculptors had cut out the portion between the present two pilaster-like sides of the figures and inserted or carved out a figure in relief. But in the case of this structural temple supporting column and then insert another without seriously injuring the structure. The sculptures of yakshi therefore seem to be coeval with the building of the temple.
Regarding the inscriptions on these sculptures, the letters for instance of name Vardhamana on sculpture, when compared with similar letters in the 9th century inscription on the pillar of the porch, west of the temple no 12, do not appear later. As a matter of fact, of all the letters in the pillar inscription the letter ‘ma’ is the youngest and resembles the Nagari ‘ma’ whereas ‘ja’ and ‘ta’ still retain some of their Gupta-period traits, and letters like ‘pa’ and ‘na’ seem to be of the transitory period. Moreover the ‘a’ and ‘u’ signs have not received a definite form. In some instances we find them as in the modern Devanagari, whereas in some the vertical ‘a’ sign is indicated only by a loop attached to the right hand top corner of the letter.
If this evidence is accepted as conclusive it follows that the 24 yakshi figures are at least of the 9th century A.D. stylistically also the figures, as the writer has briefly shown belong to the post Gupta, but pre-Chandella period and the names given to them are coeval with the figures.
Further, as names of yakshis are given, that is, with a view to informing us of the exact characteristics of the 24 yakshis, as then in existence and known to the ‘sutradhara’ (sculptor), the gain to Jain iconography is considerable. For, to summarize briefly the main iconographic and other features of the 20 known yakshis at Deogarh, eleven yakshis are two-armed and seven four-armed (about Sulochana and Sumalini there is no information). They are standing in tribhanga or samabhanga pose, unlike the later who are seated in lalitasana. One of the hands of the lesser known and figured yakshi is always placed on the waist or more properly on the thigh.
The iconography of the yakshi seems to at this period in a formative stage, though already the rest of the Tirthankaras, besides Mahavira, Parshva, and Rishabha had come to be associated with a yakshi.
How far this conclusion arrived at from the purely limited Deogarh archaeology, is correct remains to be tested by further exploration and study of the Jain works on the subject. For within a couple of centuries Deogarh witnessed the development of the yakshi iconography as evidenced by the figures of Chakreshvari and Malini and others. Was this-a number of arms, emblems, vahanas and fearful names- due to Tantric influence? It seems so, for works like Nirvankalika (c. 700 A.D.) are already redolent with Tantric formulas, only the full-fledged yaksha pantheon is missing. This is supplied by Ashadhara (c. 1300 A.D.) in his Pratishthasaroddhara. Does this work codify for the sculptors and laymen to follow? For, so far not all the archaeological specimens described in this and similar works have been noticed from Deogarh or from Khajuraho in North India ( where there is a group of Jain temples ) or from Shravan Belgola in South India where also a great number of Jain images are said to exist.
Published in Journal of the Indian Society of Oriental Art, Vol. IX, 1941