Kalugamalai and Early Pandyan Rock-Cut Shrines by C. SivaramamurtiReview by: H. GoetzJournal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 83, No. 1 (Jan. - Mar., 1963), pp. 132-133Published by: American Oriental SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/597784 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 20:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal ofthe American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:15:41 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

132 Journal of the American Oriental Society, 83.1 (1963)

-Kalugamalai and Early Pandyan Rock-Cut Shrines. By C. SIVARAMAMURTI. (Heritage of Indian Art Series, ed. by Douglas Barrett and Madihuri Desai, no. 3). Pp. 48, 34 pl. Bombay: N. M. TRIPATHI, 1961.

Since the Archaeological Department of the Government of India had focussed its main atten- tion on prehistoric and protohistoric research, the "Heritage of Indian Art Series" has acted as a modest, but effective corrective. Its monographs cover not only more or less well-known monu- ments, but also break new ground in describing important sites hitherto known only to the spe- cialist or recently discovered. In this role it has even entered into a collaboration with the Archae- ological Department as an outlet for minor studies which can not be accommodated in its normal publication series.

Mr. Sivaramamurti's monograph opens a new chapter in Indian art history in introducing a hitherto unknown style of classical Indian art, i. e., that of the Pandyas in the uttermost South during the 7th-early 10th centuries. It is a variant of the Pallava style, one of the finest aspects of In- dian art, and coincides with the flourishing of the early Pandya kingdom of Madurai in the period between the Kalabhra crisis and the rise of the Chola empire, from king Kadungon (early 7th century) to Varagunavarman and Rajasimha II who succumbed to Prithvipati Ganga and Paran- taka Chola. This style seems originally to have been introduced by Pallava queens marrying into the Pandya house, and first was an imitation of the art evolved at Kanchi and Mamallapuram by Ma- hendravarman and Narasimhavarman. Though Pallava influence continued, especially due to Pan- dya intervention in the civil wars resulting in the establishment of Nandivarman II Pallavamalla, Pandya art on its zenith, under Maravarman Raja- simha and especially Nedunjadayan (9th c.), ab- sorbed also many other inspirations, esp. from Chalukyan and Rashtrakuta art, and in its turn shaped the Chera art of Kerla (temples of Kaviyur, Peruvannam, etc.).

Of these early Pandya monuments the so-called Vattuvankoil (" sculptor's temple ") and the Jaina rock reliefs at Kalugamalai had been known already since a number of years (first published by Stella Kramrisch in "The Art of India" 1954). Most

of the other cave temples however, are accessible only to orthodox high-caste Hindus, because they are now hidden inside temples erected in front of them during the 16th-18th centuries; others are situated in out-of-the way hills around Madurai, Tenkasi, Tinvelveli and Ramanathapuram (Ra- mesvaram). And as long as the existence of a special Pandya style had not yet been discovered, some of the northernmost caves had, in absence of sufficient epigraphic evidence, been counted with the Pallava monuments. The Vattuvankoil at Kalugamalai, halfway between the railway stations of Sankaranarain and Koilpatti, has been carved, under Nedunjadayan, out of the shoulder of a bare hemispherical rock, in imitation of the famous Kailasa of Elura. It is, however, much smaller and was never completed. But what has been finished, i. e., the roofs and the three storeys of the tower on top of the sanctuary proper, belongs to the few best creations of Indian art at all, I should even like to say, of human art at all; it seems also to have had some influence on another of the great- est works of world art, the Barabudur in Java. Higher up the mountain (here Sivaramamurti's topographical description is not quite correct) there are the somewhat later, but likewise very beautiful Jaina reliefs carved in the side of the upper part of the hill. The other cave temples are those of Tirumalaipuram (here also fragments of wall paintings), Tirupparamkunram, Anamalai, Kunnakudi, Pillaiyarpatti, Tirukkolukudi, Senda- maram and Chokkanpatti, many of which have only a few reliefs of gods or dvarapalas. Moreover, many have badly suffered from ritual anointing by the priests of the present temples, or even been covered by thick layers of whitewash (like at Kanchi- puram). The best of these other reliefs is the Nataraja at Tirupparammkunram, dancing to the music of a drum and a flute played by a god and a gana, whereas Parvati, Nandi, and other gods and ganas are looking on.

Mr. Sivaramamurti (sectional keeper, National Museum, New Delhi) reveals his well-known mastery of ancient Indian art and literature, and a genuine deep love for their beauties. His his- torical outline is to the point, his descriptions, on the whole, clear, though somewhat overburdened with technical terms (which is relieved by a good register), his occasional observations on the his- torical development and migration of iconographic types very interesting, the plates (reproduced from

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:15:41 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reviews of Books 133

photos of the Archaeological Department), with a few exceptions, very satisfactory, the binding in good taste. Though a book of this type first seems to be somewhat dreary, one is soon fully absorbed

by the interest and the beauty of early Pandyan art.

H. GOETZ HEIDELBERG

The S&mkhya Karika of Thvaraktrsna. By RADIHA-

NATH PHUKAN. Pp. 165. Calcutta: FIRMA

K. L. MUKHOPADHYAY, 1960.

This is hardly a translation of the Sdmkhya- karikas but, as the author says, " practically a new rendering." Indeed it is, being an attempt to combine the authority of "modern science" with the dialectics of Advaita to produce an interpreta- tion of Smkhya which is quite contrary to the usual one, though not without precedent among previous Advaita commentators on this text.

Under these circumstances it is beside the point to cavil with the readings of the kdrikas themselves word for word; the rendering is consistent with others but inserts much additional English to justify the special interpretation here offered. There are occasional direct perversions of the sense of the Sanskrit in the cause of Phukan's thesis (e.g., on "tatha ca" in the eleventh karika; see below), but one would be missing the point if one did not meet the author's claims in the spirit in which they are offered. "The issue," he writes in his preface, "is (1) whether the Sruikhya Phi- losophy is atheistic and without a clear meaning; or (2) whether it is a precisely scientific treatise on 'Psycho-Physics for God-realization."' The answer to (1) is "no," to (2) "yes," according to Phukan.

It is, of course, quite possible that we have lost the meaning of Isvarakrsna's system; the interpre- tation usually accepted nowadays makes it out to be unsatisfactory philosophy, failing to justify itself against obvious objections, appealing to anthropomorphic analogies instead of offering arguments, and promulgating a peculiarly un- stable sort of dualistic realism. We should wel- come a fresh attempt at interpreting Tsvarakrsna's text, and Phukan's reading may well come as a surprise to many students of the subject. As a result, despite the difficulties in his arguments which I want to indicate below, it would be a mistake to disregard this book entirely. Too much work in Indian philosophy nowadays is re-pre-

sentation of interpretations already too often pre- sented; we need more " new renderings." The author is therefore to be congratulated for having raised again philosophical issues of consequence.

Yet this reviewer remains entirely unconvinced of the interpretation offered. It is possible I was put off by the authorities appealed to as spokesman for "modern science": perhaps it is predictable- they are that well-known pair, Eddington and Jeans! Writers with stranger theses than Phu- kan's have found justification in those romantic pages. But Phukan is not content merely to claim scientific sanction for S5mkhya; he offers other arguments as well.

There are at least 5 specific interpretations offered which run counter to the usual reading of the text.

(1) There is ultimately only one purucsa for Isvarakrsna, says Phukan. "Ultimately," i. e., before " creation " (the beginning of the S5,mkhya " evolution "), purusa and prakrti are indistin- guishable; the plurality which Tsvarakrsniia unmis- takably asserts in krilkc 18 is the plurality of purusas after creation has begun. If we are to speak about the situation before creation, we'll have to speak of "the Purusa " (28). The puman of karitkd 11 constitutes a reference by Tsvarakrsna to this ultimately single Purusa.' (85) However, strictly speaking, to talk of either one or many purusa(s) in the primal state is misleading, since the conception of plurality presupposes a system of space, and at this stage there is neither time nor space. (29) Furthermore, Samkhya has excellent reasons for accepting neither monism nor plural- ism, since its purpose is precisely to educate the seeker from a belief in pluralism to a belief in monism; thus its wisest position is an indetermi- nate one. (63)

Counter-considerations are these, however. Ka-

1 Here and elsewhere Phukan invokes the authority of the commentator Gaudapada. Consistently, however, this commentator's remarks are twisted to fit the Advaita interpretation. Does Phukan identify this commenta- tor's interpretation with the author of the Agamadstra?

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.20 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:15:41 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions