An examination of the layout and design of the earliest pilgrimage complexes informs on the practice of popular Buddhism by the sangha and particularly by the laity. With the possible exception of Vaisali and Lumbini, the earliest archaeologically known pilgrimage complexes in India date to the second or third centuries bce. Again, with the exception of Vaisali and Lumbini, none of the early pilgrimage complexes is found in the Gangetic Plain, the heartland of Buddhism (see Figure 4.1). While inscriptions, Mauryan columns, and other evidence demonstrate that pilgrimage complexes were erected in the Gangetic Plain, later building episodes have completely obliterated the material traces dating from 200 bce to 200 ce.
What is known of early pilgrimage, therefore, must be learned from a small number of early complexes constructed in central, northwestern, and southern India. All of these complexes are centered on massive stupas. The largest and most prominent of these early pilgrimage complexes are Sanchi and Bharhut (Sanchi: Cunningham [1854] 1997; Luders 1912; Marshall and Foucher 1983; Mitra 1971; Shaw 1999, 2000, 2007, 2013b; Shaw and Sutcliffe 2001; Bharhut: Barua 1979; Cunningham [1876] 1962; Hawkes 2008, 2009; Luders 1912).
The earliest stupas at Sanchi and Bharhut were constructed in the third century bce. However, both were enlarged and modified in the second centuries bce. Bharhut is very poorly preserved. Before the first archaeological excavations and research, the stupa had been extensively mined for its bricks (Barua 1979; Cunningham [1876] 1962; Hawkes 2008, 2009). While the railings and gateways have been found and reconstructed, the anda is now almost completely missing. The importance of Bharhut lies in the large number of inscriptions and reliefs found on its railings, now located in the Indian Museum on Kolkata. Three distinct stupas have been found at Sanchi, each reconstructed several times. While some excavations occurred in the early nineteenth century at Sanchi, Cunningham’s ([1854] 1966) excavations from the mid-nineteenth century provided the first systematic study. Later, Sir John Marshall conducted excavations at Sanchi between 1912 and 1919 (Marshall and Foucher 1983).
More recently, Julia Shaw conducted a large-scale survey project in the area immediately surrounding Sanchi, identifying numerous smaller sites and large irrigation features (2000, 2007, 2013b; Shaw and Sutcliffe 2001). Based on these features, Shaw (2013b:103) argued that Buddhist monasteries were a major part of the process where North Indian social and economic practices spread to South India.
Lay support of the sangha was essential to the latter’s survival, but practical services provided by the monastery, in this case, water for domestic and agricultural use, formed the backbone to changing social and economic conditions during the late centuries bc. These changing conditions included urbanization and agricultural ‘involution.’ The sangha's close relationship with agricultural improvement and water management was an important instrument of lay patronage, but it was also closely related to Buddhism’s deeper preoccupation with human suffering (dukkha) and the means of its alleviation.
Shaw also challenged the notion that Buddhist monks were purely ascetic. Rather, Shaw (2013b:103) saw the elaborate and extensive reworking of the agricultural landscape surrounding Sanchi as “demonstrating that evidence for a ‘domesticated’ and socially integrated form of Buddhist monasticism was already in place in central India by the late centuries bg.”
Several other large pilgrimage stupas are known from the first century bge. Among the best known are Amaravati (Barret 1954; Burgess [1882] 1972; Shimada 2012; Ramachandra Rao 2002; Sewell [1880] 1973) in Andhra Pradesh and the Dharmarajika stupa (Marshall [1951] 1975; Sarkar 1966) near modern Islamabad. While some have claimed that earlier stupas at Amaravati may date to Mauryan times based on some fragments of what may be a Mauryan column (Shimada 2012), the known remains likely date to major renovations that occurred in the first century bge. Earlier excavations at Amaravati obliterated any evidence of these earlier stupas, or even the ability to know if earlier stupas were present at all. Today, the archaeological materials from Amaravati are widely scattered throughout the world, with major portions of the railing and sculptural elements in the British Museum and the Government Museum in Chennai.
Between 1913 and 1934, Sir John Marshall conducted large-scale excavations at the ancient city of Taxila, near modern Islamabad in the Northwest. Excavations focused on two sections of the city (Bhir Mound and Sirkap Mound), several peripheral monasteries, and the Dharmarajika stupa. Like Sanchi and Barhut, Dharmarajika was likely initially constructed in the third century bge, but later constructions continued to modify the general architectural form. This resulted in changes to the stupa and the destruction of the railing (Marshall [1951] 1975). In its present form, the core of the complex preserves the layout from the first century bge. The courtyard surrounding the monastery, and the numerous shrines it contains, were constructed over subsequent centuries.
Marshall’s excavations on the Sirkap mound were massive in scale, revealing approximately 11 hectares of the second-century bge through first-century ge city (Marshall [1951] 1975). Excavations revealed the square bases of several stupas in courtyards within the city, though it is not clear whether these stupas had Buddhist or Jain affiliation. While noting this problem, Mitra (1971:124) argued, “the predominance of Buddhism in this region during the period to which they belonged would favor their Buddhist affiliation.” Most of the stupas on the Sirkap mound seem to be located in the courtyards of wealthy households, though it is possible that these complexes were urban shrines. The largest of these stupas was located in a large courtyard (33.5 m x 29.2 m) in Block A. At the center of the courtyard was a square drum (10 m x 10 m). While the remains of a crystal relic casket and other decorative elements confirm that stupa was erected on the drum, it is too damaged to determine its
Size. In addition to the central stupa, several other smaller votive stupas were found in the courtyard. Finally, the entire courtyard was surrounded by upwards of twenty-five, somewhat haphazardly placed, rooms. As with the other stupas found on the Sirkap mound, this stupa may have been located in the courtyard of a wealthy household, though, given the large size of the stupa and its courtyard, it is perhaps the most likely to have served as an urban shrine.
More recently, a new stupa has been found and excavated near Sannati in northern Karnataka. The Kanaganahalli stupa was found in 1994, with continued excavations through 2002. The site appears to date between the first century bce and the third century GE. Initial reports suggest that it is the site of a mahastupa, resembling in most respects other contemporary pilgrimage stupas. Among the most important finds is a frieze depicting a king and queen with an inscription reading “King Ashoka” (Poonacha 2007). Critically, since the stupa at Kanaganahalli dates at least two centuries after Ashoka’s death, this frieze indicates that Buddhists—in India—preserved the memory of Ashoka for at least several centuries. Prior to this discovery, Ashoka was only known from the inscriptions carved during his lifetime and in textual accounts from Sri Lanka and China.
While there is some variation in the form of pilgrimage stupas, they all tend to follow the same general layout (Shimada and Hawkes 2009; see Figure 4.2). All of the stupas at pilgrimage complexes seem to contain relics, often attributed to the Buddha himself. The andas are generally large. The anda of Stupa 1 at Sanchi is over 12 meters high, with a diameter of roughly 32 meters. The more heavily damaged andas at Bharhut, Dharmarajika, Amaravati, and Kanaganahalli appear to have been comparable in size. At all these early sites the andas were placed on raised platforms (drums). The role of the drums was fairly straightforward—they elevated the anda. Raising the anda achieved two purposes. First, on the practical side, raising the anda allowed more distant viewers to see it above the shoulders of closer viewers. Second, the drums also raised the perceived status of the anda through physical elevation (Moore 1996). One additional benefit of the drums is that they increased the mass of the stupa, giving it a greater physical presence. Surrounding the drum(s) and anda were circumambulatory paths defined by elaborately decorated railings. Beyond the railings was a large courtyard where larger group rituals could be performed. Gates (toranas) were located in the railing at the cardinal points to allow for access between the two ritual spaces. The railings and toranas also served as location for inscriptions—recording the donations of Buddhist monks, nuns, and laity from far-flung locations
Figure 4.2: Typical early pilgrimage stupa
(Basham 1967; Brown 1965; Lamotte 1988; Luders 1912). At Amaravati, ayaka platforms and pillars were erected directly behind the toranas. Finally, beginning in the second century bce, stupas were constructed of stone, brick, and stucco rather than earth.
At the apex of the earliest archaeologically known stupas were stylized parasols (chhatras). In India, kings were often depicted under parasols, with parasols serving as an index of their status. In this sense, the placement of a parasol atop a stupa served to index the royal character of the Buddha’s relics interred within. Chhatras also symbolized the Bodhi tree, the location where the Buddha gained enlightenment at Bodh Gaya. In Peirce’s semiotics, signs are rarely purely symbolic. In this case, a parasol
Does have some superficial, iconic resemblance to a tree. Both have a trunk and canopy. Both can also serve to protect a person from the elements. Even so, there are sufficient differences between the two that an observer of one would not immediately think of the other without prompting or convention.
There is also evidence that in the second century bce Buddhists viewed stupas as symbols of Buddhism more generally. In a semiotic analysis, Dehejia (1997) identified several multivalent signs in the friezes carved on the railings of Sanchi, Bharhut, and Amaravati. In many cases, the depictions of stupas were straightforwardly iconic—depicting devotees actively engaging in ritual around stupas (see Figure 4.5). Other friezes depicted the Buddha through indexical signs. Following the conventions of early Buddhism, artists never depicted the Buddha in human form. Rather, they depicted the Buddha by his “conspicuous absence” (Fowles 2008), or a by an index that served to represent him. For example, in many instances friezes depict crowds of people looking intently at an empty chair (see Figures 1.4 and 5.9). The empty chair, argues Dehejia, served as an index of the presence of the Buddha. In other cases footsteps, parasols, or trees indexed the Buddha’s presence (Dehejia 1997:41-51). Dehejia argues that in other cases, particularly at Sanchi and Amaravati, depictions of some stupas were symbolic, signifying more abstract theological principles and Buddhism in general, rather than serving as icons of actual stupas. It remains unclear whether the symbolic association between stupas and Buddhism developed in the second century bce, or if the same association existed from the fifth through third centuries bce. Given the lack of friezes dating to the earlier period, it is impossible to come to any conclusion on this question.
The large pilgrimage stupas of the second century bce are best understood as a multivalent signs, similar in most respects to the ancestral stupas discussed in Chapter 3. Though the medium of second century bce pilgrimage stupas was different from earthen ancestral stupas, the form of the anda (low hemisphere) and the contents of the anda (relic) remained the same. At most, the relatively greater grandeur of stone, brick, and stucco indexed a greater prominence or power of the Buddha’s relics interred within the stupas. Chhatras were added, but overall, the sign as a whole still fundamentally resembled the eight ancestral stupas through the resemblance of its distinct attributes. Beginning in the second century bce, stupas were also an overarching symbol of Buddhism. Like the ancestral stupas on which they were based, pilgrimage stupas containing the Buddha’s corporeal relics were icons of the Buddha encased within indexes of his presence.
Large outdoor stupa complexes are generally recognized as having served as pilgrimage centers. Several lines of evidence support this. Pilgrimage is recognized in assorted versions of the Mahaparinibbana-sutta (Schopen 1997:115-119), several of which record the Buddha as stating that pilgrimage confers merit upon the pilgrim. In other sections, the Buddha is recorded as stating that those people who die while traveling to or from a pilgrimage center will attain nirvana. In addition to these literary sources, three other lines of evidence support the claim that large outdoor stupa complexes were pilgrimage locations. First, many of the outdoor stupa complexes are very large. While viharas may have been located in or near pilgrimage complexes, the space available for worship was far greater than needed by the resident clergy.10 Second, no doors block access to either the circumambulatory path or the courtyards surrounding the central stupa. As will be discussed later, the entrances to the cir-cumambulatory path were carefully designed to allow the free movement of people, while maintaining the separation between different worship areas. Third, donation inscriptions from Sanchi, Bharhut, and Amaravati show that devotees, including monks, nuns, and the laity, traveled great distances to worship at them (Basham 1967; Cunningham [1854] 1966, [1876] 1962).
Within the courtyards at Sanchi, Dharmarajika, and Block A on the Sirkap mound (Mitra 1971) were numerous haphazardly placed “votive” stupas. These small stupas generally consisted of two parts, a small drum with a separate capping stone in the form of an anda. A small cavity between the two parts held the cremated remains of devotees who had been interred in ways that allowed perpetual worship of the relics interred within the stupa. Schopen (Schopen 1997:114-147) has referred to the placement of votive stupas adjacent to mahastupas as “burial ad sanctos.” Just as proximity to the Buddha during circumambulation was meritorious, burial adjacent to the Buddha was similarly meritorious. In fact, burial would be one step better. Circumambulation had a definable end point, where burial adjacent to a stupa could potentially allow for the accumulation or merit perpetually. Buddhist inscriptions also provide insight into the role of votive stupas. In many cases, short inscriptions recording the name and occupation of the deceased are carved into votive stupas. Like the variability of donors shown in inscriptions carved on the railings at Sanchi, Bharhut, and Amaravati, inscriptions on votive stupas named people from many occupations, including Buddhist monks and nuns. Taken together, the evidence from donation inscriptions and votive stupa inscriptions suggest that Buddhist monks and nuns were actively engaged in worship at pilgrimage complexes.
Individual and Communal Ritual in Pilgrimage Complexes
In Chapter 3, I discussed the creation of distinct ritual spaces within Buddhist chaityas that allowed the simultaneous performance of individual and communal ritual. At sites like Kondivte, Bairat, and the wooden prototypes on which both were based, early Buddhists separated the practice of individual and communal ritual in an attempt to ameliorate the tensions between the two. I also argued that the layout of these early chaityas privileged the performance of circumambulation over group rituals. While a hall was built in front of the chamber containing the stupa, from the point of view of people engaged in communal ritual in the hall, the stupa was only partially visible through a narrow door (see Figure 3.5). Even this limited view would have been periodically interrupted by the passage of people engaged in circumambulation within the chamber. For these reasons I argued that the design of early Buddhist chaityas only partially ameliorated the tension between the individual and communal desires of the incipient Buddhist community.
Beginning in at least the second century bce, Buddhists began building ritual spaces in ways that more effectively concealed the tensions between the individual and the group. At pilgrimage sites, railings were erected around the circumambulatory paths. These railings effectively separated devotees engaged in circumambulation from others simultaneously engaged in more communal forms of ritual in the surrounding courtyard. The construction of railings at pilgrimage stupas marks an important development in the way that Buddhists ameliorated the tension between the individual and the group at pilgrimage complexes. At all pilgrimage centers where railings are preserved, they are well over the height of a person. While these railings are important as decorative elements in the architectural design, and the gateways provide surfaces on which to carve religious scenes, neither function seems to fully explain the particular forms of the railings or gateways. Circumambulation is an individual ritual, but the courtyards at pilgrimage centers were used for group worship.
Figure 4.3: L-shaped gates
It would be distracting for the people in the pathway to become enmeshed with people milling about in the assembly area. Likewise, the sight of people silently walking around the stupa would have been distracting for those engaged in worship in the assembly area. The railings at pilgrimage stupas served to block the view of each ritual area from the other. This served to reduce the tension inherent in the competing ritual demands of the space.
This point can be best illustrated by examining at the layout of the gateways that link the circumambulatory path with the assembly area. At both Sanchi and Bharhut, the gates are L-shaped. By constructing them in this form, the potential for looking into or out of the circumambulatory path was reduced, while still allowing for unobstructed entrances and exits to the path (see Figure 4.3). As such, the gates served to promote the separation of individual and communal ritual within pilgrimage complexes, while fostering movement between them. As will be discussed below, in the monasteries the sangha achieved the same separation between individual and communal ritual, but in different ways. These differences greatly inform an understanding of the relative importance of individual and communal ritual for the laity and the sangha.
World History
