DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.9541#0242
Chap. II.
PLANS.
219
a fact that though the Jains admitted Siva, Vishnu, and all the gods
of the Hindu Pantheon into their temples, there is no evidence of the
reverse process. The Hindus never admitted the human Tirthankars
of the Jains among their gods. Its original dedication is fortunately,
however, of very little importance for our present purposes. The
religions of the Jains and Vaishnavas, as pointed out ahove (p. 40),
were, in those days and for long afterwards, so similar that it was
impossible to distinguish between them.1 Besides this, the age when
this temple was erected was the age of toleration in India. The
Chinese traveller Hiouen Thsang has left us a most vivid description
of a great quinquennial festival, at which he was present at Allahabad
in a.d. 643, at which the great King Siladitya presided, and distri-
buted alms and honours, on alternate days, to Buddhists, Brahmans,
and heretics of all classes, who were assembled there in tens of
thousands, and seem to have felt no jealousy of each other, or rivalry
that led, at least, to any disturbance.2 It was
on the eve of a disruption that led to the most
violent contests, but up to that time we have no
trace of dissension among the sects, nor any reason
to believe that they did not all use similar edifices
for their religious purposes, with only such slight
modifications as their different formulae may have
required (Woodcut No. 120).
Be this as it may, any one who will compare
the plan of the chaitya at Sanchi (Woodcut No. 40),
which is certainly Buddhist, with that of this temple
at Aiwulli, which is either Jaina or Vaishuava, can
hardly fail to perceive how nearly identical they °$S,l
must have been when complete. In both instances,
it will be observed, the apse is solid, and it appears
that this always was the case in structural free-standing chaityas.
At least, in all the rock-cut examples, so far as is known, the pillars
round the apse are different from those that separate the nave from
the aisles; they never have capitals or bases, and are mere plain
makeshifts. From the nature of their situation in the rock, light
could not be admitted to the aisle behind the apse from the outside,
but must be borrowed from the front, and a solid apse was conse-
quently inadmissible; but in free-standing examples, as at Aiwulli,
it was easy to introduce windows there or anywhere. Another
change was necessary when, from an apse sheltering a relic-shrine,
it became a cell containing an image of a god; a door was then
indispensable, and also a thickening of the wall when it was necessary
BtuveM.)
Scale 50 ft. to 1 in.
1 ' Asiatic Researches,' vol. ix. p. 270, * Hiouen Thsang, 'Vie et Voyages,
vol. xvii. p. 28S. i vol. i. p. 253, ct s'qq.
PLANS.
219
a fact that though the Jains admitted Siva, Vishnu, and all the gods
of the Hindu Pantheon into their temples, there is no evidence of the
reverse process. The Hindus never admitted the human Tirthankars
of the Jains among their gods. Its original dedication is fortunately,
however, of very little importance for our present purposes. The
religions of the Jains and Vaishnavas, as pointed out ahove (p. 40),
were, in those days and for long afterwards, so similar that it was
impossible to distinguish between them.1 Besides this, the age when
this temple was erected was the age of toleration in India. The
Chinese traveller Hiouen Thsang has left us a most vivid description
of a great quinquennial festival, at which he was present at Allahabad
in a.d. 643, at which the great King Siladitya presided, and distri-
buted alms and honours, on alternate days, to Buddhists, Brahmans,
and heretics of all classes, who were assembled there in tens of
thousands, and seem to have felt no jealousy of each other, or rivalry
that led, at least, to any disturbance.2 It was
on the eve of a disruption that led to the most
violent contests, but up to that time we have no
trace of dissension among the sects, nor any reason
to believe that they did not all use similar edifices
for their religious purposes, with only such slight
modifications as their different formulae may have
required (Woodcut No. 120).
Be this as it may, any one who will compare
the plan of the chaitya at Sanchi (Woodcut No. 40),
which is certainly Buddhist, with that of this temple
at Aiwulli, which is either Jaina or Vaishuava, can
hardly fail to perceive how nearly identical they °$S,l
must have been when complete. In both instances,
it will be observed, the apse is solid, and it appears
that this always was the case in structural free-standing chaityas.
At least, in all the rock-cut examples, so far as is known, the pillars
round the apse are different from those that separate the nave from
the aisles; they never have capitals or bases, and are mere plain
makeshifts. From the nature of their situation in the rock, light
could not be admitted to the aisle behind the apse from the outside,
but must be borrowed from the front, and a solid apse was conse-
quently inadmissible; but in free-standing examples, as at Aiwulli,
it was easy to introduce windows there or anywhere. Another
change was necessary when, from an apse sheltering a relic-shrine,
it became a cell containing an image of a god; a door was then
indispensable, and also a thickening of the wall when it was necessary
BtuveM.)
Scale 50 ft. to 1 in.
1 ' Asiatic Researches,' vol. ix. p. 270, * Hiouen Thsang, 'Vie et Voyages,
vol. xvii. p. 28S. i vol. i. p. 253, ct s'qq.