ARTICLE ~ Symbolism & Representation of the Buddha

This is intended as a general brief overview of how symbols and imagery, specifically in representations of the Buddha, developed during its two and a half thousand year history. I've relied on my own limited research, of existing articles and investigations. Any lapses, omissions or errors I will correct as and when they are pointed out. This article is by no means academically thorough or exhaustive, That was never my intention, which was to sketch out very broadly a spiritual aesthetic process, indicating how changes in the needs of practitioners could have instigated the production of particular forms of symbolic imagery. I'm intrigued with how Buddhism, that appeared to have no need of images in its early existence, ends up two and a half millennia later with such a rich diverse iconography surpassing that of most other religions.

PRE- ICONIC PHASE

In the Buddha’s Time

6th Century BC

Early Buddhism is believed to have been aniconic ( aversion to representation ) There is an almost total lack of carved or painted representations of the Buddha for three hundred years following the Buddha’s death. Absence alone cannot be taken as conclusive evidence that imagery was being forbidden. There are no incontrovertible doctrinal sources. The textual evidence is admittedly slight, so a fully authoritative viewpoint is currently not possible to obtain. What exactly did create this absence of imagery is unclear. Is the dearth of images the result of a specific request by the Buddha, or a decision made by his senior disciples in the aftermath of the Buddha’s death?

Like the Buddhist Sutras it could be that any prohibition was orally transmitted but missed being transcribed later. Another explanation is that imagery from this period has simply not survived. After two and a half thousand years, on a practical level this is probable. yet archaeologically there is little to support the idea of a vanished early tradition of Buddha images. None have yet been found. Imagery carved in wood, painted on clay, walls, or textiles would mean this materials fragility was less likely to survive 2,500 years, let alone the subsequent purging iconoclasm of Islam, or absorption into the all encompassing bosom of Hinduism. However,very limited detailed archaeological investigation of this period has been done. So the reasons for this aniconic phase remains an open question without definitive confirmation from texts or artifacts.

There is apparently one passing reference in the Digha Nikaya (reference not yet found) suggesting that the Buddha expressed a dislike of images being made of him after his death. No other references in the Pali Canon indicate disciples were encouraged or discouraged from making images of the Buddha. The Maha-Parinirvana Sutra contains the detail and reported words of the Buddha's last days. The Buddha devotes most of his last hours, unsurprisingly, urging his followers to continue practising the Dharma, and reminding them what they need to do in order to attain Enlightenment. No statement concerning making images of him has been noted down.

In the context of the Buddha’s teachings you can understand him wishing to focus on the practice of his Dharma, and not fuel any future personality cult that might emerge after his death. His legacy was to be his teachings and example, not the reverence of his physical appearance. When he has gone from the world, he has gone from the world, what endures of his presence rests, as it still does, in the hands of his practitioner followers. At this early formative stage post the Buddha's demise, his disciples may simply have considered it inappropriate or disrespectful to represent someone who had attained Nirvana. How would you represent someone whose state was ineffable?

There is one oblique mention in the Sarvastivardin's Vinaya that seems to imply the existence of an injunction against Buddha images, where Anathapindika says:-

'World honoured one, if images of yours are not allowed to be made, pray,may we not at least make images of Bodhisattvas in attendance upon you?'

to which the Buddha assents. This is by no means conclusive. One would expect such a ruling over depiction of the Buddha would have popped up in other vinayas, as it is it only appears in one Buddhist sects monastic rules. Though it does imply that the Buddha didn't want himself represented, this was written down over three hundred years after the Buddha's death, so we have to treat this as suggestive evidence rather than authoritative proof.

There is apparently also a reference in a Chinese translation of the Anguttara Nikaya, whose origins seem to have come via a Korean version or maybe directly from an Indian documentary source. Its reliability remains open to question, bearing in mind mistakes in translation, interpretation or retrospective reinterpretation, even local cultural insertions into the text are probable. Either way this Chinese text dates from between the 3rd-1st Century BC so its still well beyond living memory. However, this is traditionally taken as being at least the mytho-poetic birth of Buddha imagery. In it the King Uddiyana asks if he might make a representation of the Buddha whilst the Buddha is away preaching to his deceased mother Maya in heaven, to which the Buddha agrees. This indicates that by this time making a representation of the Buddha was at least theoretically possible.

The Buddha used only one symbolic image ~ The Wheel of Life, but makes extensive use of metaphor and analogy as illustrations in this teaching stories. The Buddha’s Dharma remained an oral tradition for many centuries before being written down, so we cannot know for certain whether references forbidding making representations of the Buddha have simply been left out. It is worth noting; that by the time his teachings were transferred from memory to being written down, images of the Buddha were already a commonplace thing. So there would have been no point in trying to re-state an earlier prohibition. The stable door was now open and the horse had bolted.

First Buddhist Imagery and Symbolism 
6th - 3rd Century BC
What happened before and after the Buddha's death, is detailed in the Maha Parinirvana Sutra. Before the Buddha's body was cremated, there was much heated discussion between his disciples and tribes associated with the Buddha, about who should have relics, and how many. The relics were eventually divided into ten parts and each took a portion to their homeland and each erected a Stupa to contain them. The Stupa was adapted from an already existing tradition of burial mounds marking the burial place of significant individuals. It.became the first and oldest visual structure used as an object of reverence in Buddhism, being originally a place where actual Buddha relics were kept. 

Over time more Stupas than relics were erected, and whilst many still claimed to contain Buddha relics, most did not. The Stupa began to accumulate its own meanings and associations, with an elemental cosmic symbolism being applied to its structural shape. It became an embodiment in symbolic form of any Buddha or revered Enlightened being. Eventually they came to use its structural elements as a means of representing the spiritual path to Enlightenment. It is known today as an object for devotional reverence to the Buddha; it encapsulated the qualities necessary for Enlightenment; it symbolised a disciple's path; it represented their own potential Buddhahood. The Stupa is then the first object to hold this trinity of meanings, one subsequently to be found in many future Buddhist imagery and symbolism.

3rd Century BC The earliest surviving Buddhist imagery is from the period of Asoka (273-232 BCE). Asoka widely commissioned pillars, sculptural reliefs and Stupas to be built during his reign. The earliest surviving Stupa is at Sanchi, in Madhya Pradesh, this is richly decorated with storytelling reliefs depicting scenes from the Buddha’s life. 

The Buddha is represented through symbolic images; such as an empty throne or his two footprints, each being venerated by disciples. This was in line with their experience, the Buddha was no longer here, nevertheless where he'd been was worthy of revering. This is consistent with the view that a Buddha cannot be represented figuratively, but this did not preclude symbolic representations. You suggest presence by showing absence. In the 1990’s Susan Huntingdon, suggested another interpretation of these reliefs as depicting his disciples re-enacting specific scenes from the Buddha’s life. This radical reinterpretation remains controversial and whilst it is interesting, it strikes me as stretching credibility a little. What these reliefs do indicate is reluctance, perhaps out of reverence, to create specific images of the Buddha.2nd Century BC
Apart from those early pictorial reliefs, all the other imagery is symbolic in nature. It has been suggested that the wide occurrence and popularity of these symbols may be due to them becoming ‘souvenir’ insignia picked up at pilgrimage sites by visitors. Of these, the Dharmachakra Wheel underwent a distinct change in emphasis, from being the symbol of a wheel rolling monarch, to a broader symbol for the Buddhist Path. 

Other symbols used are - The Empty Throne - The Begging Bowl - The Lion - The Riderless Horse, the Lotus Flower.


A couple of these symbols, to the west at least, are less well known or disavowed. The Trisula, is a form of trident, which in Buddhism represents the Three Jewels of Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. The Swastika is the more contentious one, associated in the 20th century with the Nazi’s, though in Buddhism it was widely used as an auspicious symbol of good luck and representation of eternity. The swastika has always been more of a folk symbol, heavily used in many other Indian religions, and hence it is not purely Buddhist.


The first symbol that teeters on the border of physically representing the Buddha, is the Buddha’s Footprints. Traditionally this is meant to show the impressions left in the ground by the Buddha after his Enlightenment. It again represents his presence via his absence, the imprints he left behind him, the tracks of the trackless one. It forms a visual invitation to any disciple of the Buddha to follow in his footsteps, metaphorically and imaginatively to step into his shoes and be awakened.

A series of symbols are sometimes carved upon the feet, the Dharmachakra in the soul of the foot, the Trisula, often surrounded by either 32,108 or 132 of the auspicious signs associated with a Buddha. The first example found of this is at the Sanchi Stupa. There are countless references in the Pali Canon to disciples expressing their reverence by kissing the Buddha’s feet. It is also still common practice in India today to venerate the feet of a guru.

ICONIC PHASE
First Images of the Buddha
1st Century BC
Susan Huntingdon points out that there are a few anthropomorphic Buddha representations which existed prior to the Ghandara -Greco-Buddhist period. These are in the form of cave paintings from Chilla in Pakistan. These show a standing figure with a Stupa shaped head, forming an fascinating hybrid of figurative and symbolic representation, the pre-iconic and iconic phases combined. Cave paintings and stupas at Ajanta and Baja executed in the 2nd Century BC are without any Buddha representation, but by the Ist Century BC, images of the Buddha decorate them everywhere.

There are also gold coins from Kushan that show the image of a standing Buddha on them from around 150 - 50 BC. The Ghandara period reached its height between 1st - 2nd Century CE under Kushan rule, so this may indicate that these early coins were part of a local trend towards representation.This being accelerated further by the arrival of Alexander the Great and a profound Greek influence on all subsequent representations in Buddhism. Greek realism in its sculptural forms was highly developed by this time. It propelled representations of the Buddha along a path undreamed of prior to the Greeks arrival. It must, however, also have chimed in with contemporary practitioners needs - the sense of lack for Buddhists of that time, the need for a tangible figure to focus for their devotions upon, an iconic representation of their own Awakening potential 

The modern view has been that the first significant images of the Buddha emerge with the arrival of this Greco-Buddhist tradition in the Gandhara region. When an existing tradition of representational carving skill in this region, creatively cross fertilises with the strong stylistic influence of Greek sculpture.



There is a counter claim for the first Buddha images being made in Mathura in Southern India, and that this is the source for the indigenous Indian form of Buddha Rupa. The dating of these around 80-90 CE is clear, but even though the Ghandara dating is later and a conjectured one, experts still place the conclusive weight of evidence with it.

In breadth of influence the Ghandara style has clearly been the winner. Its melding of Greek and Indian styles, has forged the predominant representation of the Buddha. One that all future portrayals of the Buddha conform to, across cultures and eras, right up to the present day. Such has been its visual impact, that anyone asked to draw what the Buddha looked like, would sketch something resembling a Ghandara Buddha. What began as an aid to practitioners in their devotion and connection with the ideal, begins to fix in our minds one particular way of visualising it. This makes it very difficult to re imagine the Buddha in any other way.

Mahayana - Vajrayana Tantric Images 

6th Century AD



With the later full flowering of the Mahayana and Vajrayana, a diverse explosion of colourful symbolic representations of Enlightened figures emerges into Buddhist iconography - male Jinas and their consorts, Bodhisattva’s, in wrathful or peaceful forms, dakas and dakini’s, nagas, gardharas etc. Once the genie was let out of the bottle, imagery flourished to epic and cosmic proportions. Early practices of recollecting the Buddha blossoming into complex visualisation practices, that are only possible once you have a rich representative tradition of Buddha and Bodhisattva imagery to draw upon. Individual practitioner's visualisation experiences then start to further develop and embellish that representational tradition.

Alongside Hinduism, Buddhism has some of the most richly depicted iconography to ever emerge out of India. There are aspects of this imagery which are very particular to Indian culture and temperament. Where highly strung devotional passions readily become expressively exuberant and these in turn are given pictorial form in a vibrant colourful iconography.

There is a view that the movement from the aniconic viewpoint to the iconic, was synchronous with the divergence between the Hinayana and Mahayana viewpoints over interpretation and imagery. Certainly differences in the approach to practice, are also present in their use of imagery. To broadly generalise,Theravada temples usually contain one very large Buddha image, whilst Mahayana temples frequently overflow with multiple images of the Buddha and all sorts of Enlightened beings. The exception being Zen Buddhism, which, whilst not explicitly prohibiting imagery, gives a diminished importance to imagery as a devotional aid. Over 2.500 years, Buddhism has needed to revive and renew its approach to practice continually. Returning to, or restating, its fundamentals time and again. Likewise the emphasis placed upon imagery and symbols shifts in the strength and importance given to them.



Conclusion
It’s clear that over its 2,550+ years of Buddhism there has been an incremental, and you could say inevitable, movement towards representation - from the sole focus being on practice of the Buddha Dharma - to storytelling reliefs in which the Buddha is symbolically represented - to the widespread use of symbols to represent the Buddha, such as his physical footprints - the full flowering of Greco-Buddhist images in Ghandhara Rupas ~ to the explosion of Mahayana/Vajrayana imagery a thousand years after the Buddha’s death. Why particular imagery emerged is easy to conjecture over. Though I have assumed that the primarily volition has usually been responding to a practical spiritual need or difficulty.

There is a recurring problem for all of the Buddha’s disciples from the Parinirvana to the present day. Practitioners from the time of the Buddha had lived alongside him or remembered an experience of him. Subsequent to his death, as the decades and centuries passed, it became harder to connect with what the Buddha’s personal qualities were. Once a tangible example of what an Enlightened state feels like is lost, you have to rely on being lucky enough to be in the presence of another Enlightened being. This may not always happen. Recollecting the Buddha practices were not enough to bridge this imaginative gap for everyone, hence the emergence of forms of representations and visualisation as a focus for devotion.. 

For Western Buddhists, who’ve inherited access to over 2,500 years of imagery, it is hard to re-imagine the Buddha, or feel what a vivid living connection with the Buddha would be like for us. Imagery can help provide a doorway, a way in. But imagery that comes from a cultural tradition other than our own can just not connect with us, or inhibit the freedom of our imaginations to conjure up our own imaginative connection or visualisation. A vision not constrained or predefined by the heavy weight of this huge legacy of symbolism and representations of the Buddha, this is our modern challenge.