See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/341425878

Dakshinamurti - The Lord of Knowledge

Chapter · October 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 499

1 author:

Rakesh Sinha
South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust
112 PUBLICATIONS 1,563 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Rakesh Sinha on 16 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

DAKSHINAMURTI:
THE LORD OF KNOWLEDGE
An Indian Collector’s Perspective
R Sinha, A Sinha

The iconographic representation of Dakshinamurti peaked in South 1. Anonymous. 1888. The

India in the medieval period, although its presence has permeated Parable of Indian Art.
through Indian philosophy and art from much earlier times (Fig 1). Journal of Indian Art &
Industry. No:23.
The icon of Dakshinamurti is doubly important for an Indian collector
as it encompasses principles of both Indian art and aesthetic philosophy 2. Belvalkar SK, Raddi RB.
in a single image. It would not be amiss to state that any cogent Indian 2015. Dandin’s Kavyadarsa.
collection should contain an icon of Dakshinamurti as its cornerstone. Andesite Press.
As fittingly described by an anonymous author from a scholarly 3. Ramaswamy H.N. The
journal in 1888: “It is required by the student of Indian art to have dwelt Taittiriya Upanishad:
in the ‘immense flowering forests of Ramayana and Mahabharata,’ as Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.
Heine calls them, because in this ancient poetry, and nowhere else,
he will discover the spirit that is at the heart of all Indian religions and
philosophies, as it is the treasure of which the arts of India are symbol
and casket1.”
Therefore it is important that connoisseurs of Indian art turn
to literature to fully comprehend the significance of such icons and
artworks. Literature holds the key to the understanding of Indian
metaphors, as more than any other genre, classical Indian art has an
almost exclusive relationship to literature and poetry. Ancient Vedic
thought later elaborated by classical literature is the genesis of all
iconography. As succinctly put by Dandin (7th c.) in Kayvadarshá2:

आदिराजयशोबिम्बमादर्श प्राप्य वाडमयम् |

तेषामसत्रिधानेsपि पश्य नाद्यापि नश्यति ||
The celebrated culture of great kings reflected in the mirror of
literature does not diminish even after their deaths.

To fully explain the importance of the Dakshinamurti image, a summary

of Indian aesthetics especially the Rasa theory is necessary. The
Natyasastra by Bharata (4th c.), a treatise on dance is one of the oldest
texts that mention Rasa as a definitive aesthetic element, although the
term was also used much earlier in Upanishads to mean “essence”. As
stated in Taittriya Upanishad:

Verily the Atman is Rasa. One becomes joyful after obtaining rasa.3

Rasa or the “emotive aesthetic” - is a fundamental concept in classical

Indian aesthetics, having considerable influence in theories of painting,
sculpture, dance, poetry, and drama. From the 6th-7th century
onwards a group of erudite scholars emerged, especially from Kashmir Dakshinamurti
who interpreted Indian aesthetics and the Natyasastra from Shaivite Late Pallava / Early Chola dynasty
perspectives, authoring a vast corpus of philosophic works. It would South India, 9th/10th century
be beyond the scope of this essay to discuss all these works, except Ivory, Height 14 cm

86 87
DAKSHINAMURTI:
THE LORD OF KNOWLEDGE
An Indian Collector’s Perspective
R Sinha, A Sinha

The iconographic representation of Dakshinamurti peaked in South 1. Anonymous. 1888. The

India in the medieval period, although its presence has permeated Parable of Indian Art.
through Indian philosophy and art from much earlier times (Fig 1). Journal of Indian Art &
Industry. No:23.
The icon of Dakshinamurti is doubly important for an Indian collector
as it encompasses principles of both Indian art and aesthetic philosophy 2. Belvalkar SK, Raddi RB.
in a single image. It would not be amiss to state that any cogent Indian 2015. Dandin’s Kavyadarsa.
collection should contain an icon of Dakshinamurti as its cornerstone. Andesite Press.
As fittingly described by an anonymous author from a scholarly 3. Ramaswamy H.N. The
journal in 1888: “It is required by the student of Indian art to have dwelt Taittiriya Upanishad:
in the ‘immense flowering forests of Ramayana and Mahabharata,’ as Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.
Heine calls them, because in this ancient poetry, and nowhere else,
he will discover the spirit that is at the heart of all Indian religions and
philosophies, as it is the treasure of which the arts of India are symbol
and casket1.”
Therefore it is important that connoisseurs of Indian art turn
to literature to fully comprehend the significance of such icons and
artworks. Literature holds the key to the understanding of Indian
metaphors, as more than any other genre, classical Indian art has an
almost exclusive relationship to literature and poetry. Ancient Vedic
thought later elaborated by classical literature is the genesis of all
iconography. As succinctly put by Dandin (7th c.) in Kayvadarshá2:

आदिराजयशोबिम्बमादर्श प्राप्य वाडमयम् |

तेषामसत्रिधानेsपि पश्य नाद्यापि नश्यति ||
The celebrated culture of great kings reflected in the mirror of
literature does not diminish even after their deaths.

To fully explain the importance of the Dakshinamurti image, a summary

of Indian aesthetics especially the Rasa theory is necessary. The
Natyasastra by Bharata (4th c.), a treatise on dance is one of the oldest
texts that mention Rasa as a definitive aesthetic element, although the
term was also used much earlier in Upanishads to mean “essence”. As
stated in Taittriya Upanishad:

Verily the Atman is Rasa. One becomes joyful after obtaining rasa.3

Rasa or the “emotive aesthetic” - is a fundamental concept in classical

Indian aesthetics, having considerable influence in theories of painting,
sculpture, dance, poetry, and drama. From the 6th-7th century
onwards a group of erudite scholars emerged, especially from Kashmir Dakshinamurti
who interpreted Indian aesthetics and the Natyasastra from Shaivite Late Pallava / Early Chola dynasty
perspectives, authoring a vast corpus of philosophic works. It would South India, 9th/10th century
be beyond the scope of this essay to discuss all these works, except Ivory, Height 14 cm

86 87

Fig 1: Terracotta of Shiva
as Lord of Music and
Dance. Sunga period (2nd
c. BC). Kanoria Collection
88
for a brief summary of those relevant to the current topic. Among
the important earlier commentators, it was Bhatt Lollatta (9th c.)
who emphasized that for the creation of an artistic form, the artist
or poet would require incipient experience and a refined sensibility.
His arguments were from a grammarian’s point of view and therefore
his theses have a rather literal, linguistic explanation of the Rasa
theory. According to him, Rasa was nothing but simply an incipient
emotion (sthayibhava) that has been intensified by certain excitants.
For example, energy in its highest form manifests as the Vira-Rasa
(Heroic). He states that Rasa is inherent both in the original character
and it comes into being in actors in a dramatic work (uttpattivada). His
arguments were mainly concerned with the creative aspect of aesthetic
works. Classical Sanskrit scholars have considered his arguments as
important, although criticised his omission of the last component
of the artistic phenomenon – that of the experience of the spectator
or audience. One of his critics, Srisankuka points out that Rasa was
not only the presentation of an idea in an artistic form, but its main
importance lay in eliciting of an analogous aesthetic experience in
the viewer. Further important contributions to aesthetic theory were
laid down by Bhatta Nayak in Hridyadarpana (Mirror of the Heart).
Unfortunately, this major work is lost and was probably extinct even by
the 11th century4. Bhatta Nayak made a fundamental break from the
pre-existing theories, drawing emphasis away from the process of Rasa
creation and gave priority to the spectator’s subjective experience.
“Rasa belongs to the spectator experiencing the rasa, and to him alone,
because he is alive and present. It does not belong to the character.”
This pioneering shift in philosophic theory put the spectator at the centre
of the aesthetic experience – a fundamental point of coherence with the
modern collector. Consequently, earlier philosophical, linguistic analyses
of literature for aesthetic elements or importance given to actors in a
dramatic work (uttpattivada) lessened. The Sanskrit word for actor is
patra (vessel or pot) - and therefore so goes the aphorism:
“The pot does not know the taste of the brew”.
Bhatta Nayak classified this absorptive aesthetic experience as an event
completely different from normal experience or memory. As he tells us -
Even religious revelation is inferior to the aesthetic experience:
“Nothing can compare with aesthetic rasa, not even the rasa spiritual
savants bring forth”.
Finally, it was the polymath Abhinavagupta (c. 950 – 1016) who in his
encyclopaedic work Abhinavabharati summarizes Indian aesthetic
philosophy and brings forth his own powerful arguments. He was
a renaissance man who was a master of philosophy, logic, Tantra,
aesthetics and poetry. By the end of his career he was widely regarded as
one of the greatest teachers, writers and spiritual masters of his day. His
theory of Rasa revelation/realisation is known as Abhivyaktivada. As he
exquisitely describes Rasa5:
“Born in the heart of the poet, it flowers in the actor and bears fruit in
the spectator.”
According to him a true aesthetic work should have a strong sense of
suggestion to stimulate the imagination of the viewer. It is not enough
for the artwork to have abhida or lakshana (literal or metaphorical
meaning), but should also contain Vyanjana (suggestion). It is the
4. Pollock S. 2016. A Rasa
Reader: Classical Indian
Aesthetics. Columbia
University Press.
5. Gnoli R. 1985. The
Aesthetic Experience
according to Abhinavagupta.
Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series.
6. Raghavan, V. 1978. Bhoja’s
Sringara Prakasa. Madras
89
vyanjana that sparks the imagination of the aesthete, transporting
them to a world of their own creation upon viewing a work of art.
This aesthetic experience elevates the individual to the universal level
(Brahman) free from the mundane realities of place, time and life.
He uses the Shaivite term of chamatkara as a description of aesthetic
consciousness, which frees the individual from reality and their
own ego. When an aesthete is immersed in this state, the ordinary
world ceases and they lose themselves in that wondrous moment;
therefore, Rasa is pure pleasure and beatitude (Ananda). He terms this
temporary cessation of the ordinary world and its replacement by a new
dimension as alaukik (other-worldly phenomenon). As one can discern,
Abhinavagupta’s theories of the process of artistic creation and aesthetic
experience are surprisingly modern and relevant to individuals today.
It can also be inferred that any serious study of Indian art is incomplete
if it does not include the aesthetic experience from the viewers’
perspective.
Other important contributions by Abhinavagupta relate to an
additional ninth Rasa (Quiescent Rasa - Shanta Rasa) and the making
of an initiated connoisseur (Sahrdya). This quiescent Rasa equates the
aesthetic experience to the plane of highest knowledge or ultimate
reality. He argues that to activate an individual’s dormant experiences
and emotional quotient by aesthetic processes it is necessary to have
absolute calmness of the mind without distractions - it is from the
stillness of the mind that pleasure arises. If the spectator were a cultured
person with inherent dormant experiences, when these are manifested
or reflected in literature or poetry, they are elevated to ultimate state
of Ananda. It evidently follows that to be a cultured person, familiarity
with literature, poetry or revealed texts is necessary in order to fully
realize this aesthetic consciousness.
Although Abhinavagupta’s work surpassed earlier philosophical
systems, the works of Bhatta Lollatta and earlier scholars continued
to find support and patronage, particularly in the major work
(Sringarprakasha) of the 11th c. Malwa ruler Raja Bhoja6. Bhoja’s
aesthetic philosophy is intensely personal and applicable at an
individual level (as opposed to the impersonal, ego-less state
propounded by Abhinavagupta). Furthermore, according to Bhoja any
cultured individual (Rasika) can enjoy Rasa, whether the creator, actor
or the spectator. The ability to experience Rasa is dependent on one’s
emotional quotient, although Bhoja insists that the experience is heavily
dependent on previous religious acts. Another major difference is the
overall primacy given to Sringar Rasa (romantic emotion) by Bhoja –
according to him this is the primary Rasa that unifies all experiences
of pleasure or joy. The position held by Bhoja had immense appeal for
medieval Bhakti cults that celebrated worship or divine union with
amorous and erotic poetry. The vision of an icon (darshan) was in itself
an intensely personal and uplifting experience similar to a romantic
union according to Sringarprakasha. Subsequently, Abhinavagupta’s
and Bhoja’s positions came to be regarded as the northern and southern
schools of Indian aesthetics.
Finally, it is important to understand that Indian aesthetics and the
Rasa theory is an all-encompassing system, which does not distinguish
at all between different religions, sects or regions (unlike the categories,
subcategories and sub-styles of Indian art favoured by Western
scholars). The interpretation of Indian art through the lens of western
art theory may be important academically but is of limited value to the
Indian aesthete. Academic papers mainly focussed on the “when, where,
and by who?” of Indian art hardly ever engage with traditional Indian
scholarship and the aesthetic fidelity of artworks from the viewers’
perspective. This modern trend is perhaps secondary to the limited
availability and correlation of classical texts and vernaculars in the study

Fig 1: Terracotta of Shiva
as Lord of Music and
Dance. Sunga period (2nd
c. BC). Kanoria Collection
88
for a brief summary of those relevant to the current topic. Among
the important earlier commentators, it was Bhatt Lollatta (9th c.)
who emphasized that for the creation of an artistic form, the artist
or poet would require incipient experience and a refined sensibility.
His arguments were from a grammarian’s point of view and therefore
his theses have a rather literal, linguistic explanation of the Rasa
theory. According to him, Rasa was nothing but simply an incipient
emotion (sthayibhava) that has been intensified by certain excitants.
For example, energy in its highest form manifests as the Vira-Rasa
(Heroic). He states that Rasa is inherent both in the original character
and it comes into being in actors in a dramatic work (uttpattivada). His
arguments were mainly concerned with the creative aspect of aesthetic
works. Classical Sanskrit scholars have considered his arguments as
important, although criticised his omission of the last component
of the artistic phenomenon – that of the experience of the spectator
or audience. One of his critics, Srisankuka points out that Rasa was
not only the presentation of an idea in an artistic form, but its main
importance lay in eliciting of an analogous aesthetic experience in
the viewer. Further important contributions to aesthetic theory were
laid down by Bhatta Nayak in Hridyadarpana (Mirror of the Heart).
Unfortunately, this major work is lost and was probably extinct even by
the 11th century4. Bhatta Nayak made a fundamental break from the
pre-existing theories, drawing emphasis away from the process of Rasa
creation and gave priority to the spectator’s subjective experience.
“Rasa belongs to the spectator experiencing the rasa, and to him alone,
because he is alive and present. It does not belong to the character.”
This pioneering shift in philosophic theory put the spectator at the centre
of the aesthetic experience – a fundamental point of coherence with the
modern collector. Consequently, earlier philosophical, linguistic analyses
of literature for aesthetic elements or importance given to actors in a
dramatic work (uttpattivada) lessened. The Sanskrit word for actor is
patra (vessel or pot) - and therefore so goes the aphorism:
“The pot does not know the taste of the brew”.
Bhatta Nayak classified this absorptive aesthetic experience as an event
completely different from normal experience or memory. As he tells us -
Even religious revelation is inferior to the aesthetic experience:
“Nothing can compare with aesthetic rasa, not even the rasa spiritual
savants bring forth”.
Finally, it was the polymath Abhinavagupta (c. 950 – 1016) who in his
encyclopaedic work Abhinavabharati summarizes Indian aesthetic
philosophy and brings forth his own powerful arguments. He was
a renaissance man who was a master of philosophy, logic, Tantra,
aesthetics and poetry. By the end of his career he was widely regarded as
one of the greatest teachers, writers and spiritual masters of his day. His
theory of Rasa revelation/realisation is known as Abhivyaktivada. As he
exquisitely describes Rasa5:
“Born in the heart of the poet, it flowers in the actor and bears fruit in
the spectator.”
According to him a true aesthetic work should have a strong sense of
suggestion to stimulate the imagination of the viewer. It is not enough
for the artwork to have abhida or lakshana (literal or metaphorical
meaning), but should also contain Vyanjana (suggestion). It is the
4. Pollock S. 2016. A Rasa
Reader: Classical Indian
Aesthetics. Columbia
University Press.
5. Gnoli R. 1985. The
Aesthetic Experience
according to Abhinavagupta.
Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series.
6. Raghavan, V. 1978. Bhoja’s
Sringara Prakasa. Madras
89
vyanjana that sparks the imagination of the aesthete, transporting
them to a world of their own creation upon viewing a work of art.
This aesthetic experience elevates the individual to the universal level
(Brahman) free from the mundane realities of place, time and life.
He uses the Shaivite term of chamatkara as a description of aesthetic
consciousness, which frees the individual from reality and their
own ego. When an aesthete is immersed in this state, the ordinary
world ceases and they lose themselves in that wondrous moment;
therefore, Rasa is pure pleasure and beatitude (Ananda). He terms this
temporary cessation of the ordinary world and its replacement by a new
dimension as alaukik (other-worldly phenomenon). As one can discern,
Abhinavagupta’s theories of the process of artistic creation and aesthetic
experience are surprisingly modern and relevant to individuals today.
It can also be inferred that any serious study of Indian art is incomplete
if it does not include the aesthetic experience from the viewers’
perspective.
Other important contributions by Abhinavagupta relate to an
additional ninth Rasa (Quiescent Rasa - Shanta Rasa) and the making
of an initiated connoisseur (Sahrdya). This quiescent Rasa equates the
aesthetic experience to the plane of highest knowledge or ultimate
reality. He argues that to activate an individual’s dormant experiences
and emotional quotient by aesthetic processes it is necessary to have
absolute calmness of the mind without distractions - it is from the
stillness of the mind that pleasure arises. If the spectator were a cultured
person with inherent dormant experiences, when these are manifested
or reflected in literature or poetry, they are elevated to ultimate state
of Ananda. It evidently follows that to be a cultured person, familiarity
with literature, poetry or revealed texts is necessary in order to fully
realize this aesthetic consciousness.
Although Abhinavagupta’s work surpassed earlier philosophical
systems, the works of Bhatta Lollatta and earlier scholars continued
to find support and patronage, particularly in the major work
(Sringarprakasha) of the 11th c. Malwa ruler Raja Bhoja6. Bhoja’s
aesthetic philosophy is intensely personal and applicable at an
individual level (as opposed to the impersonal, ego-less state
propounded by Abhinavagupta). Furthermore, according to Bhoja any
cultured individual (Rasika) can enjoy Rasa, whether the creator, actor
or the spectator. The ability to experience Rasa is dependent on one’s
emotional quotient, although Bhoja insists that the experience is heavily
dependent on previous religious acts. Another major difference is the
overall primacy given to Sringar Rasa (romantic emotion) by Bhoja –
according to him this is the primary Rasa that unifies all experiences
of pleasure or joy. The position held by Bhoja had immense appeal for
medieval Bhakti cults that celebrated worship or divine union with
amorous and erotic poetry. The vision of an icon (darshan) was in itself
an intensely personal and uplifting experience similar to a romantic
union according to Sringarprakasha. Subsequently, Abhinavagupta’s
and Bhoja’s positions came to be regarded as the northern and southern
schools of Indian aesthetics.
Finally, it is important to understand that Indian aesthetics and the
Rasa theory is an all-encompassing system, which does not distinguish
at all between different religions, sects or regions (unlike the categories,
subcategories and sub-styles of Indian art favoured by Western
scholars). The interpretation of Indian art through the lens of western
art theory may be important academically but is of limited value to the
Indian aesthete. Academic papers mainly focussed on the “when, where,
and by who?” of Indian art hardly ever engage with traditional Indian
scholarship and the aesthetic fidelity of artworks from the viewers’
perspective. This modern trend is perhaps secondary to the limited
availability and correlation of classical texts and vernaculars in the study
of Indian art. Perhaps it also comes from studying genres in isolation
rather than as a continuous, composite strand of Indian art as a whole
and also from concentrating mainly on the creative aspect of artworks
rather than a comprehensive overview of the process from creator to
patron/connoisseur. Older Indian collectors attuned to traditional
Indian aesthetic philosophy are openly critical of such modern
subdivisions and often deride such scholarship - as they often say: “after
all there is nothing specifically labelled as a Hindu dance or Jain drama
or Buddhist poem in Indian art history”.
The idol of Dakshinamurti is usually depicted as an image of Lord
Shiva in the teaching pose in various iterations and expounds his role
as the great teacher. The icons of Vinadhara and Nataraja are the other
facets of Lord Shiva as the supreme teacher of the arts – that of music
and dance respectively. His beating of the drum, playing of the vina
and dancing brings together the disciplines of philosophic thought and
aesthetic connoisseurship of the highest order. Lord Shiva is considered
to be the fountainhead of art and revealed knowledge and therefore
it should come as no surprise that major scholars of Indian aesthetics
came from a strong background of Shaivite philosophy. The image
of Dakshinamurti holds a special resonance with the Indian aesthete.
As the Lord of the arts, Dakshinamurti is the tutelary deity of the
connoisseur:
नृत्यशास्त्रं महेश्वर:
Traditionally Dakshinamurti is depicted as an elegant young man
seated on an elevated seat under a spreading banyan tree. He is usually
depicted with four arms. In his upper right hand he holds a rosary, or a
snake (symbol of esoteric, tantric knowledge) or both7. Sometimes he
is also shown holding a drum, which represents the creative aspect of
Shiva – the universe emerges and vanishes cyclically with the primeval
sound and rhythm of the drum. In his upper-left-hand he holds a
flaming torch symbolizing enlightenment or illumination, removing
the darkness of ignorance. His lower-left-hand resting on his left knee
is in a boon-granting (varada) mudra or it may also hold kusha grass
or manuscripts symbolizing scriptural knowledge. The lower right-
hand gestures assurance (abhayamudra or jnanamudra). His right foot
crushes the mythical demon Apasmara, which is the personification of
ignorance.
Surrounding his elevated seat are four to seven sages (rishis)
of redoubtable lineage. The eloquent, young master imparts the
revealed texts (Vedas) to the rishis in absolute silence. Intuitively, the
rishis gain esoteric knowledge without a word being spoken - they
just know. His teaching is silent, through the subtlest form of speech
that lies beyond the range physical hearing. It is thought that speech
is bound by the limits of rational knowledge, and therefore His
teachings transcend speech; it is a revealed experience. His listeners are
cultured men, learned and wise, receptive of intuitional understanding
(पूर्वाभासयोज़ना). It is also important to note that Shiva is portrayed
as a young man, implying that revealed or intuitive insights are not
necessarily correlated to advanced age or learned wisdom.
This mundane scene of a teacher sitting under a tree with disciples
is one full of aesthetic and philosophic potentialities (vyanjana)
that stimulate the imagination of the viewer. The suggestion of a
supreme teacher (Jnana Yogeshwara) is indicated by his sacred thread
(upanayana), matted hair and four arms7. It should be noted that the
Vinadhara and Nataraja (as supreme teachers of music and dance) are
also usually depicted with four arms and adorned with the upanayana.
Occasionally the artist may portray an idol with just a piece of cloth over
the shoulder to indicate the upanayana (Figs 2-3). The three strands
90
8. Sivaramamurti C. 1994.
Nataraja in Art, thought and
literature. National museum,
Delhi.
91
of the upanayana serve as a reminder of the three greatest debts of a
cultured person: debt to one’s parents, debt to one’s teachers, and debt
to scholars that have gone before them.
The tangled, matted locks (jata-bhara) are a particularly important
aspect of Dakshinamurti, as this signifies immense knowledge8. An
important early Dakshinamurti from the Sunga period in the Kanoria
collection shows Lord Shiva on a mountain throne presiding over
the Gandharvadevas of music and dance (Fig 1). It is to be noted that
the jatas are arranged as a prominent cranial protuberance (ushnisa)
signifying supernatural knowledge. A similar motif is used in the
depiction of the Buddha in Indian art and earlier Indo-Bactrian coins
are also known to show Shiva with an ushnisa rather than a jata-bhara.
The flame held in the left hand of some archaic Dakshinamurti idols
are depicted with a rudimentary stem (Fig 4). This is cognate with
the lotus held in the left hand by the Boddhisattva Avalokiteshwara
(Padmapani), further evidence of the commonality in iconography
of Indian art. Occasionally the Dakshinamurti is depicted playing
the mridanga (drum). As Patanjali states, it was through the beat
and rhythm of the drum that the fourteen sutras of Astadhyayi were
wordlessly revealed to Panini - Lord Shiva patting the drum thus
propounds esoteric knowledge. The drum and banyan tree with a
typical branching pattern (akshayavata) signifies the creative aspect of
Shiva. The drum implies creation, whereas the spreading branches of
the banyan tree reflect the expanding universe. It is a common motif
in Indian art – that of intuitive knowledge or enlightenment under
a tree – whether it be Buddha under the Bodhi, Mahavir under the
Sala or Dakshinamurti under the banyan. This symbolism of a young
teacher under a tree imparting knowledge is often seen in Indian art,
particularly miniature paintings. Most depictions are clichéd and
repetitive with little aesthetic merit, although occasionally one can
come across an example that is true to the original concept (Fig 5). The
fidelity of all attributes of an image to the proscribed textual references,
whether it be the number or arms, facial features or pose are important
for the Indian connoisseur. Deviations from the described forms appear
anachronistic, akin to using the wrong set of notes in a classical raga. On
the other hand, deviations from the norm in a masterpiece of art may
be a subtle suggestion towards obscure or esoteric iconography - artistic
inspiration left to be discovered by the viewer. Once all such aesthetic
possibilities are realized by the imagination of initiated spectator
(Sahrdya), aesthetic resolution is achieved. It is as if several esoteric
philosophical concepts and aesthetic ideas have been moulded into a
single, tangible object by the discerning sculptor. The connoisseur can
see reflected in the Dakshinamurti a distillation of their own experience
of aesthetic inspiration that is intuitive, just as one of the rishis. The
sudden sense of realization that comes to a collector when confronted
with an exceptional work of art, colourfully termed “the discerning eye”
or something to that effect, is nothing but the surfacing of dormant
experiences tempered with the familiarity of Indian legends, myths,
poetry and literature. No words have to be spoken and the experience
is one of pure consciousness, when momentarily all other realities fade
away. The revealed experience of the sculpted rishis is echoed in the
mind of the modern connoisseur. Often the affinity for a particular
artwork is instinctive, a kind of love at first sight. Reasons and analysis of
why an artwork is appealing comes much later than the initial aesthetic
impulse and after deep contemplation. Fashioned in a tangible medium,
Dakshinamurti provides an insight, an explanation for the intuitive
impulse that often takes hold of collectors, forcing them into deep
contemplation or even a headlong pursuit of acquisition. The overall
emotion elicited when faced with the Dakshinamurti is that of repose,
introspection and quietude (Shanta-rasa), the supreme Rasa according
of Indian art. Perhaps it also comes from studying genres in isolation
rather than as a continuous, composite strand of Indian art as a whole
and also from concentrating mainly on the creative aspect of artworks
rather than a comprehensive overview of the process from creator to
patron/connoisseur. Older Indian collectors attuned to traditional
Indian aesthetic philosophy are openly critical of such modern
subdivisions and often deride such scholarship - as they often say: “after
all there is nothing specifically labelled as a Hindu dance or Jain drama
or Buddhist poem in Indian art history”.
The idol of Dakshinamurti is usually depicted as an image of Lord
Shiva in the teaching pose in various iterations and expounds his role
as the great teacher. The icons of Vinadhara and Nataraja are the other
facets of Lord Shiva as the supreme teacher of the arts – that of music
and dance respectively. His beating of the drum, playing of the vina
and dancing brings together the disciplines of philosophic thought and
aesthetic connoisseurship of the highest order. Lord Shiva is considered
to be the fountainhead of art and revealed knowledge and therefore
it should come as no surprise that major scholars of Indian aesthetics
came from a strong background of Shaivite philosophy. The image
of Dakshinamurti holds a special resonance with the Indian aesthete.
As the Lord of the arts, Dakshinamurti is the tutelary deity of the
connoisseur:
नृत्यशास्त्रं महेश्वर:
Traditionally Dakshinamurti is depicted as an elegant young man
seated on an elevated seat under a spreading banyan tree. He is usually
depicted with four arms. In his upper right hand he holds a rosary, or a
snake (symbol of esoteric, tantric knowledge) or both7. Sometimes he
is also shown holding a drum, which represents the creative aspect of
Shiva – the universe emerges and vanishes cyclically with the primeval
sound and rhythm of the drum. In his upper-left-hand he holds a
flaming torch symbolizing enlightenment or illumination, removing
the darkness of ignorance. His lower-left-hand resting on his left knee
is in a boon-granting (varada) mudra or it may also hold kusha grass
or manuscripts symbolizing scriptural knowledge. The lower right-
hand gestures assurance (abhayamudra or jnanamudra). His right foot
crushes the mythical demon Apasmara, which is the personification of
ignorance.
Surrounding his elevated seat are four to seven sages (rishis)
of redoubtable lineage. The eloquent, young master imparts the
revealed texts (Vedas) to the rishis in absolute silence. Intuitively, the
rishis gain esoteric knowledge without a word being spoken - they
just know. His teaching is silent, through the subtlest form of speech
that lies beyond the range physical hearing. It is thought that speech
is bound by the limits of rational knowledge, and therefore His
teachings transcend speech; it is a revealed experience. His listeners are
cultured men, learned and wise, receptive of intuitional understanding
(पूर्वाभासयोज़ना). It is also important to note that Shiva is portrayed
as a young man, implying that revealed or intuitive insights are not
necessarily correlated to advanced age or learned wisdom.
This mundane scene of a teacher sitting under a tree with disciples
is one full of aesthetic and philosophic potentialities (vyanjana)
that stimulate the imagination of the viewer. The suggestion of a
supreme teacher (Jnana Yogeshwara) is indicated by his sacred thread
(upanayana), matted hair and four arms7. It should be noted that the
Vinadhara and Nataraja (as supreme teachers of music and dance) are
also usually depicted with four arms and adorned with the upanayana.
Occasionally the artist may portray an idol with just a piece of cloth over
the shoulder to indicate the upanayana (Figs 2-3). The three strands
90
8. Sivaramamurti C. 1994.
Nataraja in Art, thought and
literature. National museum,
Delhi.
91
of the upanayana serve as a reminder of the three greatest debts of a
cultured person: debt to one’s parents, debt to one’s teachers, and debt
to scholars that have gone before them.
The tangled, matted locks (jata-bhara) are a particularly important
aspect of Dakshinamurti, as this signifies immense knowledge8. An
important early Dakshinamurti from the Sunga period in the Kanoria
collection shows Lord Shiva on a mountain throne presiding over
the Gandharvadevas of music and dance (Fig 1). It is to be noted that
the jatas are arranged as a prominent cranial protuberance (ushnisa)
signifying supernatural knowledge. A similar motif is used in the
depiction of the Buddha in Indian art and earlier Indo-Bactrian coins
are also known to show Shiva with an ushnisa rather than a jata-bhara.
The flame held in the left hand of some archaic Dakshinamurti idols
are depicted with a rudimentary stem (Fig 4). This is cognate with
the lotus held in the left hand by the Boddhisattva Avalokiteshwara
(Padmapani), further evidence of the commonality in iconography
of Indian art. Occasionally the Dakshinamurti is depicted playing
the mridanga (drum). As Patanjali states, it was through the beat
and rhythm of the drum that the fourteen sutras of Astadhyayi were
wordlessly revealed to Panini - Lord Shiva patting the drum thus
propounds esoteric knowledge. The drum and banyan tree with a
typical branching pattern (akshayavata) signifies the creative aspect of
Shiva. The drum implies creation, whereas the spreading branches of
the banyan tree reflect the expanding universe. It is a common motif
in Indian art – that of intuitive knowledge or enlightenment under
a tree – whether it be Buddha under the Bodhi, Mahavir under the
Sala or Dakshinamurti under the banyan. This symbolism of a young
teacher under a tree imparting knowledge is often seen in Indian art,
particularly miniature paintings. Most depictions are clichéd and
repetitive with little aesthetic merit, although occasionally one can
come across an example that is true to the original concept (Fig 5). The
fidelity of all attributes of an image to the proscribed textual references,
whether it be the number or arms, facial features or pose are important
for the Indian connoisseur. Deviations from the described forms appear
anachronistic, akin to using the wrong set of notes in a classical raga. On
the other hand, deviations from the norm in a masterpiece of art may
be a subtle suggestion towards obscure or esoteric iconography - artistic
inspiration left to be discovered by the viewer. Once all such aesthetic
possibilities are realized by the imagination of initiated spectator
(Sahrdya), aesthetic resolution is achieved. It is as if several esoteric
philosophical concepts and aesthetic ideas have been moulded into a
single, tangible object by the discerning sculptor. The connoisseur can
see reflected in the Dakshinamurti a distillation of their own experience
of aesthetic inspiration that is intuitive, just as one of the rishis. The
sudden sense of realization that comes to a collector when confronted
with an exceptional work of art, colourfully termed “the discerning eye”
or something to that effect, is nothing but the surfacing of dormant
experiences tempered with the familiarity of Indian legends, myths,
poetry and literature. No words have to be spoken and the experience
is one of pure consciousness, when momentarily all other realities fade
away. The revealed experience of the sculpted rishis is echoed in the
mind of the modern connoisseur. Often the affinity for a particular
artwork is instinctive, a kind of love at first sight. Reasons and analysis of
why an artwork is appealing comes much later than the initial aesthetic
impulse and after deep contemplation. Fashioned in a tangible medium,
Dakshinamurti provides an insight, an explanation for the intuitive
impulse that often takes hold of collectors, forcing them into deep
contemplation or even a headlong pursuit of acquisition. The overall
emotion elicited when faced with the Dakshinamurti is that of repose,
introspection and quietude (Shanta-rasa), the supreme Rasa according
to Abhinavagupta. Other connoisseurs may find meaning in the
devotional aspect of this icon. An aesthete with a religious propensity
can find personal benediction on viewing the icon (darshan). As Bhoja
says, evocation of Rasa is a deeply personal experience and particular
to the individual. All it requires is that the individual must be cultured
and have refined sensibilities. The aesthete in this case may accord
their experience as analogous to what the other-worldly experience
the rishis may have encountered, when the true nature of things was
revealed to them. Their evocation of Rasa may be seen as a moment of
wondrous sentiment (Adhbhuta Rasa) engendered by the darshan of
Lord Shiva himself. The great temples erected by Southern emperors
prominently feature the Dakshinamurti on their walls. Firstly, it serves
as a silent homage by the architect-sculptors to the Lord of all sculptors.
Secondly, as they enter, its beatific vision temporarily divests devotees
of their prosaic realities as they pass through into the other world of the
sanctum sanctorum.
This vision of aesthetic beatitude has been presented to us
numerous times over the millennia, whether in literature, painting,
sculpture, dance or drama. An example easily brought to mind is the
rock-cut sculpture of Mridanga Dakshinamurti teaching the tandava
dance to Tandu (who in turn taught Bharata the Natyasastra). Tandu
looks up to his master with great sensitivity and wonder, the expression
strikingly similar to a modern-day visitor perusing art in a museum.
This alaukik aesthetic wonder - a momentary lapse of reason - can also
be seen in the often erroneously labelled as “Ram Darbar” paintings,
related to the work by Tulsidas:

एकटक खड़े जोरि करि आगे| सकहु नहीं कछु कहे अनुरागे ||

The lines relate to the climax of Ramacharitmanas, when the monkey

army visits Lord Rama seated on his throne to take their final leave.
These great warriors, huge man-mountains, are so overcome by the
beauty of the vision and their own emotions that they seem paralysed,
even unable to speak. Again, in a rare exemplary painting one may
discern fidelity to the original literary sentiment of Adhbhut Rasa and
the aesthetic wonder etched in the faces of the figures.
In great works of Indian art, there is a commonality of artistic
expression and iconography that transcends time, place and medium.
It is the thread of classical texts and aesthetic theories that runs through
Indian artworks that await appreciation by the viewer. Literature, as
mentioned earlier, is the fountainhead to which collectors must return to
fully comprehend and savour Indian art. The creative aspect of such icons
is also important, as it is only rarely that the artist or sculptor realizes the
full potentialities of such rich philosophical subjects. Only the greatest of
such artworks can induce full aesthetic ananda in the Sahrdya.
There is no other icon or image that personifies the intuitive
experience and aesthetic consciousness of collectors/connoisseurs
better than the Dakshinamurti. It has appeal to both the devotee and
the connoisseur - hearts and minds. In the Dakshinamurti, both great
strands – northern and southern – of Indian aesthetic philosophy merge
into a composite whole, a particularly rare instance in Indian art.
Dakshinamurti is indeed the Lord of All Knowledge.

Acknowledgements:
Shri VK Kanoria.

Dakshinamurti
Late Pallava / Early Chola dynasty
South India, 9th/10th century
Ivory, Height 14 cm

92 93
to Abhinavagupta. Other connoisseurs may find meaning in the
devotional aspect of this icon. An aesthete with a religious propensity
can find personal benediction on viewing the icon (darshan). As Bhoja
says, evocation of Rasa is a deeply personal experience and particular
to the individual. All it requires is that the individual must be cultured
and have refined sensibilities. The aesthete in this case may accord
their experience as analogous to what the other-worldly experience
the rishis may have encountered, when the true nature of things was
revealed to them. Their evocation of Rasa may be seen as a moment of
wondrous sentiment (Adhbhuta Rasa) engendered by the darshan of
Lord Shiva himself. The great temples erected by Southern emperors
prominently feature the Dakshinamurti on their walls. Firstly, it serves
as a silent homage by the architect-sculptors to the Lord of all sculptors.
Secondly, as they enter, its beatific vision temporarily divests devotees
of their prosaic realities as they pass through into the other world of the
sanctum sanctorum.
This vision of aesthetic beatitude has been presented to us
numerous times over the millennia, whether in literature, painting,
sculpture, dance or drama. An example easily brought to mind is the
rock-cut sculpture of Mridanga Dakshinamurti teaching the tandava
dance to Tandu (who in turn taught Bharata the Natyasastra). Tandu
looks up to his master with great sensitivity and wonder, the expression
strikingly similar to a modern-day visitor perusing art in a museum.
This alaukik aesthetic wonder - a momentary lapse of reason - can also
be seen in the often erroneously labelled as “Ram Darbar” paintings,
related to the work by Tulsidas:

एकटक खड़े जोरि करि आगे| सकहु नहीं कछु कहे अनुरागे ||

The lines relate to the climax of Ramacharitmanas, when the monkey

army visits Lord Rama seated on his throne to take their final leave.
These great warriors, huge man-mountains, are so overcome by the
beauty of the vision and their own emotions that they seem paralysed,
even unable to speak. Again, in a rare exemplary painting one may
discern fidelity to the original literary sentiment of Adhbhut Rasa and
the aesthetic wonder etched in the faces of the figures.
In great works of Indian art, there is a commonality of artistic
expression and iconography that transcends time, place and medium.
It is the thread of classical texts and aesthetic theories that runs through
Indian artworks that await appreciation by the viewer. Literature, as
mentioned earlier, is the fountainhead to which collectors must return to
fully comprehend and savour Indian art. The creative aspect of such icons
is also important, as it is only rarely that the artist or sculptor realizes the
full potentialities of such rich philosophical subjects. Only the greatest of
such artworks can induce full aesthetic ananda in the Sahrdya.
There is no other icon or image that personifies the intuitive
experience and aesthetic consciousness of collectors/connoisseurs
better than the Dakshinamurti. It has appeal to both the devotee and
the connoisseur - hearts and minds. In the Dakshinamurti, both great
strands – northern and southern – of Indian aesthetic philosophy merge
into a composite whole, a particularly rare instance in Indian art.
Dakshinamurti is indeed the Lord of All Knowledge.

Acknowledgements:
Shri VK Kanoria.

Dakshinamurti
Late Pallava / Early Chola dynasty
South India, 9th/10th century
Ivory, Height 14 cm

92 93

View publication stats