viha ̄ra(where monks lived). In addition, the inner sanctum (garbhagr.ha)
may have incorporated the imagery of a cave which served as early shrines
in non-classical settings and as dwelling places for Jain and Buddhist mendi-
cants.^11 Like the palace, the temple was deemed homologous to the cosmos
itself and, at least by the late Gupta period, its tower was deemed congruent
to Mt. Meru, the mythical center of the universe, to the hiran.yagarbha, the
primal “golden reed,” and to the human torso, itself thought to be congruent
to the “body” of the divinity. It is probable that, during this period, the ritual
known as abhis.ekawas being used (though more evidence for the full-blown
practice of this ritual came considerably later). Abhis.eka(libations or bathing)
was constituted of the pouring of certain materials on the icon, such as may
have been earlier offered to the fire or to the king.
Devotionalism, in sum, seemed to be the coalescence of several strands
that merged in the urban context: the sacralization of the king and the
mythological elevation of the deity as his celestial counterpart; the bringing
together of various cultural elements – vaidika, Buddhist, folk – designed to
appeal to various communities; the use of artistic forms to express religious
reality (on which more later); the possibility of participating in the “ultimate”
in more accessible form, and thereby combining the paths of both wisdom
and action.
Articulation of an “urban” ethic
It appears there was a shifting of basic paradigms in the urban period as to
what constituted appropriate lifestyle and ethical behavior. In the vaidika
system, there was an effort to adjust “continuities,” such as the notions of
“sacrifice,” monism, varn.a, and the ethic of renunciation to urban-based
society. Asceticism, while still practiced in some quarters, was no longer the
highest priority – householding was. Insofar as the city-state had been sacral-
ized, new options and compromises occurred. We have already observed
howartha(statecraft) had come to epitomize the ethic of kingship and the
king’s role in maintaining public dharma. In some contexts, dharmahad
come to take precedence over moks.a.Dharmanow connoted the law of the
city-state, social interactions, and ritual activities. Indeed several bodies of
texts evolved, summarizing these duties. These are the Dharmasu ̄ tras–
concise verses and aphorisms summarizing ritual and legal obligations
appearing in textual form between the fourth and first centuries BCE; the
Dharmas ́a ̄stras, a more elaborate articulation of these matters, appearing
a few centuries later; and the Gr.hyasu ̄ traswhich provided a systematization
of household rituals, including the forty or so rites of passage done at critical
stages of the lifecycle.
The Urban Period 61