The ancient and medieval architecture of India: a study of Indo-Aryan civilisation

94

VISHNU

SHRINES

had accepted, more abstruse

metaphysical

and philospphical

theses, so that both the Hinayina

and Mah^yana schools

merged into modern Hinduism inthe

samewayas the earlier

schools of Vedic India had merged into

Buddhism, The

Hinayana,

whichwas then the

southern school of

Buddhism,

grew
into the modern Saivaite

school, which inherited the

ascetic traditions ofpre-Buddhist

times; while the Vaishna-

vaites, who representthereformingschools

ofnorthern India,

absorbed the following of Mahayanist

philosophy. It must,

however, be remembered that in modern

times thetwomain

sects,orgroupsof sects, haveintermingledat somany

points

thattheolddistinctions havebeenlargelysupersededbyothers

whichindividualHinduteachers,likeSankaracharya,Ramanllja

and Chaitanya, haveintroduced.

The apparent anomaly, which has confused Fergusson

and many others, is that a Vishnu shrine is not necessarily

Vaishnavaite in the sectarian sense, but only one
that

is

dedicated

totheVaishnavaaspectofSrahma,Buddha,

or

Siva,

asthecase

maybe. Similarly, a Sivashrinemay

beSaivaite,

Buddhist,

orVaishnavaite. Fergusson did not

perceive that

throughout

allthesesectarianchangesthere prevailed

thegreat

architectural

traditionwhich was Indo-Aryan, and

that these

symbols represent

philosophical concepts accepted

by all the

chiefschoolsof

Indo-Aryan religion.

The idea of the

Vishnu mystic pillar,or

holymountain

supportingthesky,isof

very remoteantiquity

andcommon to

Europe and Asia.

The Christian church

tower and steeple,

and

the IndianVishnu

sikhara areone and

the same symbol

withdifferentimplications.

TheVedic

philosopherstookitas

the symbol of the

equilibrium of the

twoopposing

cosmic

forces, which

theynamed

Brahmiand

Siva, orevolution

and

involution.

Thethree

symbols together,

theTrimdrti,

arenot

separate

"

gods," but

threeAspects of

Ishwara, the

firstmani-