BUDDHIST
ICONS
in
men as
Sri—is there. Indra upon
his
elephant, the rain-
cloud
;
Dtirga upon
her
tawny
lion, the
scorchingheat of
the
Indian
plains
—all the
Vedic
gods are
there as witnesses
of
the Truth.
But Buddha, the Blessed
One Himself,
is only
represented
by the precious relics
placed within
the Vedic
altarupon
thechaityaofthePari-Nirvana.
Suddenly, about the beginning of
the Christian
era, the
chaitya becomes something more than
anature-symbol
and
a
reliquary: it is transformed intoa
shrine for the
Buddha as
theDeity, and
everywhere images ofthe Blessed
Oneas the
Preacher, or as the
Great
Yogi,
appear within
the chaitya-
houses and
monasteries of the Sangha. Are
we to suppose
thatduringthefivecenturieswhich had
elapsed sincethe
first
preachingoftheLaw,allthefollowers of
the Buddhahad
kept
strictlytothe spiritofAryanphilosophy,
as expounded
in the
DeerParkatSarnath,andevenrefrained
frommakingfor
them-
selvesgravenorpaintediconstokeepin
memorythe
personality
of theirbeloved Master
?
As human
nature is,this
wouldbe
altogether incredible. There must have been
numbers of
pious Buddhists,outside the strict rules of
the Sangha,
who
kept among their household gods His pictured
and graven
image, beforewhich theywould sitin silent
adoration as
they
meditateddailyupon Hisinspired precepts.
All thatwe
really
know
is
that from
the chaitya-houses
andmonasteries
ofthe
orthodox Sangha, uponwhich the finest artistryof
theAryan
geniuswas lavished, suchpicturesand imageswere
excluded.
It is easyto understand, also, that a close
restriction of
this kind upon the
highest imagination
of the painter
and
sculptor is sufficient in
itself toaccount
for the comparative
barrenness of Indo-Aryan fine art during the centuries
when
the Western
branch of the same family tree was
producing
such wonderful fruit
in the temples
of
ancient
Greece. In
latertimesithad thesamesterilisingeffectupon the Muham-