.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
拍品專文
Krodharaja Acala, or ‘King of the Wrathful Ones’, as he is described in one of his epithets, stands erect in alidhasana, trampling two figures, one with an elephant head beneath his feet. With his barred fangs and furrowed brow, he stares directly out at the viewer with wide eyes and punctuated pupils. His jeweled ornaments, swirling scarf, and short dhoti are all substantial; the lobed five-pointed crown with triple flared sashes, thick rimmed roundel earrings, collared necklace with inverted breastplate pendant, piped hemmed and deeply incised tiger-skin skirt all carry a weightiness which easily convey a confronting presence of power. His sword and noose held in his respective hands, the snakes wrapped on a bias across his chest and along each ankle, and the elevated double lotus throne activate his capability to remove obstacles and awaken a practitioner on their path towards enlightenment.
The intense power stance of these early Acala images portray an uprightness that captures the deity's immovable nature, a form that is linked to descriptions popularized by the Indian master Atisha (982-1054 C.E). Fathering Buddhism during its second wave in Tibet, he held a preference for this solitary tutelary deity which he described in several texts including the Ekavira-sadhana-nama (P. Pal, "An early Tibetan mandala of Ekallavira Achala in a private collection: An Art Historical Analysis", 13 September 2009, www.asianart.com). Several earlier twelth century images of the deity, including fig. 1 (circa 1175) and fig. 7 (circa 1100) of the aforementioned essay share the same fierce frontal posture, and a thirteenth century kesi reveals the same protruding pot-belly and robust form as depicted here.
Like the textual sources, early iconographic forms of the deity borrowed from the Pala period styles of art. Features of this Northeast Indian style as adapted into Tibetan examples include his dynamic stride, fluttering sash, brassy patina, and tall base (c.f. U, von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures in Tibet, Vol.II, Hong Kong, 2001, pp. 1112-3, nos. 291A-E). However, Pala models and even the early examples of the deity in paintings, as noted in the two examples above, illustrate the deity with slimmer proportions. Comparatively, developed Tibetan styles emphasize thicker limbs, enlarged features, and an overall monumental appearance, of which several other examples of the 13th century also highlight his formidable appearance (see HAR 30376 and 68452; Victoria and Albert Museum IM.55-1929; British Museum 1952..11-1.1; and Norton Simon M. 1975.14.6.S). Even compared to those contemporaneous Tibetan examples, this Acala stands out in its erect posture with straight head, leaving the viewer in no uncertain terms, with a wrathful forthrightness in his address.
The intense power stance of these early Acala images portray an uprightness that captures the deity's immovable nature, a form that is linked to descriptions popularized by the Indian master Atisha (982-1054 C.E). Fathering Buddhism during its second wave in Tibet, he held a preference for this solitary tutelary deity which he described in several texts including the Ekavira-sadhana-nama (P. Pal, "An early Tibetan mandala of Ekallavira Achala in a private collection: An Art Historical Analysis", 13 September 2009, www.asianart.com). Several earlier twelth century images of the deity, including fig. 1 (circa 1175) and fig. 7 (circa 1100) of the aforementioned essay share the same fierce frontal posture, and a thirteenth century kesi reveals the same protruding pot-belly and robust form as depicted here.
Like the textual sources, early iconographic forms of the deity borrowed from the Pala period styles of art. Features of this Northeast Indian style as adapted into Tibetan examples include his dynamic stride, fluttering sash, brassy patina, and tall base (c.f. U, von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures in Tibet, Vol.II, Hong Kong, 2001, pp. 1112-3, nos. 291A-E). However, Pala models and even the early examples of the deity in paintings, as noted in the two examples above, illustrate the deity with slimmer proportions. Comparatively, developed Tibetan styles emphasize thicker limbs, enlarged features, and an overall monumental appearance, of which several other examples of the 13th century also highlight his formidable appearance (see HAR 30376 and 68452; Victoria and Albert Museum IM.55-1929; British Museum 1952..11-1.1; and Norton Simon M. 1975.14.6.S). Even compared to those contemporaneous Tibetan examples, this Acala stands out in its erect posture with straight head, leaving the viewer in no uncertain terms, with a wrathful forthrightness in his address.