.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
拍品专文
Seated Vajradhara, the Primordial Buddha
Robert D. Mowry
Alan J. Dworsky Curator of Chinese Art Emeritus,
Harvard Art Museums, and
Senior Consultant, Christie’s
Created in the imperial workshops during the Yongle reign (1403–1424) of the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), this exquisite gilt-bronze sculpture represents the Buddha Vajradhara, the Primordial Buddha, who is known in Chinese as Jingang Zongchi (and, in shortened form, as Jingangchi). Although widely worshipped in Nepal and Tibet, Vajradhara was only infrequently venerated in China and thus is seldom represented in Chinese Buddhist art, marking this as an exceptionally rare sculpture and thus of signal importance.
The hands crossed at the wrists before the chest and holding a vajra, or “thunderbolt scepter”, and a ghanta, or prayer-bell, identify this figure as Vajradhara, the Adibuddha—that is, the Primordial Buddha of Vajrayana Buddhism. Followers of Vajrayana Buddhism believe that the religion’s sacred teachings, or dharma, originate with Vajradhara and that all other Buddhas emanate from him. As evinced by this sculpture, the vajra—in this case, a five-pronged vajra—characteristically appears in the deity’s right hand and the vajra-handled ghanta in his left (in this case, a five-pronged ghanta. The gesture with wrists crossed at the chest and palms facing inward symbolizes preaching and is termed the prajnalinganabhinaya-mudra, which is usually called anweiyin in Chinese, though that term also designates the vitarka-mudra. (A ritual hand gesture, a mudra—symbolizes a particular action, power, or attitude of a deity.) Together, the vajra and ghanta symbolize the Buddhist ideals of all-penetrating emptiness and absolute wisdom—the former known as sunyata in Sanskrit and as kongxing or shunruoduo in Chinese, the latter as prajna in Sanskrit and bore in Chinese.
Vajrayana Buddhism, which is often translated into English as the “Thunderbolt Vehicle” or “Diamond Vehicle”, is a form of Tantric, or Esoteric, Buddhism that developed in India and neighbouring countries, notably Nepal and Tibet. In the long history of Buddhism, Vajrayana marks the transition from the speculative thought of Mahayana Buddhism to the enactment of Buddhist ideals in individual life. In the name “Vajrayana”, vajra , means “thunderbolt”, “diamond”, or “adamantine” and signifies the absolutely real and indestructible in a human being, as opposed to the fictions an individual entertains about himself and his nature, while yana refers to the spiritual pursuit of the ultimately valuable and indestructible.
Vajradhara is always shown seated; in this sculpture he sits atop a Nepalese-style, double-lotus base. Befitting his august status, Vajradhara appears in a formal, erect pose, his spine straight, his shoulders square, his head held high, rather than in the less-formal, S-curved pose typical of bodhisattva images in Tibeto-Chinese style.1 In fact, he sits in the vajrasana pose, a cross-legged sitting position, or asana, in which the feet are placed on the opposing thighs, soles up, the heels as close to the abdomen as possible, and the arrangement of the knees and legs as symmetrical as possible. (Often termed padmasana, or the lotus position in English, the position is known as vajrasana in Chinese and Tibetan Buddhism.) The upper tier on the double-lotus base claims rising lotus petals and is roughly half the height of the lower tier, which features descending lotus petals; beaded borders encircle the top and bottom of the base.
Although Buddhas —that is, beings who have attained enlightenment and have entered nirvana —are typically cloaked in the robes of a Buddhist monk and customarily lack jewelry and a crown, Vajradhara, following Nepalese and Tibetan convention, characteristically appears in the guise of a bodhisattva . (A bodhisattva is a benevolent being who has gained enlightenment but has selflessly postponed entry into nirvana in order to help other sentient beings achieve enlightenment—i.e., to deliver all living creatures from suffering.) Bodhisattvas are thus portrayed in the trappings of an early Indian prince, a reference to Siddhartha Gautama’s worldly status as a crown prince before he became the Historical Buddha Shakyamuni , implying that just as Siddhartha (traditionally, c. 563–c. 483 BC) became a Buddha, so will bodhisattvas eventually become Buddhas, once all sentient beings have attained enlightenment and entered nirvana.
In the guise of a bodhisattva, Vajradhara is richly attired and is represented with long hair arranged in an imposing coiffure with a tall bun atop the head and with long strands cascading over the shoulders; a braid of hair encircles the base of the topknot, and a jewel appears at its summit, the jewel known variously as a manibaozhu and a mounibaozhu. Small ringlets of hair follow the hairline across the forehead, down the temples, and around the nape of the neck. As the Primordial Buddha, Vajradhara wears an elaborate crown with eight vertical, jewel-embellished lappets in contrast to a bodhisattva’s crown which typically has five rising lappets—the eight lappets a reference to the Buddha’s Noble Eightfold Path to enlightenment and escape from the samsara cycle of birth and rebirth. He wears ornamental scarves, a dhoti of rich silk brocade, and a wealth of jewelry that includes armlets, bracelets, anklets, and long chains of beads as well as large, circular earrings whose size and style reflect the Nepalese origin of this iconographic type. As if animated by a gentle breeze, ribbons from the crown flutter above the deity’s ears on either side.
The distinguishing characteristic of most Buddhas—whether Shakyamuni, Amitabha, the Medicine Buddha, or Vairocana, for example—is the ushnisha, or cranial protuberance atop the head, that symbolizes the expanded wisdom that the Buddha gained at his enlightenment; in fact, it serves as a Buddha’s diagnostic iconographic feature as only Buddhas possess an ushnisha. As a Buddha, Vajradhara of course has an ushnisha; however, as he is presented in the trappings of a bodhisattva, the bun of hair atop his head conceals his ushnisha from view.
An attribute of a deity—and often incorrectly termed a “third eye” or even a caste mark—the urna is the curl of white hair between the Buddha’s eyebrows from which issues a ray of light illuminating all worlds.2 Though technically defined as a curl of hair, the urna is usually portrayed in gilt-bronze sculptures as a relief, cabochon jewel, in this instance, as a jewel in teardrop form. Due to frequent touching by worshippers, the urna has lost much of its gilding, as has the tip of the nose. The gilded surfaces not only make the sculpture appropriate for representing a deity but symbolize the light that, according to the sacred texts, or sutras, radiates from the deity’s body.
The Tibeto-Chinese style of this sculpture evolved from a long artistic tradition that can be traced to northeastern India in the eleventh and twelfth centuries and that subsequently spread to Nepal and Tibet.3 The flowering of the Nepali variant of the style in China during the Yuan dynasty (1279–1368) is often linked to the influence of Anige (1245–1306), a young Nepali artist who was brought to Beijing in 1262 by Drogön Chogyal Phagpa (1235–1280), an influential Tibetan monk of the Sakya sect and state preceptor for Kublai Khan (1215–1294), the founder of the Yuan dynasty. Anige played a key role at the Mongol court, serving as the director of all artisan classes and the controller of the Imperial Manufactories Commission.4
Although Tibetan Buddhist imagery began to appear in the repertory of Chinese art already in the Yuan dynasty, Tibetan influence on Chinese Buddhist art became far more pronounced in the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), particularly during the Yongle era (1403–1424), when the imperial court looked favorably upon Buddhism and made a concerted effort to build secular and religious alliances with Tibet, even inviting Tibetan monks to the capital, Beijing, to conduct religious services. Such Tibetan influence manifests itself in the sensuousness of the art, as witnessed in this figure’s elegant proportions, benevolent countenance, dazzling jewels, refined gestures, abundant and meticulously rendered details, and compressed double-lotus base. As important as Tibetan-influenced works of art were early in fifteenth-century China, particularly in the Yongle and Xuande (1426–1435) reigns, Tibetan-style Buddhism was little practiced outside the imperial court, so most such images likely were made for the court, as indicated by the imperial inscriptions.5
The figure’s broad shoulders, smooth torso, and long legs derive from Indian traditions, as do the thin clothing and such items of jewelry as the bracelets, armbands, and anklets. By contrast, the large circular earrings and the broad, squarish face with high cheekbones, fleshy cheeks, and elegantly curved eyebrows stem from Nepali and Tibetan traditions. Excepting its numerous turquoise inlays, a fourteenth-century, Nepalese sculpture of Vajradhara in the Museum Rietberg, Zurich (Inventory Number Inv.-Nr. BA 21), represents the type of Himalayan sculpture that likely inspired the present image of Vajradhara.6
Numerous sculptures in this Nepali-Tibetan-influenced style were produced during the Yongle reign, and the style continued through the fifteenth and into the sixteenth century with but little change or evolution. The soft folds in the scarf draped over the figure’s shoulders and arms and the loose pleats and folds of the garment covering the legs are typical of works produced in the imperial workshops during the Yongle period, as is the careful casting and finishing of the back. In particular, gilt-bronze sculptures produced during the Yongle era are celebrated for their delicacy of detail and the rich colour of their mercury gilding.7
The formulaic, six-character inscription reading Da Ming Yongle nian shi, which is engraved at the center of the base’s flat top and which may be translated “Bestowed [during the] Yongle era [of the] Great Ming”, dates this sculpture to the Yongle reign (1403–1424) of the Ming dynasty, a period of great artistic refinement in China. Engraved after casting, inscriptions on such Tibeto-Chinese-style bronzes typically read from left to right, as seen here, and end with the verb shi, in this context meaning “bestow”, rather than with the verb zhi, meaning “made”, which is typically seen in the imperial marks of porcelains, lacquers, and other secular arts of the same period.
Now lost, a metal plate, probably of copper or brass, originally covered the hollow sculpture’s open base, concealing the interior from view and securing in place the dedicatory objects deposited within at the time of consecration. The metal plate would have rested on the small, relief ledge just inside the base and would have been fixed in place by both friction and red wax. At its center, the base plate likely sported an engraved vishvavajra, or double vajra, perhaps with a stylized lotus blossom at the crossing of the two arms, the design symbolically shielding and protecting the sculpture and its consecratory contents.
The consecration of Buddhist sculptures included an elaborate ritual executed in accordance with canonical texts that describe the process in detail.8 The most important part of the ritual was the placement of consecratory objects within the sculpture’s interior cavity, those objects typically including small paper sutras and prayer scrolls, glass beads, textile fragments, small bronze seals, small sculptures of metal or wood, seeds, and assorted other special goods.9 Such dedicatory items were believed to enliven the image and accord it religious efficacy; religious in nature, they are seldom dated and rarely include any information that would convey insight into the sculpture’s date, place, or other circumstances of manufacture.10
The closest counterparts to this superb work are four Yongle-marked, gilt-bronze sculptures of Vajradhara that are in collections in Tibet, including one in Lhasa’s Jo khang Temple / gTsug lag khang11 and three in the collection of the Potala Palace, Lhasa.12 The present sculpture is virtually identical to the four in Lhasa, though the latter appear slightly different on first inspection as their faces have been cold-painted in gold and thus are matte rather than lustrous and as their lips have been tinted red, their eyes touched in with black and white pigments, and their hair coloured blue with lapis lazuli. On the Himalayan Art Resources website, Jeff Watt, a scholar and a former curator at New York’s Rubin Museum, illustrates and describes five additional Chinese, gilt-bronze sculptures of Vajradhara that are now in private collections, that are similar in style to the present Vajradhara, and that, although dating to the fifteenth century, lack imperial inscriptions (object nos. 12441, 23125, 57394, 57396, and 57397). 13
A more distantly related sculpture in New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art (1975.1.1442) depicts Vajradhara seated in a yogic meditation posture and united in ecstatic sexual congress (yab-yum) with Prajnaparamita, his energy consort, or shakti. Though it could be Tibetan, the sculpture is in Yongle style, is thought to be Chinese, and is believed to date to the early fifteenth century.14 The similarity in style and general appearance of sculptures in Tibeto-Chinese style and those in Sino-Tibetan style illustrates the difficulty in determining the culture of origin of such works, particularly in the absence of an imperial or other inscription. Yab-yum is generally understood to represent the primordial (or mystical) union of Wisdom and Compassion. In Buddhism the masculine form is active, representing the compassion and skillful means (upaya) that must be developed in order to reach Enlightenment. The feminine form is passive and represents Wisdom (Prajna), which is also necessary to achieve Enlightenment. United, the figures symbolize the union necessary to overcome the veils of Maya , the false duality of object and subject.
Stylistically related to the present Vajradhara, a Yongle-marked, gilt-bronze sculpture in the Rietberg Museum, Zurich (Inv.-Nr. BA 22), represents the Bodhisattva Vajrasattva—known in Chinese as Jingang Saduo Pusa—who also holds a vajra and a ghanta but does not cross the hands before the chest; rather, grasping the vajra, Vajrasattva holds his right hand before his chest but holds his left hand with the ghanta at waist level, the arm extended slightly forward.15 In Vajrayana Buddhism, Vajrasattva is regarded as the Tantric, or Esoteric, aspect of the Bodhisattva Samantabhadra. Though both date to the Yongle period, hold a vajra and a ghanta, share similar names, and are stylistically and visually akin, the differing positions of the arms indicate that the present Buddha Vajradhara and the Rietberg Museum Bodhisattva Vajrasattva represent different deities with very different powers and meanings and thus must be distinguished one from the other.
The present example is identical in style to a Yongle-marked, gilt-bronze sculpture representing Manjushri in the Metropolitan Museum, New York (2001.59).16 Although the deities represented differ, the earrings and other jewelry, the figures’ backs, and the Nepalese-style bases are virtually identical. A stylistically related, Yongle-marked sculpture representing the Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara sold at Christie’s, New York, on 20 March 2014 (lot 1622)(fig. 1),17 and another is in the collection of the Museum Rietberg, Zurich.18 A stylistically kindred Yongle-marked sculpture representing the Seated Bodhisattva Tara in her “Green Manifestation” is in the collection of the Harvard Art Museums (1992.289).19
In excellent condition, this impressive gilt-bronze sculpture is one of only five known, Yongle-marked sculptures of Vajradhara; of those five, this is the only one outside of Tibet, making it exceptionally rare. Made in the imperial workshops, this sculpture incorporates the finest casting and gilding of the day. With its dazzling jewels, its abundant and meticulously rendered details, and the rich color of its gold, this sculpture perfectly embodies the refinement of the Yongle era; in fact, it is a masterwork of Chinese Buddhist sculpture.
1. In this essay, “Tibeto-Chinese” refers to art produced in China but strongly influenced by Tibetan styles, while “Sino-Tibetan” refers to art created in Tibet but heavily influenced by Chinese styles.
2. The urna is variously termed guanghao, yuhao, baihao, and suhao in Chinese; the ray of light issuing from the urna is generally termed 眉間白毫相. In fact, many Hindu deities indeed have a third eye at the center of the forehead, but Buddhist deities, and particularly the Buddhas, have a magical curl of hair between the eyebrows. The urna is one of the thirty-two special physical characteristics of the Buddha, known as the Thirty-Two Signs of a Great Man sanshierxiang. The term “Thirty-two Signs of a Great Man” 三十二相 refers to the laksana-vyanjana, known in Chinese as the xianghao, with xiang referring to the thirty-two major marks, and hao 好 to the eighty secondary signs on the physical body of Buddha.
3. For information on Tibeto-Chinese bronze sculptures, see: Ulrich von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures in Tibet (Hong Kong: Visual Dharma), 2001, vol. 2, pp. 1221-1223, 1237-1248; James C.Y. Watt quzhiren and Denise Leidy, Defining Yongle: Imperial Art in Early Fifteenth-Century China (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art; and New Haven, CT: Yale University Press), 2005, pp. 61-73; Helmut Uhlig, On the Path to Enlightenment: The Berti Aschmann Foundation of Tibetan Art at the Museum Rietberg Zurich (Zurich: Museum Rietberg), 1995; Denise Patry Leidy, Donna Strahan et al., Wisdom Embodied: Chinese Buddhist and Daoist Sculpture in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art; and New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press), 2010, pp. 148-151, no. 37; Chandra L. Reedy, Himalayan Bronzes: Technology, Style and Choices (Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press), 1997; Heather Karmay, Early Sino-Tibetan Art (Warminster, UK: Aris and Phillips Ltd.), 1975.
4. James C.Y. Watt 屈志仁 and Denise Leidy, Defining Yongle: Imperial Art in Early Fifteenth-Century China (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art; and New Haven, CT: Yale University Press), 2005, pp. 61-73; also see Denise Patry Leidy, Donna Strahan et al., Wisdom Embodied: Chinese Buddhist and Daoist Sculpture in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art; and New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press), 2010, pp. 148-151, no. 37.
5. For information on Tibetan influence on Chinese Buddhist art in the early fifteenth century, see Denise Leidy, “Buddhist Art”, in Watt and Leidy, Defining Yongle, 2005, pp. 61-101.
6. See: Helmut Uhlig, On the Path to Enlightenment: The Berti Aschmann Foundation of Tibetan Art at the Museum Rietberg Zurich (Zurich: Museum Rietberg), 1995, pp. 60-61, cat. no. 21.
7. Watt and Leidy, Defining Yongle, 2005, p. 74.
8. For a discussion of the consecration of Buddhist sculptures, see: Gennady Leonov, “Amitayus” in Marylin M. Rhie and Robert A.F. Thurman, eds., Wisdom and Compassion: The Sacred Art of Tibet (San Francisco: Asian Art Museum; New York: Tibet House in association with Harry N. Abrams), 1991, pp. 351-353; Yael Bentor, Consecration of Images and Stūpas in Indo-Tibetan Tantric Buddhism, vol. 11 in Brill’s Indological Library series (Leiden, The Netherlands, and New York: Brill), 1996; Gennady Leonov, “The Rite of Consecration in Tibetan Buddhism”, Arts of Asia (Hong Kong), vol. 22, no. 5 (September-October 1992), pp. 100-110.
9. For the classic English-language study on the inclusion of dedicatory objects within the cavities of hollow religious sculptures, see: John M. Rosenfield, “The Sedgwick Statue of the Infant Shotoku Taishi,” Archives of Asian Art, vol. 22 (1968-69), pp. 56-79; also see: Ulrich von Schroeder, “III. Consecration, Worship, and Practice: Consecration of Buddhist Statues in Tibet”, in Ulrich von Schroeder, 108 Buddhist Statues in Tibet: Evolution of Tibetan Sculptures (Chicago, IL: Serindia Publications; Hong Kong: Visual Dharma Publications Ltd.), 2008, pp. 29-30. Chandra L. Reedy, “A Buddha Within a Buddha”, Arts of Asia (Hong Kong), vol. 16, no. 2 (March-April 1986), pp. 94-101; Chandra L. Reedy, “The Opening of Consecrated Tibetan Bronzes with Interior Contents: Scholarly, Conservation, and Ethical Considerations”, Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, vol. 30, no. 1 (1991), pp. 13-34; Yael Bentor, “Tibetan Relic Classifications”, in Per Kvaerne, ed., Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Fagernes, 1992 (Oslo, Norway: Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture), 1994, pp.16-30.
10. For an image of the interior of a Yongle period (1403–1424) gilt bronze sculpture with dedicatory objects packed inside, see: Leidy, Strahan, et al., Wisdom Embodied, 2010, p. 151, fig. 110; for an image of one of the miniature scrolls removed from that sculpture and unfurled, see: Leidy and Strahan, Wisdom Embodied, pp. 150-151, fig. 109.
11. Located in central Lhasa and often called the gTsug lag khang, the Jo khang dazhaosi is Tibet’s earliest and foremost temple. For information on the temple and its treasures, see: Hugh E. Richardson, “The Jo-khang ‘Cathedral of Lhasa’” in Ariane W. Macdonald and Yoshiro Imaeda, eds., Essais sur l’art du Tibet (Paris: Librairie d'Amérique et d’Orient), 1977, pp. 157-188; Ulrich von Schroeder, 108 Buddhist Statues in Tibet: Evolution of Tibetan Sculptures (Chicago, IL: Serindia Publications; Hong Kong: Visual Dharma Publications Ltd.), 2008; Amy Heller, “The Lhasa gtsug lag khang: Observations on the Ancient Wood Carvings”, The Tibet Journal, (Dharamshala, India: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives), vol. 29, no. 3 (Autumn 2004), pp. 3-24.
12. See: Ulrich von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures in Tibet (Hong Kong: Visual Dharma), 2001, vol. 2, pp. 1250-1251, plates 343A-E.
13. See: https://www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=4655
14. See: Wolfram Koeppe et al., The Robert Lehman Collection, vol. 15 Decorative Arts (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art in association with Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press), 2012, pp. 364-465; also see: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/460573?ft=ghanta&offset=0&rpp=40&pos=2
15. See: Helmut Uhlig, On the Path to Enlightenment: The Berti Aschmann Foundation of Tibetan Art at the Museum Rietberg Zurich (Zurich: Museum Rietberg), 1995, p. 62, no. 22.
16. See: Watt and Leidy, Defining Yongle, 2005, pp. 70-71, plate 25; Leidy, Strahan, et al., Wisdom Embodied, 2010, pp. 148-151, cat. no. 37; also see: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/57612?ft=2001.59&offset=0&rpp=40&pos=1
17. See: Christie’s, The Sublime and the Beautiful: Asian Masterpieces of Devotion, 20 March 2014 (New York: Christie’s), 2014, pp. 110-115, lot 1622.
18. See: Uhlig, On the Path to Enlightenment, 1995, p. 98, no. 52.
19. See: “A Decade of Collecting: Arthur M. Sackler Museum”, Harvard University Art Museums Bulletin, vol. 7, no. 2 (Spring 2000), p. 10; Sherman E. Lee and Wai-kam Ho , Chinese Art Under the Mongols: The Yuan Dynasty (1279–1368) (Cleveland: Cleveland Museum of Art), 1968, no. 16.
Robert D. Mowry
Alan J. Dworsky Curator of Chinese Art Emeritus,
Harvard Art Museums, and
Senior Consultant, Christie’s
Created in the imperial workshops during the Yongle reign (1403–1424) of the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), this exquisite gilt-bronze sculpture represents the Buddha Vajradhara, the Primordial Buddha, who is known in Chinese as Jingang Zongchi (and, in shortened form, as Jingangchi). Although widely worshipped in Nepal and Tibet, Vajradhara was only infrequently venerated in China and thus is seldom represented in Chinese Buddhist art, marking this as an exceptionally rare sculpture and thus of signal importance.
The hands crossed at the wrists before the chest and holding a vajra, or “thunderbolt scepter”, and a ghanta, or prayer-bell, identify this figure as Vajradhara, the Adibuddha—that is, the Primordial Buddha of Vajrayana Buddhism. Followers of Vajrayana Buddhism believe that the religion’s sacred teachings, or dharma, originate with Vajradhara and that all other Buddhas emanate from him. As evinced by this sculpture, the vajra—in this case, a five-pronged vajra—characteristically appears in the deity’s right hand and the vajra-handled ghanta in his left (in this case, a five-pronged ghanta. The gesture with wrists crossed at the chest and palms facing inward symbolizes preaching and is termed the prajnalinganabhinaya-mudra, which is usually called anweiyin in Chinese, though that term also designates the vitarka-mudra. (A ritual hand gesture, a mudra—symbolizes a particular action, power, or attitude of a deity.) Together, the vajra and ghanta symbolize the Buddhist ideals of all-penetrating emptiness and absolute wisdom—the former known as sunyata in Sanskrit and as kongxing or shunruoduo in Chinese, the latter as prajna in Sanskrit and bore in Chinese.
Vajrayana Buddhism, which is often translated into English as the “Thunderbolt Vehicle” or “Diamond Vehicle”, is a form of Tantric, or Esoteric, Buddhism that developed in India and neighbouring countries, notably Nepal and Tibet. In the long history of Buddhism, Vajrayana marks the transition from the speculative thought of Mahayana Buddhism to the enactment of Buddhist ideals in individual life. In the name “Vajrayana”, vajra , means “thunderbolt”, “diamond”, or “adamantine” and signifies the absolutely real and indestructible in a human being, as opposed to the fictions an individual entertains about himself and his nature, while yana refers to the spiritual pursuit of the ultimately valuable and indestructible.
Vajradhara is always shown seated; in this sculpture he sits atop a Nepalese-style, double-lotus base. Befitting his august status, Vajradhara appears in a formal, erect pose, his spine straight, his shoulders square, his head held high, rather than in the less-formal, S-curved pose typical of bodhisattva images in Tibeto-Chinese style.1 In fact, he sits in the vajrasana pose, a cross-legged sitting position, or asana, in which the feet are placed on the opposing thighs, soles up, the heels as close to the abdomen as possible, and the arrangement of the knees and legs as symmetrical as possible. (Often termed padmasana, or the lotus position in English, the position is known as vajrasana in Chinese and Tibetan Buddhism.) The upper tier on the double-lotus base claims rising lotus petals and is roughly half the height of the lower tier, which features descending lotus petals; beaded borders encircle the top and bottom of the base.
Although Buddhas —that is, beings who have attained enlightenment and have entered nirvana —are typically cloaked in the robes of a Buddhist monk and customarily lack jewelry and a crown, Vajradhara, following Nepalese and Tibetan convention, characteristically appears in the guise of a bodhisattva . (A bodhisattva is a benevolent being who has gained enlightenment but has selflessly postponed entry into nirvana in order to help other sentient beings achieve enlightenment—i.e., to deliver all living creatures from suffering.) Bodhisattvas are thus portrayed in the trappings of an early Indian prince, a reference to Siddhartha Gautama’s worldly status as a crown prince before he became the Historical Buddha Shakyamuni , implying that just as Siddhartha (traditionally, c. 563–c. 483 BC) became a Buddha, so will bodhisattvas eventually become Buddhas, once all sentient beings have attained enlightenment and entered nirvana.
In the guise of a bodhisattva, Vajradhara is richly attired and is represented with long hair arranged in an imposing coiffure with a tall bun atop the head and with long strands cascading over the shoulders; a braid of hair encircles the base of the topknot, and a jewel appears at its summit, the jewel known variously as a manibaozhu and a mounibaozhu. Small ringlets of hair follow the hairline across the forehead, down the temples, and around the nape of the neck. As the Primordial Buddha, Vajradhara wears an elaborate crown with eight vertical, jewel-embellished lappets in contrast to a bodhisattva’s crown which typically has five rising lappets—the eight lappets a reference to the Buddha’s Noble Eightfold Path to enlightenment and escape from the samsara cycle of birth and rebirth. He wears ornamental scarves, a dhoti of rich silk brocade, and a wealth of jewelry that includes armlets, bracelets, anklets, and long chains of beads as well as large, circular earrings whose size and style reflect the Nepalese origin of this iconographic type. As if animated by a gentle breeze, ribbons from the crown flutter above the deity’s ears on either side.
The distinguishing characteristic of most Buddhas—whether Shakyamuni, Amitabha, the Medicine Buddha, or Vairocana, for example—is the ushnisha, or cranial protuberance atop the head, that symbolizes the expanded wisdom that the Buddha gained at his enlightenment; in fact, it serves as a Buddha’s diagnostic iconographic feature as only Buddhas possess an ushnisha. As a Buddha, Vajradhara of course has an ushnisha; however, as he is presented in the trappings of a bodhisattva, the bun of hair atop his head conceals his ushnisha from view.
An attribute of a deity—and often incorrectly termed a “third eye” or even a caste mark—the urna is the curl of white hair between the Buddha’s eyebrows from which issues a ray of light illuminating all worlds.2 Though technically defined as a curl of hair, the urna is usually portrayed in gilt-bronze sculptures as a relief, cabochon jewel, in this instance, as a jewel in teardrop form. Due to frequent touching by worshippers, the urna has lost much of its gilding, as has the tip of the nose. The gilded surfaces not only make the sculpture appropriate for representing a deity but symbolize the light that, according to the sacred texts, or sutras, radiates from the deity’s body.
The Tibeto-Chinese style of this sculpture evolved from a long artistic tradition that can be traced to northeastern India in the eleventh and twelfth centuries and that subsequently spread to Nepal and Tibet.3 The flowering of the Nepali variant of the style in China during the Yuan dynasty (1279–1368) is often linked to the influence of Anige (1245–1306), a young Nepali artist who was brought to Beijing in 1262 by Drogön Chogyal Phagpa (1235–1280), an influential Tibetan monk of the Sakya sect and state preceptor for Kublai Khan (1215–1294), the founder of the Yuan dynasty. Anige played a key role at the Mongol court, serving as the director of all artisan classes and the controller of the Imperial Manufactories Commission.4
Although Tibetan Buddhist imagery began to appear in the repertory of Chinese art already in the Yuan dynasty, Tibetan influence on Chinese Buddhist art became far more pronounced in the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), particularly during the Yongle era (1403–1424), when the imperial court looked favorably upon Buddhism and made a concerted effort to build secular and religious alliances with Tibet, even inviting Tibetan monks to the capital, Beijing, to conduct religious services. Such Tibetan influence manifests itself in the sensuousness of the art, as witnessed in this figure’s elegant proportions, benevolent countenance, dazzling jewels, refined gestures, abundant and meticulously rendered details, and compressed double-lotus base. As important as Tibetan-influenced works of art were early in fifteenth-century China, particularly in the Yongle and Xuande (1426–1435) reigns, Tibetan-style Buddhism was little practiced outside the imperial court, so most such images likely were made for the court, as indicated by the imperial inscriptions.5
The figure’s broad shoulders, smooth torso, and long legs derive from Indian traditions, as do the thin clothing and such items of jewelry as the bracelets, armbands, and anklets. By contrast, the large circular earrings and the broad, squarish face with high cheekbones, fleshy cheeks, and elegantly curved eyebrows stem from Nepali and Tibetan traditions. Excepting its numerous turquoise inlays, a fourteenth-century, Nepalese sculpture of Vajradhara in the Museum Rietberg, Zurich (Inventory Number Inv.-Nr. BA 21), represents the type of Himalayan sculpture that likely inspired the present image of Vajradhara.6
Numerous sculptures in this Nepali-Tibetan-influenced style were produced during the Yongle reign, and the style continued through the fifteenth and into the sixteenth century with but little change or evolution. The soft folds in the scarf draped over the figure’s shoulders and arms and the loose pleats and folds of the garment covering the legs are typical of works produced in the imperial workshops during the Yongle period, as is the careful casting and finishing of the back. In particular, gilt-bronze sculptures produced during the Yongle era are celebrated for their delicacy of detail and the rich colour of their mercury gilding.7
The formulaic, six-character inscription reading Da Ming Yongle nian shi, which is engraved at the center of the base’s flat top and which may be translated “Bestowed [during the] Yongle era [of the] Great Ming”, dates this sculpture to the Yongle reign (1403–1424) of the Ming dynasty, a period of great artistic refinement in China. Engraved after casting, inscriptions on such Tibeto-Chinese-style bronzes typically read from left to right, as seen here, and end with the verb shi, in this context meaning “bestow”, rather than with the verb zhi, meaning “made”, which is typically seen in the imperial marks of porcelains, lacquers, and other secular arts of the same period.
Now lost, a metal plate, probably of copper or brass, originally covered the hollow sculpture’s open base, concealing the interior from view and securing in place the dedicatory objects deposited within at the time of consecration. The metal plate would have rested on the small, relief ledge just inside the base and would have been fixed in place by both friction and red wax. At its center, the base plate likely sported an engraved vishvavajra, or double vajra, perhaps with a stylized lotus blossom at the crossing of the two arms, the design symbolically shielding and protecting the sculpture and its consecratory contents.
The consecration of Buddhist sculptures included an elaborate ritual executed in accordance with canonical texts that describe the process in detail.8 The most important part of the ritual was the placement of consecratory objects within the sculpture’s interior cavity, those objects typically including small paper sutras and prayer scrolls, glass beads, textile fragments, small bronze seals, small sculptures of metal or wood, seeds, and assorted other special goods.9 Such dedicatory items were believed to enliven the image and accord it religious efficacy; religious in nature, they are seldom dated and rarely include any information that would convey insight into the sculpture’s date, place, or other circumstances of manufacture.10
The closest counterparts to this superb work are four Yongle-marked, gilt-bronze sculptures of Vajradhara that are in collections in Tibet, including one in Lhasa’s Jo khang Temple / gTsug lag khang11 and three in the collection of the Potala Palace, Lhasa.12 The present sculpture is virtually identical to the four in Lhasa, though the latter appear slightly different on first inspection as their faces have been cold-painted in gold and thus are matte rather than lustrous and as their lips have been tinted red, their eyes touched in with black and white pigments, and their hair coloured blue with lapis lazuli. On the Himalayan Art Resources website, Jeff Watt, a scholar and a former curator at New York’s Rubin Museum, illustrates and describes five additional Chinese, gilt-bronze sculptures of Vajradhara that are now in private collections, that are similar in style to the present Vajradhara, and that, although dating to the fifteenth century, lack imperial inscriptions (object nos. 12441, 23125, 57394, 57396, and 57397). 13
A more distantly related sculpture in New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art (1975.1.1442) depicts Vajradhara seated in a yogic meditation posture and united in ecstatic sexual congress (yab-yum) with Prajnaparamita, his energy consort, or shakti. Though it could be Tibetan, the sculpture is in Yongle style, is thought to be Chinese, and is believed to date to the early fifteenth century.14 The similarity in style and general appearance of sculptures in Tibeto-Chinese style and those in Sino-Tibetan style illustrates the difficulty in determining the culture of origin of such works, particularly in the absence of an imperial or other inscription. Yab-yum is generally understood to represent the primordial (or mystical) union of Wisdom and Compassion. In Buddhism the masculine form is active, representing the compassion and skillful means (upaya) that must be developed in order to reach Enlightenment. The feminine form is passive and represents Wisdom (Prajna), which is also necessary to achieve Enlightenment. United, the figures symbolize the union necessary to overcome the veils of Maya , the false duality of object and subject.
Stylistically related to the present Vajradhara, a Yongle-marked, gilt-bronze sculpture in the Rietberg Museum, Zurich (Inv.-Nr. BA 22), represents the Bodhisattva Vajrasattva—known in Chinese as Jingang Saduo Pusa—who also holds a vajra and a ghanta but does not cross the hands before the chest; rather, grasping the vajra, Vajrasattva holds his right hand before his chest but holds his left hand with the ghanta at waist level, the arm extended slightly forward.15 In Vajrayana Buddhism, Vajrasattva is regarded as the Tantric, or Esoteric, aspect of the Bodhisattva Samantabhadra. Though both date to the Yongle period, hold a vajra and a ghanta, share similar names, and are stylistically and visually akin, the differing positions of the arms indicate that the present Buddha Vajradhara and the Rietberg Museum Bodhisattva Vajrasattva represent different deities with very different powers and meanings and thus must be distinguished one from the other.
The present example is identical in style to a Yongle-marked, gilt-bronze sculpture representing Manjushri in the Metropolitan Museum, New York (2001.59).16 Although the deities represented differ, the earrings and other jewelry, the figures’ backs, and the Nepalese-style bases are virtually identical. A stylistically related, Yongle-marked sculpture representing the Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara sold at Christie’s, New York, on 20 March 2014 (lot 1622)(fig. 1),17 and another is in the collection of the Museum Rietberg, Zurich.18 A stylistically kindred Yongle-marked sculpture representing the Seated Bodhisattva Tara in her “Green Manifestation” is in the collection of the Harvard Art Museums (1992.289).19
In excellent condition, this impressive gilt-bronze sculpture is one of only five known, Yongle-marked sculptures of Vajradhara; of those five, this is the only one outside of Tibet, making it exceptionally rare. Made in the imperial workshops, this sculpture incorporates the finest casting and gilding of the day. With its dazzling jewels, its abundant and meticulously rendered details, and the rich color of its gold, this sculpture perfectly embodies the refinement of the Yongle era; in fact, it is a masterwork of Chinese Buddhist sculpture.
1. In this essay, “Tibeto-Chinese” refers to art produced in China but strongly influenced by Tibetan styles, while “Sino-Tibetan” refers to art created in Tibet but heavily influenced by Chinese styles.
2. The urna is variously termed guanghao, yuhao, baihao, and suhao in Chinese; the ray of light issuing from the urna is generally termed 眉間白毫相. In fact, many Hindu deities indeed have a third eye at the center of the forehead, but Buddhist deities, and particularly the Buddhas, have a magical curl of hair between the eyebrows. The urna is one of the thirty-two special physical characteristics of the Buddha, known as the Thirty-Two Signs of a Great Man sanshierxiang. The term “Thirty-two Signs of a Great Man” 三十二相 refers to the laksana-vyanjana, known in Chinese as the xianghao, with xiang referring to the thirty-two major marks, and hao 好 to the eighty secondary signs on the physical body of Buddha.
3. For information on Tibeto-Chinese bronze sculptures, see: Ulrich von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures in Tibet (Hong Kong: Visual Dharma), 2001, vol. 2, pp. 1221-1223, 1237-1248; James C.Y. Watt quzhiren and Denise Leidy, Defining Yongle: Imperial Art in Early Fifteenth-Century China (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art; and New Haven, CT: Yale University Press), 2005, pp. 61-73; Helmut Uhlig, On the Path to Enlightenment: The Berti Aschmann Foundation of Tibetan Art at the Museum Rietberg Zurich (Zurich: Museum Rietberg), 1995; Denise Patry Leidy, Donna Strahan et al., Wisdom Embodied: Chinese Buddhist and Daoist Sculpture in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art; and New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press), 2010, pp. 148-151, no. 37; Chandra L. Reedy, Himalayan Bronzes: Technology, Style and Choices (Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press), 1997; Heather Karmay, Early Sino-Tibetan Art (Warminster, UK: Aris and Phillips Ltd.), 1975.
4. James C.Y. Watt 屈志仁 and Denise Leidy, Defining Yongle: Imperial Art in Early Fifteenth-Century China (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art; and New Haven, CT: Yale University Press), 2005, pp. 61-73; also see Denise Patry Leidy, Donna Strahan et al., Wisdom Embodied: Chinese Buddhist and Daoist Sculpture in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art; and New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press), 2010, pp. 148-151, no. 37.
5. For information on Tibetan influence on Chinese Buddhist art in the early fifteenth century, see Denise Leidy, “Buddhist Art”, in Watt and Leidy, Defining Yongle, 2005, pp. 61-101.
6. See: Helmut Uhlig, On the Path to Enlightenment: The Berti Aschmann Foundation of Tibetan Art at the Museum Rietberg Zurich (Zurich: Museum Rietberg), 1995, pp. 60-61, cat. no. 21.
7. Watt and Leidy, Defining Yongle, 2005, p. 74.
8. For a discussion of the consecration of Buddhist sculptures, see: Gennady Leonov, “Amitayus” in Marylin M. Rhie and Robert A.F. Thurman, eds., Wisdom and Compassion: The Sacred Art of Tibet (San Francisco: Asian Art Museum; New York: Tibet House in association with Harry N. Abrams), 1991, pp. 351-353; Yael Bentor, Consecration of Images and Stūpas in Indo-Tibetan Tantric Buddhism, vol. 11 in Brill’s Indological Library series (Leiden, The Netherlands, and New York: Brill), 1996; Gennady Leonov, “The Rite of Consecration in Tibetan Buddhism”, Arts of Asia (Hong Kong), vol. 22, no. 5 (September-October 1992), pp. 100-110.
9. For the classic English-language study on the inclusion of dedicatory objects within the cavities of hollow religious sculptures, see: John M. Rosenfield, “The Sedgwick Statue of the Infant Shotoku Taishi,” Archives of Asian Art, vol. 22 (1968-69), pp. 56-79; also see: Ulrich von Schroeder, “III. Consecration, Worship, and Practice: Consecration of Buddhist Statues in Tibet”, in Ulrich von Schroeder, 108 Buddhist Statues in Tibet: Evolution of Tibetan Sculptures (Chicago, IL: Serindia Publications; Hong Kong: Visual Dharma Publications Ltd.), 2008, pp. 29-30. Chandra L. Reedy, “A Buddha Within a Buddha”, Arts of Asia (Hong Kong), vol. 16, no. 2 (March-April 1986), pp. 94-101; Chandra L. Reedy, “The Opening of Consecrated Tibetan Bronzes with Interior Contents: Scholarly, Conservation, and Ethical Considerations”, Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, vol. 30, no. 1 (1991), pp. 13-34; Yael Bentor, “Tibetan Relic Classifications”, in Per Kvaerne, ed., Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Fagernes, 1992 (Oslo, Norway: Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture), 1994, pp.16-30.
10. For an image of the interior of a Yongle period (1403–1424) gilt bronze sculpture with dedicatory objects packed inside, see: Leidy, Strahan, et al., Wisdom Embodied, 2010, p. 151, fig. 110; for an image of one of the miniature scrolls removed from that sculpture and unfurled, see: Leidy and Strahan, Wisdom Embodied, pp. 150-151, fig. 109.
11. Located in central Lhasa and often called the gTsug lag khang, the Jo khang dazhaosi is Tibet’s earliest and foremost temple. For information on the temple and its treasures, see: Hugh E. Richardson, “The Jo-khang ‘Cathedral of Lhasa’” in Ariane W. Macdonald and Yoshiro Imaeda, eds., Essais sur l’art du Tibet (Paris: Librairie d'Amérique et d’Orient), 1977, pp. 157-188; Ulrich von Schroeder, 108 Buddhist Statues in Tibet: Evolution of Tibetan Sculptures (Chicago, IL: Serindia Publications; Hong Kong: Visual Dharma Publications Ltd.), 2008; Amy Heller, “The Lhasa gtsug lag khang: Observations on the Ancient Wood Carvings”, The Tibet Journal, (Dharamshala, India: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives), vol. 29, no. 3 (Autumn 2004), pp. 3-24.
12. See: Ulrich von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures in Tibet (Hong Kong: Visual Dharma), 2001, vol. 2, pp. 1250-1251, plates 343A-E.
13. See: https://www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=4655
14. See: Wolfram Koeppe et al., The Robert Lehman Collection, vol. 15 Decorative Arts (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art in association with Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press), 2012, pp. 364-465; also see: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/460573?ft=ghanta&offset=0&rpp=40&pos=2
15. See: Helmut Uhlig, On the Path to Enlightenment: The Berti Aschmann Foundation of Tibetan Art at the Museum Rietberg Zurich (Zurich: Museum Rietberg), 1995, p. 62, no. 22.
16. See: Watt and Leidy, Defining Yongle, 2005, pp. 70-71, plate 25; Leidy, Strahan, et al., Wisdom Embodied, 2010, pp. 148-151, cat. no. 37; also see: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/57612?ft=2001.59&offset=0&rpp=40&pos=1
17. See: Christie’s, The Sublime and the Beautiful: Asian Masterpieces of Devotion, 20 March 2014 (New York: Christie’s), 2014, pp. 110-115, lot 1622.
18. See: Uhlig, On the Path to Enlightenment, 1995, p. 98, no. 52.
19. See: “A Decade of Collecting: Arthur M. Sackler Museum”, Harvard University Art Museums Bulletin, vol. 7, no. 2 (Spring 2000), p. 10; Sherman E. Lee and Wai-kam Ho , Chinese Art Under the Mongols: The Yuan Dynasty (1279–1368) (Cleveland: Cleveland Museum of Art), 1968, no. 16.