Dimensión de la memoria histórica

The practice of excavated mountain sanctuaries in India dates to at least the third century BCE, during the time of King Aśoka of the Maurya dynasty. By that time, a reaction towards the Vedic order, the withdrawing of oneself to achieve “freedom”, was a shared idea in almost all types of Indian asceticism, with these dwellings in mountains and forests serving as a heterotopic space between civilization and its antithesis. Previously seen as occupied by supernatural beings in Brahmanic epic literature and mythology, the space offered a “heterotopia” and fulfilled the geographic connotations of renunciation.515 The earliest extant examples are single cells for monks, forest ascetics, and the like that were located in the suburban areas. For instance, at the Barābar Hills in the state of Bihar, four caves were excavated into the face of a low outcrop of granite. (Figure 9) Two of the caves featured hut-shaped chambers that were sculptured out of the rock matrix,

approached through rectangular front chambers.516 These huts were believed to be a

515 _{The Rigvedic period practices in asceticism and renunciation had become part of a doctrinal conception} by the sixth century BCE, when great social changes were taking place in India, which Louis Dumont calls the “age of vairagya (renunciation)”, marked by the predominance of Ājīvika, Jaina, and Buddhistic asceticism (Kazi K. Ashraf 2002, 4-5; id. 2013, 24-28, and 34-38).

516 _{Three of the four caves at the Barābar Hills, the Sudāma, the Karṇa Chopār and the Viśvāmitra, had} inscriptions that point to dates around the mid-third century BCE during the Aśoka Maurya. The unfinished Lomās Ṛṣi cave does not bear any inscriptions, but is generally believed to be from the same period. At the nearby Nāgārjuni Hill, inscriptions confirmed excavation activities sponsored by Aśoka’s grandson, Dasaratha. See John Huntington 1974, 34-56.

glorifying “momentalization” of the kind of elementary architecture used by hermits that has been long lost.

With imperial patronage, Buddhism soon emerged among other ascetic sects and became the dominant state religion from the second century BCE onwards, with the next stage of architectural development mainly documented by large numbers of rock-cut Buddhist monuments.517 According to early Buddhist literature, the Buddha is referred to living under trees and in caves. In addition, the cave (Skt. guhā) was one of the five dwelling types sanctioned by the Buddha, which may have been used as shelters during the rain retreat that played a major role in the transition from the eremitical to the coenobitical manner of life.518 As Kazi K. Ashraf has pointed out, “[i]f Buddhism and its various practices are ascetical in nature, dwelling is a key locus in that tradition”, and the Buddha’s teachings, such as encouraging his disciples to live under trees or in caves, may have poised a dilemma between the requisite ascetical practices and the increasingly elaborate monastic architecture.519 Grand assembly halls (Skt. chaityas) had façades modeled after

517 _{Some Jaina sites were preserved from this period as well, such as the Udayagiri and Khandagiri caves in} Odisha mentioned in note 519 below.

518 _{It is generally recognized that permanent monasteries may have emerged from taking temporary shelter} from the rain, since the ideal of a wandering and alms collecting life in India would be inevitably interrupted by the rainy season (Sukumar Dutt 1924, 123-127).

519 _{See Kazi K. Ashraf 2002, 228-229. Single cells did co-exist with monastic courts during this later period} of development. At Udayagiri and Khandagiri caves in Odisha, “[r]ock-cut architecture [...] initially ignores such a hypaethral complex, adapting wooden models to suit the natural stone in which the living quarters were encased. Cells either were scattered along the rock’s natural contours, or were combined in such complex, multi-storied apartment” (Michael W. Meister 1990, 219-225). However, this reminiscence from the ascetic period of Buddhism was rather scarce.

contemporary wooden palaces, and the rock-cutmonastic residences (Skt. vihāras)520 that emerged around the same time, with cells on four sides surrounding a central open court, were modeled after urban architecture as well.521 Their connection with ideal of an ascetic life was still present in the mountainous settings, with the relation to the primitive cave shelter preserved through the construction medium of stone.

During the succeeding Gupta period, Brahmanical architecture emerged into full being in response to the challenges from non-Vedic systems. It was a period when various religious traditions overlapped artistically and technically, some even had interchanges between deities and icons. Temples were erected using a great diversity of forms and styles, and the earliest ones from the early fifth century CE. Some temples, like the ones found at Udayagiri near Vidisha, Madhya Pradesh, clearly expressed links to earlier cave

hermitages. Although constructed porticos had started to appear,522 these temples still had sanctuaries carved into the prepared rock face of a mountain ridge, with altars or even primary icons directly sculpted out of the mountain simultaneously with the excavation of their cave sanctuaries.523 (Figure 10) Freestanding and “flat-roofed” masonry temples also emerged around this time, such as the Temple 17 at Sanchi, and the Kankali Devi Temple at

520 _{Note that both the terms had evolved historically. For instance, see later discussion on the term vihāra.} Here I used them for specific meanings given in the parentheses.

521 _{Percy Brown 1965, 5-6; Walter Sprink 1958, 95-104; Ananda K. Coomaraswamy 1992, 39-40; Michael} W. Meister 2007, 5-9. A greater amount of Buddhist establishments that did not survive probably moved closer to the cities and villages on which they were dependent for alms. In the Gandhāra Region in Central Asia, excavation revealed two major types of monastic complexes as well, namely the quadrangular monasteries and mountain vihāras (Kurt A. Behrendt 2004, 33-38).

522 _{Joanna G. Williams 1982, 88-89.}

Tigawa, both located in Madhya Pradesh. They were described as “constructed caves”, since their primary building material, stone, bore the symbolic significance of the presence of “mountains”. The symbolic effects of these temples were even compared to “the lofty peak of the mountain Kailāsa” or “as lofty as the peak of a hill and bearing the luster of the moon” in contemporary inscriptions.524

Later comers to the scene, Hindu temples nonetheless started taking over the temple landscape in India with their pronounced mountain analogy. Ananda K.

Commaraswamy has pointed out the “far-reaching exegesis” of the cave as it integrated into the Vedic/Brahmanical world-view.525 As Michael W. Meister has observed, “the metaphor of temple as mountain runs throughout India’s tradition of buildings”, explaining that the Hindu temples are often seen as mountains with a womb-like cave.526 From the sixth century CE onward, this link between the temple and the mountain was experimented with a variety of ways. A temple at Badami, Karnataka, was constructed in the

“flat-roofed” tradition and placed under a rock ledge. Carol Bolon suggests that the overhanging cliffs of the mountain acted as the śikhara for the temple.527 The Pārvatī Temple at Nachna, Uttar Pradesh, probably had a superstructure, but its original contour has been lost.528 Nevertheless, the elevated temple platform used blocks of stones that were intentionally rugged to resemble the surface of a mountain, with small caverns in which

524 _{John F. Fleet 1888, 44-45; cf. Michael W. Meister 2013, 129.} 525 _{Ananda K. Commaraswamy 1992.}

526 _{Michael W. Meister 2006, 26.}

527 _{Carol Bolon 1979, 255; cf. Michael W. Meister 2013, 129.} 528 _{George Michell 1988, 95-96.}