Prof. Dr. Klaus Bruhn
This essay was published in Berliner Indologische Studien No. 19. 2010, pp. 123-169. To make this online reissue citeable, the page numbers are added to the text (see squared brackets).
Early Jaina Iconography - An Overview (Part 1)
In Honour of M.A. Dhaky
1. Introduction
[123] We suggest in the present article 'overviews' as a type of study, giving one selected example, 'Overview I (the present article), to be followed on a later occasion by 'Overview II. Overviews can be written where handbooks and similar studies do not exist, in literature for example in the case of the Jaina canon. Overviews are limited and unpretentious projects. The scope for such programmes is considerable. It is obvious that the type envisaged by us exists, in one form or another, already in many disciplines outside Indology.
A recommendation like the present one is not likely to have any direct effect ('progress of research'), but it may have some influence on the development of the discipline (discussions, curricula etc.).
The advantage of overviews, as we understand them, is the employment (Ausschöpfung) of a maximum of different approaches and the introduction of as many "open questions" as possible, answered or unanswered (Bruhn Pr: § 1).
We are using "Overview" (I-II) for a method of research, "Period" (I-II) for a segment of the material. Overview and period coincide in terms of content.
The line of demarcation (I versus II) has been described below (Section 14). Overview I (Period I) is mainly "Mathurā" (as far as iconography is concerned), but we have also included Chausa (pre-Gupta), Tamil Nadu (the region), Aihole and Badami. Overview II examples (Period II) are considered in the present section ('categories'). Iconographic literature of Periods
I-II has been summarized in Section 14. Early Jaina iconography is not understood (is no acceptable subject) without early Jaina literature: see Sections 2- 3 and 5-8. [123|124]
The period of Quintanilla Ea is defined by the authoress as 150 B.C. to 265 A.D. (p. xiv and pp. 249-253). Our examples belong to the same 'period', if the term is used. Refer for the earliest Jina images to the accepted chronology ('Jina' precursor of the 'Buddha') and to Lal Te (Ayodhya and Lohanipur). We have not considered a great number of individual Jina images, but most 'segments' (i.e. mainly 'parikara segments') of the Jina image have been taken into account. Other Jaina sculptures are, naturally, also part of our subject.
In the present Section we consider a number of categories, perhaps all experimental. Most of these conceptions have already been discussed in our previous studies. We start here with two very general categories which have been introduced in a recent publication (Bruhn Pr: § 1), viz. "itemization" and "text-image differences" (categories i-ii). Less general categories will follow (all listed in iii).
(i) Itemization. This category implies consideration of all elements connected with a specific subject, consideration taking possibly place without time-consuming studies. Itemization would for example mean in connection with pedestals description of the individual figures (and motifs): Joshi Ea: 343, 346 (fig. 34.14), 347-348a (compare our Section 4). A more extended subject for itemization would be the āyāgapaṭas (Quintanilla Ea), assemblages of symbols and ornaments, and the tympana. The hair styles of the Jinas vary at Mathurā, at Chausa and in 'early medieval art', and this is another subject for pointed itemization, in particular if Śaiva iconography is included (see Sections 3 and 5). Itemization ignores the theoretical hierarchy of the image (centre, periphery) and emphasizes all elements in an equal manner.
In Bruhn Pr: § 1 we have used "itemization" in connection with the actual subject (predicament itself and other elements of culture: predicament extended); this requires no comment.
The inclusion of a second subject (theory and practice in art and literature) is a different matter. Here we have a broad range of items on both sides: For example Yakṣas and Yakṣīs as an item in literature, and the 'real' deities (e.g. Ambikā as an independent goddess) as an item in art: Bruhn Gr II: §§ 2-6. The watchword is (independent) description of both sides, and this approach should have preference to (laborious) comparison. Comparison promises identification without guaranteeing identification. See also Bruhn Gr II: §§ 2-5 (general) [124|125] and Bruhn Gr II: 293-295 (connected with figs. 13-17: niche figures of Deogarh Temple No. 12).
It is theoretically possible to study the art objects of a particular period as combinations of segments. In the case of the early Jinas one could distinguish between three pedestal segments (flanking lions, central symbol, human figures); further segments would be hair style, hood-circle (Pārśva) and tree. Probably few scholars would be interested in a complete inventory of all the segments in a style, but frequent use of the segment concept could prevent us from overlooking interesting features. - "Segment" is opposed to "whole". It is different from "item", "item" being more methodological and "segment" more technical.
(ii) Text-image differences require further emphasis. There is not only literature without precise correspondence in art (or with no correspondence at all), but there is also art without literature. The Jaina tradition has well-known examples. The long lists of Yakṣas and Yakṣīs (not to speak of Mahāvidyās) are not really translated into the medium of art. On the other hand, the hair styles of the Jinas, and Pārśva's snake-hoods - a different subject - are nowhere mentioned in literature, and the same applies to Kubera and Ambikā (Bruhn Gr II: § 3). The situation is similar in non-Jaina art. No Sanskrit text describes the famous Trimūrti on Elephanta (there are many multiple images of this type). The modern literature on the meaning of the Trimūrti is comprehensive, but no simple derivation of art from literature (from the texts) has been found. The general study of Indian art emphasized symbolism (as a bridge between art and texts) rather than discrepancies (Chandra St: 57-60 on A.K. Coomaraswamy). General harmony of texts and images was not a dogma, but discrepancies were not accentuated. Pragmatic scholars always saw the differences, but the differences were no primary concern. Refer for the subject of text-image differences to Gail Ic, Maxwell Śi and Dehejia Di: 55-60 (Buddhist narrative art).
(iii) Less general and less abstract problems require detailed discussions. We start with partial motif, slot-filler mechanism, repetition, lack-of-distinction. Many vegetable motifs can be treated as partial motifs (for example leaves in the upper parikara of the Buddha and the Jina). A distinctive case of filler change (part of the slot-filler mechanism) are the nimbuses and nimbus substitutes (e.g. hood-circle of Nāgas as well as other nimbus substitutes). [125|126]
Repetition or multiplication is everywhere (arms, heads, snake hoods, lotuses) and does not require much explanation. Distinctions may be reduced in one way or another: A lotus may look like a cakra, strands (piled together) may look like a crown. There is generally no risk of confusion between lotus and cakra, and there are few problems of identification. But reduction of distinctions is, inspite of its frequency, not an accepted category in the description of Indian art.
Categories like type and classification must be isolated from case to case. Sarasvatī is a type, the 'Jina' is not a type, because there are three related, but rather different iconographic concepts (Ṛṣabha, Pārśva, non-R-non-P), and these may perhaps be called 'types'. The advantage of the type concept is probably the stimulation to study the internal variety of a type: different forms of Pārśva, different forms of Ambikā (Tiwari Am), etc. - Classification is indispensable in Jaina iconography. We have for example numerous Jina bronzes with 1/3/5/24 Jinas, we see standing and seated Jinas, Pārśvas and non-Pārśvas, Jinas with grahas (eight or nine) and Jinas without grahas; see Krüger Br and Mevissen Ja. The isolation of classes is useful inter alia because there are implications: Standing Śvetāmbara Jinas wear a dhotī, but seated Śvetāmbara Jinas have no indication of dress, or simply a minimal indication. Pārśva has attributes (Section 8) and often a fantastic morphology of the cobra (Western Indian Bronzes etc.).
As a last category we mention attribute. Attributes (beyond the common hand-attributes) are not easily systematized: Is nakedness an attribute (of the Jina)? Is Balarāma an attribute (of the Jina Nemi?) Is the female chowry-bearer an attribute (of Pārśva?) Is Pārvatī an attribute (of Śiva)? Is the lotus postament a true attribute of many deities (or too common to work as an agent of identification?). 'Attributes' like nakedness (employment of the term 'A.' absolutely different from the normal usage) are a logical, not a visible (and accepted) category.
Systematization of categories is possible, but the 'handling' (definition etc.) must be transparent. Our observations on lack of distinction (1960), on historical observations (JID: Chapter 18,1969), on types, systems, attributes and form-principles (JID: Chapters 20-23), on Wiederholung (1973), on classification (1976), on repetition (1983), on partial motifs (1990), and on types (2000) can be mentioned as examples of successful or unsuccessful systematization (a problem being in our case frequent 'over-systematization'). See www.klaus-bruhn.de for bibliographical details. [126|127]
The slot-filler mechanism (mentioned by us supra and in previous publications) possibly requires a fresh definition. It means in a given case "identity of the slot and non-identity of the filler": e.g. Jina (central Jina) plus two subsidiary Jinas, or Jina plus two adorants, or Jina plus two male chowry-bearers, or Jina plus two divine acolytes (a Yakṣa and a Yakṣī). The four dyads occupy the same place or slot. We are not only concerned with picture-book examples, however. The slot for the garland-bearing couple may be filled by two couples or by two single garland-bearers; the slot for the bhāmaṇḍala may show the bhāmaṇḍala, or it may be empty (filler zero); JID: figs. 113 and 114.
Filler change is the simplest designation of the facts. The slot-filler mechanism is wide-spread in all phases of the art of North India (Picron St, Picron Sy: analytic studies). It is an abstract principle, the North Indian styles have their standard patterns with a set of slots, but there is no "wild" use of fillers. The Jina has two male chowry-bearers (Pārśva has sometimes one male chowry-bearer and one female parasol-bearer), but never two female chowry-bearers or two garland-bearers or two male/female adorants. Chowry-bearers are of medium size, not more and not less. There are rules, and there is a mechanism.
Some categories may be less convincing than others, but the categories are in principle not subservient to the study of styles and dates. They exist as units in their own right. In the case of the 'Trimūrti' at Elephanta we can study as a partial motif the jaṭā. The jaṭā, more particularly the jaṭā of the 'Trimūrti', demonstrates that partial motifs (like other categories) receive little attention, even if they are exceptional. A good example from early and later Jaina art is the tree above the Jina (compare Buddhist iconography). Partial motifs are complex or simple, they may have a wide or a limited distribution.
Our subjects:
- Section 1. Introduction.
- Section 2. The universal history.
- Section 3. The twenty-four Jinas.
- Section 4. Categories (monks etc.).
- Section 5. 1st Jina Ṛṣabha.
- Section 6. Bāhubali.
- Section 7. 22nd Jina Ariṣṭanemi.
- Section 8. 23rd Jina Pārśva.
- Section 9. Sarvatobhadrikās.
- Section 10. Chausa.
- Section 11. Sarasvatī.
- Section 12. Microcosm of symbols.
- Section 13. Udayagiri.
- Section 14. Overview II.
- Section 15. Bibliography. [127|128]
The 'overview' principle could be applied mutatis mutandis to other fields. A corpus of overviews can be designed for the whole of Indology or for a section of Indology. We recommend ' 100-200' overviews of Indology and '10-20' overviews of selected subjects (e.g. of Indian art). Such projects are not unmanageable. A specialist will, in most cases, write an overview without great difficulty.
According to the communis opinio, completeness of research is often essential, but not always necessary. Here the overview principle encourages completeness. We give three examples from the field of later Jainism (Overview II): Architecture and sculpture at Ellora (Jaina, Jaina and non-Jaina); Western Indian Jaina bronzes (Krüger Br); Western Indian miniature painting: palm-leaf, paper, cloth.
As in § 1 of Bruhn Pr we accentuate open questions. Can Ṛṣabha iconography (hair style) and Pārśva iconography (hood-circle) be derived from Jaina literature? (derivation not possible), are the Udayagiri and Khandagiri caves connected with Jainism? (no connection), which was the status of tree worship? (tree worship not connected with Jaina doctrine), which was the religious status of the āyāgapaṭas? (not absolutely clear), why do we find hardly any narrative scenes in early Jaina art? (no dogmatic explanation, no secular explanation).
The present study does not cover all aspects of early Jaina art and epigraphy. In particular we have not included inscriptions, and we have not described in great detail āyāgapaṭas and tympana. The sculptures and bas-reliefs of Udayagiri and Khandagiri are not considered (they would at any rate not form a substantial supplement to an 'overview' of early Jaina art).
2. The universal history
The universal history (UH) occurs in the Jaina canon (early Jainism) in the form of a work which is known as 'Kalpa Sūtra' (UH in radical if not extreme reduction), and piecemeal in several other works (e.g. long sections in the Jambūdvīpa-Prajñapti).
The history of the sixty-three "Great Men" (sixty-three heroes of the UH) is on the one hand the repetition of a cliché (comparable clichés exist in the case of all the categories: twenty-four Jinas, twelve great emperors and nine 'triads'). The cliché (fairly uniform) is present in all versions of the UH literature (Śvetāmbara and Digambara). The UH is on the other hand a narration of individual events in the lives of the 63 heroes. We can use in this connection [128|129] the expressions 'general motif (cliché) and 'individual motif ('general UH' and 'individual UH'). In the case of most heroes (in particular of the Jinas), general motifs are: name, names of parents, birthplace etc. Individual motifs of the Jina-biographies are attacks on the Jinas by demons, and other events (individual motifs largely restricted to Jinas nos. 1 und 22-24). Possibly the 24 Jinas (the names at least) were already known in toto to the authors of the Mathurā inscriptions (JRM: 82-83). - See Glasenapp Jn: 286-289, 290-337; Deleu My: 230-231, 236-237, 238-239, 259-263, 270-273, 282-283; Bruhn Re: §§ 9-15 and figs. 3-9; Ohira Tw (Jainism and Buddhism); Grönbold My: 335-336, 407-409 (Buddhism).
The Kalpa Sūtra requires in our context a short comment. Jinas 1 and 22-23 (Ṛṣabha, Nemi, Pārśva) have in the Kalpa Sūtra only the cliché (all three clichés very short, Nemi's cliché still shorter than Ṛṣabha's and Pārśva's clichés). But Mahāvīra (24) has a biographical account worth the name, partly individual and partly usable as a cliché for other Jina biographies in other UH versions. This biography is complete up to the Nirvana. In the Kalpa Sūtra the biographical section of the Ācārāṅga Sūtra is repeated (i.e. Mahāvīra-biography up to the attainment to omniscience). The two texts are not identical, however. The Ācārāṅga Sūtra is noticeably earlier than the Kalpa Sūtra.
The universal history forms a vast ensemble: complete versions and partial versions, parallelism of general motifs (clichés) and individual motifs, inclusion of considerable literary complexes (Harivaṃśa etc.) into the UH, and 'partial intrusion' of the UH into other literary bodies (Vasudevahiṇḍi).
Jinas 21-2 (reverse order) have in the Kalpa Sutra, instead of the cliché, chronological data: Nirvana of Jina X so many years before the Nirvana of Jina Y: e.g. Abhinandana or 4th Jina died one million crores of sāgaropamas before Śītala or 10th Jina; Sambhava or 3rd Jina died two million crores of sāgaropamas before Sītala. A sāgaropama is a large time-measure (Glasenapp Jn: 181). The epochs of the Jinas 21-2 (Nami to Ajita, Jacobi Sū 1:280) are interpolated between Nemi and Ṛṣabha (between the 22nd and the 1st Jina). - The other UH elements in the canon are the following:
The Jambūdvīpa-Prajñapti has a Ṛṣabha-biography, a Bharata-biography and UH data (Suttāgame II: 551-556, 628-642; Schubring Do: § 15, pp. 104-105; Alsdorf Fu: 137-140). The Malli-Jñātā (Chapter 8 in Jñātā-Dharmakathāḥ) follows the cliché in principle but is largely an individual account of Malli (Roth Ma). Bharata is the 1st Cakravartī (son of the first Jina Ṛṣabha), [129|130] and Malli is the 19th Jina (in the Śvetāmbara tradition Malli is female). UH data are also contained in the Samavāya Sūtra (infra). The Uttarādhyayana Sūtra Ch. 22 has the basic elements of the (Ariṣṭa)nemi biography (22nd Jina, our Section 7); Antakṛd-Daśāḥ (passim, Bruhn Re: §§ 5-8, figs. 1-2) and Jñātā-Dharmakathāḥ 16 have elements of the Ariṣṭanemi-Balarāma-Kṛṣṇa tradition (Schubring Do: 93-94, Schubring Jñā: 53-57, our Section 7). Gośāla (Mahāvīra's rival) is treated in the Bhagavatī Sūtra (15). Differences between the doctrines of Pārśva (No. 23) and Mahāvīra (No. 24) are mentioned in the Uttarādhyayana Sūtra Ch. 23.
Further UH elements are mentioned in the two volumes of Prakrit Proper Names ("Āgamic Index"). The PPN volumes contain in particular the extra-canonical data available in the Niryukti-Bhāṣya-Cūrṇi literature (commentaries on the canon, three extensive bodies) and in the Ṭīkā literature (later commentaries on the canon, closer to the standard type than Niryuktis, Bhāṣyas and Cūrṇis). See for example Śānti (16th Jina, PPN: 739-740), Mahāvīra (24th Jina, PPN: 574-584), Sagara (2nd Cakravartī, PPN: 748) and Jarāsandha (9th Prativāsudeva, PPN: 278).
A comprehensive and consolidated version of the Śvetāmbara UH is the gigantic "History of the Sixty-Three Great Men" by the Jaina monk Hemacandra (1089-1172). The Śvetāmbara canon does not say much about the UH, and its selection of UH material has no rational basis. We find the Malli-biography (supra), but essential elements of the Pārśva-legend (to mention just one example) are missing. See Deleu My supra: 270-273, "Tīrtha(ṃ)kara", and 282-283, "Welthistorie". A systematic study of the UH literature (complete versions like HTr and partial versions like Mallijñāta) does not exist. We also have no complete translation of the very important Sanskrit version of the Digambara UH (authors: Jinasena and Guṇabhadra).
The expression 'Universal History' is mainly used for the mahāpuruṣas (heroes) of the present period (avasarpiṇī) and of 'our' continent (Bharata). Supplementary Universal History (infra) is contained in two canonical works: Samavāya (Weber He: 293-294, last section; Bruhn Re: § 11 and fig. 3) and Sthāna. We mention as a specimen of the supplementation the names of Jinas 1-12 (Samavāya) of the present avasarpiṇī in the geographically opposed continent Airāvata (Prakrit forms according to PPN 340):
Refer for the continent Airāvata to Glasenapp Jn: 254 and 257; and to Bossche El: 276 and 18. The UH outside Bharata is devoid of narrative substance.
Detailed information on the one plus five categories (Kulagaras or 'patriarchs', Titthayaras, Cakkavaṭṭis, Vāsudevas, Baladevas, Paḍisattus) will be found in PPN (> designations and names). An overview of the characteristics of the 63 mahāpuruṣas (63 mahāpuruṣas of our period and our continent) has been given by H. von Glasenapp (Jn: 274-286 and 286-289). The information is based on later encyclopedic Jaina literature (Glasenapp Jn: 166).
See for the UH (different aspects, different versions etc.) also Bruhn Re (1983) as mentioned above (§§9-15 and figs. 3-9). Our seven subdivisions were (on the whole) more clearly written than the other subdivisions of the article.
3. The twenty-four Jinas (Tīrthaṃkaras).
In iconography, all the 24 Jinas are identical with two exceptions: Ṛṣabha and Pārśva. The individualizing features are Ṛṣabha's jaṭā and Pārśva's hood-circle (see below). The other Jinas (2-22, 24) may be called non-Ṛ-non-P, if recognizable Ṛ images and P images exist. The Jinas 1-22,24 are to be called non-P if recognizable Ṛ images do not exist. Mahāvīra, the historical founder, is never (!) recognizable, except on images with inscriptions or cihnas (cihnas in Period II: infra). The sarvatobhadrikās of Mathurā show, generally speaking, Ṛ and P and non-Ṛ-non-P, but only some sarvatobhadrikās show all the three categories together (Joshi Ea: 353-354). Several Mathurā Jinas can be identified on the basis of their inscriptions (JRM: 82). South India has only Pārśvas and non-Pārśvas. - The later period (Period II) has introduced individual symbols (cihnas). They were not compulsory, and they were not bound to be clear. The lack of interest in clear cihnas is unexplained. Was the artist responsible or the donor? See Bruhn Gr I: 256-260 (development of the cihnas). - Modern Jainas take keen interest in the individuality of the Jina images ('this' is Mahāvīra), but Jina images without individuality have the same importance. Even then it is rather strange that Mahāvīra, practically the founder of Jainism, has never been individualized (thousands of non-Ṛ-non-P images including not a single image with special Mahāvīra features). The cihna (lion) of Mahāvīra is without special importance; cihnas of Yakṣas and Yakṣīs are almost non-existant in art. [131|132]
In the North the posture of the Jina (meditation posture) is vajrāsana or padmāsana ("les jambes sont etroitement croisees, plantes des pieds apparentes, car chaque pied repose sur la cuisse opposee"), and in the South it is sattvāsana ("les deux jambes sont repliees l'une sur l'autre sans etre croisees, de sorte q'une seule plante de pied est visible."), de Mallmann Av: 9 and pls. 1.4 and 1.3.
We have in this way only one seated Jina type, at the most two seated Jina types (padma° and sattva°), and one standing Jina type, but, as indicated already, no variation qua mudrās. There is also no individualizing context as we have no narrative scenes. Dress was only shown in Śvetāmbara iconography (starting in the middle of the first millennium). The dress of standing Śvetāmbara Jinas shows some variation, the dress of seated Śvetāmbara Jinas is at the most attribute-like. As a general demonstration of the Jina (old general type and Digambara type) we mention a seated Kuṣāṇa Jina and a standing Kuṣāṇa Jina, Mitterwallner Ku: pls. 28 and 43 (general type).
A Jina does not look like a Buddha, but the difference can be minimal. A maximum of similarity is produced if the Buddha has the same posture as the seated Jina ("Buddha in meditation") and if the dress of the Buddha is for one reason or another scarcely visible (Sharma Bu: pl. 162: two pedestal Buddhas, Gupta, 448-449 A.D.). Similarity (our example) is rare but not strictly avoided. Clear distinction is the rule.
Jinas except Ṛṣabha (strands, infra) have (i) plain skull (shaven head), (ii) "notched" hair (parallel crescents arranged in lines, tiers of semi-circles), and (iii) round spirals ("snail-shell-like" curls). See (for iii) Lohuizen Sc: Ch. III, pl.40; Mitterwallner Ku: 165 (hair-do) et alia. Williams (Om: 325b etc.) is skeptical when reviewing available theories "detailed chronology... not worth all the fuss"; Joshi Ea has an elaborate typology: 340a-b, 363-364. - Three clear illustrations: (i) Joshi Ea: pl. 34.IV.A (Pārśva); (ii) Joshi Ea: pl. 34.II.A (non-Ṛṣabha-non-Pārśva); (iii) JAA I: pl. 17 (non-Ṛṣabha-non-Pārśva).
In Kuṣāṇa art this range of hair styles (Ṛṣabha and i-iii) is probably always the rule. The situation is different at Chausa (strands and types ii-iii, generally speaking more variety). - It might be felt that (i = plain skull) goes with Pārśva (supra and Alphen St: pi. 59), "But it cannot be said that this style was strictly associated with Pārśva figures alone..." (Joshi Ea: 340). The principle in the use of hair styles i-iii is not clear. - The curls (iii) of Jina and Buddha images (standard type), are also found - in different execution - with other [132|133] beings, especially with Yaksas. The motif is obscure (Lohuizen Sc: 206, "curls like snail-shells"; Czuma Ku: 107b "flat S-shaped curls").
Ṛṣabha, [Bāhubali,] Malli, Ariṣṭanemi, Pārśva and Mahāvīra have individual features in the UH literature of the Śvetāmbaras. The remaining Jinas are treated on the cliche level (great number of data, e.g. Jinas nos.1-4: height 500/450/400/350 dhanuṣas), and there are apparently no deviations, relevant or irrelevant, from the pattern (PPN). In the case of the cakravartīs and triads (Baladevas, Vāsudevas and Prativāsudevas) the procedure (cliché vs. individual motifs) is basically the same. - Jina-iconography has in the art of the Kuṣāṇa period a triad of individual characters (Ṛṣabha, Ariṣṭanemi, Pārśva: supra/infra). Kuṣāṇa epigraphy mentions a number of names (Ṛṣabha, Sambhava, Munisuvrata, Ariṣṭanemi, Pārśva, Mahāvīra: JRM 82).
Refer for a description of seated Jinas ("Ten dated seated...") to Mitterwallner Ku: 89-99, pls. 26-35. See also Shah Ev: pls. 8,28 etc. The quality and richness of the pedestals (pedestal figures) varies. - Standing Jinas belong mostly to sarvatobhadrikās (Joshi Ea: pls. 34.VIII.A-C); other standing Jinas are rare (Mitterwallner Ku: pls. 36 and 47; Shah Ev: pls. 4, 6, 9-12, 18).
Miniature Jinas (always seated) occur in a number of contexts. They appear on some āyāgapaṭas in a medallion in the centre (Section 12). The āyāgapaṭa of Czuma Ku: pl. 3 (Quintanilla Ea: fig. 140) has, in addition to a central miniature Jina, in its outermost circle a motif tetrad (four motifs orientated towards the quarters): stūpa, tree, Jina, indistinct motif. A single seated Jina is shown on a Jaina tympanon (with a rich figure programme: adorants etc.) in a central vertical sequence, from top to bottom: stūpa - Jina - unknown goddess (Jaina goddess, no name); Quintanilla Ea: fig. 233. Rare is a simple horizontal motif sequence (upper section of the Kaṇa Plaque) containing (from left to right) three non-Ṛ-non-P Jinas (1-2-5), a stūpa (3), and a Pārśva (4): Quintanilla Ea: 139-140, fig. 177). Refer also to Shah Ev: pls. 5-6 (two Jina images, each with two miniature Jinas flanking the central symbol). - Miniature Buddhas exist in related functions (Quintanilla Ea: fig. 286, Buddhist tympanon fragment).