365bet娱乐

[Full title: Formative sources for ritualized charnel asceticism in iconography and practice]

Charnel asceticism can be understood as the historical innovation of Buddhist and brahmanical 艣谤补尘补峁嘺, or renunciate, traditions which emerged in the social geography of south Asia over the course of the first millennium BCE.^[1] As these communities grew and diversified, they cultivated methods and modes of observance which instrumentalized transgressive, antinomian or left-handed (惫腻尘腻肠腻谤补) qualities of pollution, impurity and social marginality.^[2] The 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 observance to carry a skull or skull-topped staff (办丑补峁璿腻峁単补) is first recorded amongst these 艣谤补尘补峁嘺 groups as the religious performance of a legal punishment for killing a brahmin, first documented in the 驰腻箩帽补惫补濒办测补蝉尘峁泃颈 (c. third-fifth centuries C.E) as a twelve year period of exile and charnel asceticism, after which one is restored to society.^[3] Here, rather than a distinct sectarian affiliation, the name or title 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 can be understood as a ritual identity defined by the socially transgressive and ascetic instrumentation of charnel materials and human remains.

As a religious practice, the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow is first documented in the 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 corpus where the 办丑补峁璿腻峁単补 is described as one of the implements taken by initiates during a period of public observance.^[4] This was done in order to identify with Rudra鈥攁ssociated in the Vedas with disorder and transgression鈥攂y which they would be liberated from rebirth through union with the deity 惭补丑别艣惫补谤补 or 艢颈惫补-笔腻艣耻辫补迟颈.^[5] However, the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 use of 办丑补峁璿腻峁単补 is only one of the ways in which the 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 performed their religious identity with other observances included feigned madness, singing and bathing in ash.The 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 came to dominate the brahmanical 补迟颈尘腻谤驳补, or ascetic path, by the fifth and sixth centuries and within this growing community, the 尝腻办耻濒补 distinguished themselves as a sub-group of charnel specialists, adding to the implements of the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow an initiatory thread (耻辫补惫墨迟补) made of hair and charnel ornaments made from pieces of skull, further instrumentalizing the notoriety of these materials by identifying themselves as a community through them (figure 2.6).^[6]

Figure 2.6: Two ascetics under the seat of 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 founding teacher 尝补办耻濒墨艣补, at Tale艣vara in 叠丑耻产补苍别艣惫补谤, 7th century. The 办腻辫腻濒颈办补, on the left, holds a skull-topped staff or 办丑补峁璿腻峁単补 while the figure on the right holds a 迟谤颈艣奴濒补. Image from Donaldson 1986.

After the sixth century, the 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 tradition was a demonstrably active and diverse proportion of the 艢补颈惫补 communities then expanding across south Asia and who would further re-contextualize these charnel ascetic observances within the brahmanical mainstream. Reflecting a division between orthodox 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 ascetics (e.g. 笔补帽肠腻谤迟丑补) and more inclusive 艢补颈惫补 practitioners of the mantramarga, or ritual path, narratives like the 厂办补苍诲补辫耻谤腻峁嘺 鈥攕ections of which are dated as early as the late sixth or early seventh centuries鈥攚ould describe the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow as one of the methods with which to identify with 艢颈惫补-惭补丑别艣惫补谤补 in a text oriented towards laity as well as ascetic specialists.^[7] This work moreover describes the legendary second century 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 founder 尝补办耻濒墨艣补 as an incarnation of 艢颈惫补, reinforcing a fundamental relationship between these modes of charnel asceticism and 艢补颈惫补 sources.^[8]

Other narratives from this period further these associations between 艢颈惫补 and the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow: A number of 艢补颈惫补 monuments constructed between the seventh and tenth centuries in or around 叠丑耻产补苍别艣惫补谤 in the eastern region of Orissa reflect the prestige of 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 modes of charnel asceticism by juxtaposing 尝补办耻濒墨艣补 with images of 艢颈惫补-Bhik峁Ｄ佱弓anam奴rti, illustrating the account of 艢颈惫补 as a wandering 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 ascetic found in the 惭补迟蝉测补辫耻谤腻峁嚹� (c. third to sixth centuries) as well as the 厂办补苍诲补辫耻谤腻峁嘺.^[9] As Bhik峁Ｄ佱弓anam奴rti, 艢颈惫补 performs the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 observance after killing the deity 叠谤补丑尘腻, whose skull he carries for twelve years until he is released from his expiatory exercise in the charnel grounds of Varanasi, a center for 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 activities during these centuries.^[10] In an image preserved at the temple of Para艣ur膩me艣vara, the ithyphallic, two-armed 艢颈惫补 solicits a female donor by holding the empty skull towards her with his left hand (figure 2.7).

Figure 2.7: 艢颈惫补-Bhik峁Ｄ佱弓anam奴rti with female donor and dancing figure at right, mid-7th century, Para艣ur膩me艣vara temple at 叠丑耻产补苍别艣惫补谤. 艢颈惫补 holds a skull in his left hand and a peacock-feather topped staff on the right. Image from Donaldson 1986.

Figures 2.8 and 2.9: Reverse and obverse of 艢颈惫补-叠丑奴迟别艣惫补谤补 (Rudra addorsed to 惭补丑别艣惫补谤补) with a single skull in the hair of both Rudra and Aghora/Bhairava (obverse, proper right), Fattehgarh, Kashmir, c. 6th century. Image from Granoff 1979.

At the same time, an integration and popularization of charnel ascetic observances emerges in the iconography for comprehensive representations of 艢颈惫补 as well. A series of sixth to eighth century images of Rudra addorsed to 艢颈惫补-惭补丑别艣惫补谤补鈥攁 figure identified as 叠丑奴迟别艣惫补谤补鈥攈ave been found in Kashmir, in which region brahmanical traditions dominated after the seventh century (figures 2.8 and 2.9).^[11] Here, Rudra has a single skull ornament in his hair, above which the figure of 尝补办耻濒墨艣补 carries his characteristic club (Skt. 濒补驳耻岣峚, lakula), while the deity holds a staff topped with a 艢补颈惫补 trident (迟谤颈艣奴濒补) horizontally across his body.^[12] On the obverse, the figure of Aghora鈥攁lso called Bhairava, to the proper right of 惭补丑腻诲别惫补 at center鈥攈as a skull ornament and wide-eyed, wrathful visage like Rudra on the reverse.

Figure 2.10: 艢颈惫补-惭补丑别艣惫补谤补 as 艢膩da艣iva, with Aghora/Bhairava at left with a single skull in his hair, Elephanta, 6th century. Image from Kramrisch 1981.

Figure 2.11: 艢颈惫补-Andhak膩sura with skull in the left hand and single skull ornament in the hair, Elephanta, c. 6th century. Image from Kramrisch 1981.

The broader integration of charnel ascetic materials into 艢补颈惫补 iconography is seen as well at the site of Elephanta, the construction and iconography of which has been explicitly related to 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 sources and patronage after the seventh century.^[13] The central image of this temple complex is a five-headed Sad膩艣iva, a comprehensive form of the deity as 惭补丑别艣惫补谤补 related to the expansion of the 艢补颈惫补 community from an ascetic to ritual tradition accessible to a diversity of social groups (figure 2.10).^[14] Here, a single-skull ornament is found鈥攁s above in fig. 2.9鈥攊n the hair of Aghora/Bhairava to the proper right of 惭补丑腻诲别惫补; in the slightly later figure of 艢颈惫补-Andhakasura at the same site, however, the wrathful deity鈥攏ow a solitary central figure鈥攈olds a skull in the front left of his many hands under the damaged figure of Andhaka, with a single-skull ornament in his pile of hair (figure 2.11).32 艢颈惫补 is elsewhere illustrated at Elephanta as the ascetic 驰辞驳别艣惫补谤补, or lord of yoga, who is also identified with 尝补办耻濒墨艣补.^[15]

This shift in iconography towards centralized images of 艢颈惫补 with 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 implements corresponds to a further expansion of the 艢补颈惫补 尘补苍迟谤补尘腻谤驳补, within which the goal was the ritual cultivation of siddhi, or accomplishment. This ritual corpus is preserved in two substantial traditions, the 尘补苍迟谤补辫墨峁环补 and 惫颈诲测腻辫墨峁环补, which were collectively identified as 艣腻蝉迟谤补 or 腻驳补尘补 (rather than tantra) of Bhairava.^[16] However it was in the latter collection (辫墨峁环补) of applied ritual knowledge (惫颈诲测腻) that 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 methods and materials were especially prominent.^[17] And though yoga has its roots in the oldest 艣谤补尘补峁嘺 traditions, the practice of a siddhayogin鈥攐ne who ritually instrumentalizes the body through performance, visualization and other actions in order become accomplished or empowered鈥攂ecame central to the expansion of the 尘补苍迟谤补尘腻谤驳补 and the 艢补颈惫补 cultivation of what would come to be the characteristic methods of tantra, including mantra, 尘补峁囜笉补濒补 and 尘耻诲谤腻.^[18] Moreover, the identification of a siddha as one who is accomplished by means of deity yoga, antinomian behaviors and ascetic observances was historically associated with the (non-tantric) 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 community.^[19] Therefore, 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 siddhas were not an innovation of tantra (or 艢补颈惫补 腻驳补尘补), but rather an integration and valorization of charnel asceticism as part of its expanding ritual methodologies.

After the seventh century, siddhas were an increasingly valued category of skilled ritual practitioner whose utility was known to 艢补颈惫补 and Buddhist communities as well as a variety of political patrons.^[20] Building on the historical repertoire of the 惫颈诲测腻dhara鈥攐ne who possesses applied ritual knowledge, often translated as sorcerer, magician or wizard鈥攕iddhas diversified their ritual methodologies with means to attain practical siddhi, including powers of flight, control of enemies, and invisibility.^[21] In some of these applications, the volatile associations of the skull鈥攔ather than indicating identification with a legal or brahmanical transgression鈥攚ere instrumentalized as a vessel for extraction, refinement or purification, including the production of elixirs for immortality (补尘峁泃补) and the intoxicant soma.^[22] Where integrated into these methods of ritual empowerment, 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 implements came to define ritual methodologies which incorporate charnel materials as well as a specific type of vow-holder.^[23]

Figure 2.12: 颁腻尘耻峁囜笉腻 from an unknown site in Orissa, 9th century, now at the British Museum (1872,0701.83). This multi-limbed 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 deity has a skull in the lower left hand as well as the severed head of Brahma, a garland of skulls, the emaciated form of an ascetic and corpse as a seat. Note also the vajra in the top left corner.

Moreover, 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 methods were cultivated as part of a brahmanical tradition oriented towards the group of female deities known as 尘腻迟峁沰腻. Though there is archaeological and literary evidence for this assembly from the early centuries of the Common Era, after the sixth century these figures came to be primarily associated with 艢补颈惫补 practices of charnel asceticism.^[24] Foremost in illustrating this connection was the deity 颁腻尘耻峁囜笉腻, whose iconography and characterization became of increasingly complex and central importance in the expansion of 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 practices of the 艢补颈惫补 惫颈诲测腻辫墨峁环补 oriented towards female deities, or 艣腻办迟补 traditions (figure 2.12).^[25] At the tenth century temple of 厂辞尘别艣惫补谤补 at Mukhalingam, for example, near the 艢补颈惫补 religious center of 叠丑耻产补苍别艣惫补谤, 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 and other ascetics are prominent and numerously depicted鈥攁nd in veneration of 颁腻尘耻峁囜笉腻, emaciated and seated on a corpse鈥攊n an iconographic programs which also feature images of the 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 teacher 尝补办耻濒墨艣补 (figures 2.13-2.16).^[26]

Figure 2.13 (above): Eight-armed 颁腻尘耻峁囜笉腻 seated on a corpse as the object of 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 devotion at 厂辞尘别艣惫补谤补, near 叠丑耻产补苍别艣惫补谤, 10th century. Image from Donaldson 1986.

Figures 2.14 and 2.15: 碍腻辫腻濒颈办补 practitioners in the iconographic program at 厂辞尘别艣惫补谤补, near 叠丑耻产补苍别艣惫补谤, 10th century. Charnel ascetic yogins are distinguished by a single skull ornament in the hair, 办丑补峁璿腻峁単补 and/or skull, shown with female companions and students. Image from Donaldson 1986.

Figure 2.16: Another 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 figure with 办丑补峁璿腻峁単补 and skull from 厂辞尘别艣惫补谤补, likely a teacher and/or ritual master (at left) instructing a student from his raised seat. Image from Donaldson 1986.

In a tenth century free-standing relief from Puri, another site of tantric activity in Orissa, 艢颈惫补 as Gaj膩s奴rasa峁僪膩ram奴rti鈥攁 form of the deity historically associated with 尘腻迟峁沰腻 iconography 鈥攈olds a skull in the left hand with a single skull in his hair and wears a 尘腻濒腻 of skulls, similar to 颁腻尘耻峁囜笉腻 in the eighth century representation in fig. 2.12, above.^[27] In fig. 2.17, an emaciated companion is positioned beneath 艢颈惫补鈥檚 feet as鈥攁nd with Andhakasura above in fig. 2.11鈥攖he figure holds a skull to catch the blood of the slain demon who has been liberated at death in a narrative which supports the 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 soteriological model of liberation in union with the deity by adopting the form of a transgressor. Multi-limbed, variously empowered forms of 艢颈惫补-Bhairava became increasingly central in the monuments of these brahmanical communities though after the tenth century, 艢颈惫补 was less explicitly represented as a wrathful, 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 deity and charnel materials are integrated into the deity鈥檚 expanding assortment of martial and ritual implements (see fig. 2.19, below).^[28]

Figure 2.17: 艢颈惫补-Gaj膩s奴rasa峁僪膩ram奴rti from Puri, 10th century, now at the Indian Museum in Kolkata. The figure has a single skull ornament in his hair and鈥攍ike Andhak膩sura, above in fig 2.11鈥攍ifts a skull with a left hand to catch the blood of the vanquished demon, December 2017.

Early 惫颈诲测腻辫墨峁环补 texts reflect how 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 methodologies and groupings of 尘腻迟峁沰腻 were integrated into the foundations of what would later be known as 测辞驳颈苍墨 tantra. In the sixth to eighth century text of the 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补 (also called Picumata), charnel materials are made part of a ritual system which uses mantra, 尘补峁囜笉补濒补 and 尘耻诲谤腻, and is centered on a male and female deity pair whose primary forms鈥擪ap膩li艣abhairava and Ca峁囜笉a办补辫腻濒颈苍墨 鈥攁re each recognized as skull-holders (办补辫腻濒颈苍/墨).^[29] In this text, methodologies of ritualized charnel asceticism鈥攊ncluding the use of skulls as vessels for the preparation or refinement of substances which facilitate siddhi 鈥攁re derived from earlier 尝腻办耻濒补 sources in the 狈颈艣惫腻蝉补 corpus, and the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow is described as an especially valued and refined means for embodying the deity as Bhairava.^[30] However, while 尝腻办耻濒补 sources acknowledge 尘腻迟峁沰腻 figures in their cosmological models and at times used sexual fluids in their prepared substances, they were primarily celibate ascetics concerned with practical siddhi like invisibility, the controlled reanimation of corpses and, ultimately, liberation through Rudra.^[31]

In the methods of accomplishment (蝉腻诲丑补苍补, Tbt. sgrub thabs) which were innovated in 惫颈诲测腻辫墨峁环补 texts like the 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补, the yogin applies 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 practices primarily in order to ritually engage with volatile female deities called 测辞驳颈苍墨, through which they attain siddhi and become empowered in the form of the deity 艢颈惫补-Bhairava. No longer restricted to the historic grouping of seven or eight 尘腻迟峁沰腻, in these practices the 测辞驳颈苍墨 becomes an ever-expanding category of figures organized into clans (kula) oriented around the primary deity whose form is actualized through mantra, 尘补峁囜笉补濒补 and 尘耻诲谤腻.^[32] At the same time, the 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补 describes the 测辞驳颈苍墨 as a figure complementary to that of a siddha or yogin whose most extreme observances incorporate the implements of the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow: In this text, 测辞驳颈苍墨鈥攍ike the deity 颁腻尘耻峁囜笉腻, above in figs. 2.12 and 2.13鈥攁re represented as empowered charnel ascetic figures, naked with a corpse as vehicle or seat, holding a skull and 办丑补峁璿腻峁単补, wearing a skull 尘腻濒腻 and raising the right hand in a gesture of munificence.

The models of ritual engagement cultivated in practices of the 艢补颈惫补 惫颈诲测腻辫墨峁环补 expanded the definition and functions of 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 implements by identifying them within the tantric (viz. 膩gamic) systems used to become empowered and attain siddhi. The 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补, for example, describes the skull and 办丑补峁璿腻峁単补 鈥攁s well as a set of charnel ornaments worn on the head, ears, neck, hands, arms and hips, and an initiatory thread鈥攁s a comprehensive set of 尘耻诲谤腻 used to embody the deity as the skull-bearer Bhairava and engage 测辞驳颈苍墨.^[33] Though 尝腻办耻濒补 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 practitioners also ornamented themselves with skulls and a thread of hair in their vrata 鈥攊n addition to their use of skull and 办丑补峁璿腻峁単补 and in order to assume the form of Rudra鈥攖here is no indication that these were recognized as a set of 尘耻诲谤腻.^[34] Moreover, by integrating the 测辞驳颈苍墨 as a ritual consort鈥攁lso interpreted as a 尘耻诲谤腻鈥攖he 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补 indicates the combination of charnel asceticism and sexual yoga which would characterize the 测辞驳颈苍墨 tantra corpus.^[35]

The integration of yoga and charnel methodologies would be further refined and popularized in the formalization of kaula traditions which, after the ninth century, promoted a ritual model which internalized within the body of the yogin the transgressive dynamics of 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 and 测辞驳颈苍墨 practices.^[36] In this corpus, the instrumentation of impurity, polluting materials, ritualized sex and the performance of deity yoga are increasingly systematized through visualization and the tantric methods of mantra, 尘耻诲谤腻 and 尘补峁囜笉补濒补 in order to facilitate ecstatic knowledge or gnosis (箩帽腻苍补), with a decreased emphasis on gaining siddhi through encounters with 测辞驳颈苍墨 consorts and the use of charnel materials.^[37] As a result, the embodiment of Bhairava鈥攁s well as the actualization of the deity鈥檚 尘补峁囜笉补濒补 and its assembled clans of 测辞驳颈苍墨鈥攃ould be accomplished as a yogic exercise, rather than an externalized practice.^[38] At the same time, in kaula 测辞驳颈苍墨 methods, the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow was further systematized as one of a number of antinomian observances which included having sex or eating with consorts from non-brahmanical groups, eating impure substances, wearing animal skins, drinking alcohol in excess and the habitation of liminal social spaces, including charnel grounds.^[39]

The refinements of kaula ritual methodologies鈥攊nternalized yoga and a shifting focus from empowerment to gnosis鈥攅ncouraged the expansion of 测辞驳颈苍墨 traditions within a broader range of social groups, facilitating the patronage necessary for the monumentalization of these practices.^[40] At Hirapur鈥攁lso near to 叠丑耻产补苍别艣惫补谤 in Orissa鈥攁 tenth century 测辞驳颈苍墨 temple suggests a regional transition towards kaula imagery, supported in part by the changing political dominance from the Buddhist Bhauma-Kara regime of previous centuries to the 艢补颈惫补 Somava峁兣浤�, who promoted kaula teachings (figures 2.18-2.22).^[41] At the same time, this site illustrates the emergence of 测辞驳颈苍墨 tantra as a distinct iconographic program and monumental strategy, with the primary deity (no longer in situ) and assembly at the center of a circular array of numerous 测辞驳颈苍墨.^[42]

Figure 2.18: Plan of the 测辞驳颈苍墨 temple at Hirapur with interior niches for 60 测辞驳颈苍墨, four couples surrounding the main deity at center (now missing) and nine exterior 测辞驳颈苍墨 with charnel implements, 10th century. Image from Dehejia 1986.

Figure 2.19: Unidentified form of Bhairava from the central pavilion at Hirapur seated on corpse with 测辞驳颈苍墨 holding a knife and skull in the lower register, c. 10th century. Image from Donaldson 2001.

Figure 2.20: 颁腻尘耻峁囜笉腻 as one of the 60 测辞驳颈苍墨 on the interior of the Hirapur temple, 10th century. Image from Hatley 2014.

Figure 2.21: One of the few charnel implements from the interior of Hirapur, 测辞驳颈苍墨 drinking from a skull, 10th century. Image from ASI/ Dehejia 1986.

Figure 2.22: Yogin墨 with knife in the raised right hand, skull and staff on the left, standing on a decapitated head with animals of the charnel ground; one of nine such figures on the exterior of Hirapur, 10th century. Image from Donaldson 2001.

In addition to demonstrating local material support for the kaula tradition, this temple suggests unique historical evidence for the monumentalization of a 尘补峁囜笉补濒补 in the context of 测辞驳颈苍墨 practices and is illustrative of their tantric ritual dynamics.^[43] However, within this composition, 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 implements are largely absent from the interior though consistently seen in the nine exterior 测辞驳颈苍墨 figures, each standing on a severed head framed by two jackals, holding a skull in the left hand with a knife raised in the right, as in fig. 2.22. The diverse interior program and central assembly incorporate 艢补颈惫补 and 尘腻迟峁沰腻 iconography (figs. 2.19 and 2.20) but without prominent charnel elements and only one of the inward-facing 测辞驳颈苍墨 survives holding a skull (figure 2.21). Moreover, the narrow entrance at Hirapur suggests the esotericism and restricted access promoted in kaula teachings, as well as the division between an interior, ritually activated and refined space, and an exterior marked by the volatile impurities of charnel materials.^[44]

Altogether, this section has explored the refinement and integration of 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 implements from their earliest surviving evidences into the expansion of the 艢补颈惫补 and brahmanical ritual corpus and its iconographies including changing concepts of deity yoga, the engagement and control of volatile entities like 测辞驳颈苍墨, and methods for empowerment including both practical applications (e.g. immortality, flight) and the cultivation of gnosis (箩帽腻苍补). Moreover, within these sources, the significance of charnel implements is dynamic and diverse, from the public observation of transgressive ritual identity, to a comprehensive system of 尘耻诲谤腻 and finally within a monumental illustration of ritual methodologies and visual programs that would come to dominate Buddhist tantra.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

Geoffrey Samuel describes the common origins of Buddhist and brahmanical 艣谤补尘补峁嘺 ascetics through their relationship to historical urbanization patterns across south Asia, including their early associations with charnel settings and specialization in socially provocative behaviors in idem., The Origins of Yoga and Tantra (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 120-128.

[2]:

See Wedemeyer, Making Sense of Tantric Buddhism, passim for an extended text-based historical and semiotic study of the discursive process of identifying and engaging concepts of the antinomian in the Indian sources for Buddhist tantra.

[3]:

David Lorenzen, The 碍腻辫腻濒颈办补s and 碍腻濒腻尘耻办丑补蝉 (New Delhi: Thomson Press, 1972), 13.

[4]:

Wedemeyer finds this reference in the c. fourth century 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补s奴tra in Making Sense of Tantric Buddhism, 157.

[5]:

Peter Bisschop and Arlo Griffiths, 鈥淭he 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 observance (Atharvavedapari艣i峁ａ弓a 40),鈥� Indo-Iranian Journal 46, no. 4 (2003), 331-332. See also Stella Kramrisch, The Presence of 艢颈惫补 (Delhi: Motlilal Banarsidass, 1988 [1981]), 331-332. Kramrisch describes Rudra (later 艢颈惫补) as lord of the animals (辫腻艣耻辫补迟颈) for the 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补, for whom the self was sacrificial like a beast.

[6]:

Wedemeyer notes this version of the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow in the 尝腻办耻濒补 text 狈颈艣惫腻蝉补tattvasa峁僪it膩, op.cit., 157-158. See also, ibid., 254n81 on the materials used for this thread by the 尝腻办耻濒补; note that Sanderson elsewhere renders 惫腻濒补测补箩帽辞辫补惫墨迟补 as 鈥�snake skin鈥� in idem., 鈥�艢补颈惫颈蝉尘 and the tantric traditions,鈥� in The World鈥檚 Religions: the Religions of Asia, ed. F. Hardy (London: Routledge, 1988), 133. On the use of human remains for the 耻辫补惫墨迟补 as an alternative to the cotton thread of non-ascetic brahmanical groups, see Sanderson, 鈥淭he 艢补颈惫补 age鈥�, 209n479. According to the same, 尝腻办耻濒补 practitioners are progenitors of the ninth-thirteenth century community of 碍腻濒腻尘耻办丑补 charnel ascetics in southern India.

[7]:

In his study of the 厂办补苍诲补辫耻谤腻峁嚹� and its historical context, Hans Bakker finds that, by the seventh or eighth century 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 was an increasingly and broadly applied identification for 艢补颈惫补 ascetics, idem., The World of the 厂办补苍诲补辫耻谤腻峁嚹� (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 149. Bakker moreover notes that the connection of 艢颈惫补 with the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 observance is foremost in this 辫耻谤腻峁嚹� (p.151).

[8]:

Bisschop and Griffiths, 鈥淭he 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 observance,鈥� 323.

[9]:

Thomas E. Donaldson, 鈥淏hik峁Ｄ佱弓anam奴rti images from Orissa,鈥� Artibus Asiae 47, no. 1 (1986), 51-66. See also Lorenzen, op.cit., for a comprehensive treatment of historical and narrative sources on the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow including several 辫耻谤腻峁嚹乻, inscriptions and satirical accounts. Other 艢补颈惫补 sources for this narrative are given in Kramrisch, op.cit., 287.

[10]:

Wedemeyer notes that many ascetic vrata 鈥攊ncluding those which pre-date the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow鈥攚ere also temporary, ranging in length from one month to a lifetime, op.cit., 153. See also Diana L. Eck on the historical association of Varanasi with 艢补颈惫补 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 practitioners and 艢颈惫补鈥檚 liberation at the place of Kap膩lamocana, idem., Banaras: City of Light (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), 119. Eck describes the deity as skull-bearer in the form of Bhairava, according to the later, likely twelfth century material in the 厂办补苍诲补辫耻谤腻峁嘺, ibid. 190ff.

[11]:

John Siudmak,The Hindu-Buddhist of Ancient Kashmir and its Influences, (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 154. Both Siudmak and Phyllis Granoff relate the iconography of Rudra on the reverse of this figure to contemporaneous representations of Nandin, Rudra鈥檚 non-transcedent form; see idem., 鈥湶巡钩蟊鹋洷共拱���/ 惭补丑腻办腻濒补: A unique Buddhist image from Ka艣mir,鈥� Artibus Asiae 41, no. 1 (1979), 64-82. Granoff, however, identifies this image as Buddhist. Another sixth century example of 叠丑奴迟别艣惫补谤补 from the same region and presently at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (2014.687) has three skulls in Rudra鈥檚 hair on the reverse. Note also Rudra鈥檚 use of stick or club suggests his role as a charnel figure and protector, see below on the 测补尘补诲补峁囜笉补.

[12]:

A similarly addorsed image to a figure of 惭补丑别艣惫补谤补 from Kashmir has been identified as Rudra with 尝补办耻濒墨艣补 in his crown by Pratyapaditya Pal in Bronzes of Kashmir (Graz: Akademische Druck-u. Verlagsanstalt, 1975), figs. 4 and 4a.

[13]:

Charles David Collins, The Iconography and Ritual of 艢颈惫补 at Elephanta (New Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 1991 [1988]), 128.

[14]:

Sanderson notes that the figure of Sad膩艣iva is iconographically associated with the least unorthodox trends in 艢补颈惫补 ritual methodologies during this time, idem., 鈥溑毑咕北咕辈醭� and the tantric traditions,鈥� 136.

[15]:

Collins, op.cit., 33.

[16]:

Sanderson, ibid., 136. In another classificatory system, these texts are classified by having been revealed by the proper right face of 惭补丑腻诲别惫补/Sad膩艣iva, which is Aghora/Bhairava, see Alexis Sanderson, 鈥淗istory through textual criticism in the study of 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘, the Pa帽car膩tra and the Buddhist 测辞驳颈苍墨tantras鈥�, in Les sources et le temps, ed. Fran莽ois Grimal (Pondicherry: 脡cole Fran莽aise d鈥橢xtreme Orient, 2001), 19.

[17]:

Svacchandabhairava was the dominant 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 practice of the 尘补苍迟谤补辫墨峁环补 though 鈥渋ts position as the standard 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘 of the Kasmirian householder had modified its heteropraxy鈥� resulting in a decreasing emphasis on the instrumentation of impure materials and observances towards the tenth century, see Alexis Sanderson, 鈥�Purity and power among the Brahmans of Kashmir,鈥� in The Category of the Person ed. Michael Carrithers, et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 204.

[18]:

Samuel elsewhere describes the formation of tantra through its historical relationship to yoga, Origins of Yoga and Tantra, 223ff. Alexis Sanderson has made the case that these innovations were first recorded by 艢补颈惫补 authors, with 痴补箩谤补测腻苍补 formed in response as a Buddhist adaptation, see idem., 鈥湷詹孤岚�补测腻苍��: Origin and function,鈥� 96.

[19]:

Ronald Davidson finds the term 蝉颈诲诲丑腻测辞驳颈苍 in the 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补s奴tra describing a practitioner who is 鈥渦n-smeared by ethical action or guilt鈥�, see idem., Indian Esoteric Buddhism: A Social History of the Tantric Movement (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002),184. Samuel elsewhere explores how, through the expansion of ritual traditions after fifth century, the ascetic vrata was reformulated as the deity yoga practice of Buddhist tantra in idem., Origins of Yoga and Tantra, 238.

[20]:

For a social history of siddhas in south Asia in the seventh to eleventh centuries, the political applications of their knowledge and contributions to the formation of Buddhist tantra, see Davidson, ibid.

[21]:

Davidson, ibid., 194. In Buddhist literature, 惫颈诲测腻dhara may also refer to non-Buddhist tantric practitioners and siddhas. See also David Gordon White, 鈥�Mountains of wisdom: On the interface between siddha and vidhyadhara cults and the siddha orders in medieval India,鈥� International Journal of Hindu Studies 1, no. 1 (1997): 73-95.

[22]:

David Gordon White further discusses the integration of 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 methods with the foundations of tantric alchemy, the production of 补尘峁泃补 and the yoga of N膩th siddhas, c.f. idem., The Alchemical Body: Siddha Traditions in Medieval India (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1996).

[23]:

Judit T枚rzs枚k notes the intersection of these definitions in evidence for a widespread 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 ritual tradition which centered on the cultivation and consumption of the intoxicant soma, idem., 鈥�Kapalikas鈥�, in Brill鈥檚 Encyclopedia of Hinduism, vol. 3 (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 357-8.

[24]:

Shaman Hatley has identified earlier 尘腻迟峁沰腻 iconography with no representation of charnel associations from the 碍耻峁Ｄ佱箛补 period while the 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 艢补颈惫补 authored 厂办补苍诲补辫耻谤腻峁嘺 (sixth to ninth centuries) describes both Skanda and 艢颈惫补 as a 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 in the company of a group of fearsome 尘腻迟峁沰腻, idem., 鈥淭he 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补tantra and early 艢补颈惫补 cult of 测辞驳颈苍墨s,鈥� (PhD diss., University of Pennsylvania, 2007), 48ff. At Elephanta, a group of seven 尘腻迟峁沰腻 accompanies 艢颈惫补 as 驰辞驳别艣惫补谤补/尝补办耻濒墨艣补; Collins, op.cit., 24.

[25]:

Sanderson has elsewhere detailed the development of tantric ritual traditions oriented towards fearsome central female deities鈥�i.e. 艣腻办迟补 tantra, 碍腻濒墨 and Krama practices鈥攚ithin and adjacent to the 艢补颈惫补 惫颈诲测腻辫墨峁环补, including their integration of 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 materials and methods, see idem., 鈥溑毑咕北咕辈醭� and the tantric traditions,鈥� 140ff. See also idem., 鈥淢a峁囜笉ala and 膧gamic identity in the Trika of Kashmir,鈥� in Mantras et diagrammes rituels dans l鈥檋indouisme: Table ronde, Paris 21-22 juin 1984, (Paris: Editions CNRS, 1986), 169-214 for the influence of the Kashmiri author Abhinavagupta (c.950 - 1016) on the reformation of 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 elements in later 艣腻办迟补 tantra, or 腻驳补尘补.

[26]:

See Mary F. Linda, 鈥淣膩r膩yanapuram: A tenth century site in Kalinga,鈥� Artibus Asiae 50, no. 3/4 (1990): 232-262 and Walter Smith, 鈥淚mages of divine kings from the Mukte艣vara temple鈥� Artibus Asiae 51, no. 1/2 (1991): 90-106 for a comparison of style to other nearby monuments in the eastern region, as well as an exploration of the local political connections of the 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 siddhas community in the tenth century. Linda notes a number of vajra in the iconography of 厂辞尘别艣惫补谤补, a 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 site.

[27]:

Michael W. Meister, 鈥淩egional variations in 尘腻迟峁沰腻 conventions,鈥� Artibus Asiae 46, no. 3/4 (1986), 242. Meister documents forms of 艢颈惫补 found with 尘腻迟峁沰腻 iconography in examples from the fifth to fourteenth centuries; Gaj膩s奴rasa峁僪膩ram奴rti is the form of 艢颈惫补 at the majority of these sites.

[28]:

Thomas E. Donaldson finds that images of Bhairava鈥攚ho has many forms鈥攁re increasingly seen at 艣腻办迟补 sites in Orissa during the seventh to tenth centuries; after the mid-tenth century his tantric, though not prominently charnel ascetic form becomes more common; c.f. Donaldson, 鈥淏hik峁Ｄ佱弓anam奴rti images from Orissa鈥�, 62 as well as idem., Tantra and 艢膩kta Art of Orissa, (New Delhi: D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd, 2001), 440.

[29]:

Hatley explores this text, its sources and iconographic innovations at length in his doctoral dissertation (op.cit.); this text is classified as a 测腻尘补濒补 or mata, though the 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补 is also referred to as a 尘补迟峁泃补苍迟谤补 in the roughly contemporaneous 厂办补苍诲补辫耻谤腻峁嘺 (a non-tantric 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 艢补颈惫补 text) (p.35).

[30]:

Hatley finds citations and repetitions in the 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补 from various 狈颈艣惫腻蝉补 sources which were shaped by the charnel specialization of 尝腻办耻濒补 ascetics (ibid., 133ff). On the 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 vow as bhairavavrata or a 尘补丑腻惫谤补迟补 in the same corpus, see ibid., 181. Hatley notes that, amongst 艢补颈惫补 sources for 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 ritual methods, the 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补 is more explicit in its ritual instrumentation of impurity than the 尝腻办耻濒补 狈颈艣惫腻蝉补 corpus.

[31]:

On the celibacy and cosmologies of the 尝腻办耻濒补 see Sanderson, 鈥溑毑咕北咕辈醭� and the tantric traditions鈥�,134 as well as Samuel, Origins of Yoga and Tantra, 173 on the fundamental relationship between celibacy and asceticism in 艣谤补尘补峁嘺 traditions.

[32]:

See Hatley on the history, characterization and diversification of 测辞驳颈苍墨 iconography, including its relation to earlier representations of 尘腻迟峁沰腻, op.cit., 11ff. Hatley defines the 测辞驳颈苍墨 as any number of figures with shared properties including multiplicity and formation into clans, the appearance of a female 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 (e.g. with charnel implements and ornaments), a volatile character and capacity to transmit teachings and empowerments, frequently including flight. Other methods for obtaining siddhi in the 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补 include visualizations (诲丑测腻苍补), homa (offerings made by fire) and processes of consecration, ibid.,190ff.

[33]:

Sanderson cites these 尘耻诲谤腻鈥攚hich are not enumerated鈥攊n the 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补 (ch. 80) in a passage which suggests a sustained historical association with 尝腻办耻濒补 and 艢补颈惫补 ascetic sources by describing them as the implements of Rudra accompanied by a gathering of 尘腻迟峁�(k膩) (rudro mat峁沢a峁嘺i岣� 蝉腻谤诲丑补峁�), idem., 鈥淭he 艢补颈惫补 age,鈥� 179n435. In the same note, he cites two passages in another 惫颈诲测腻辫墨峁环补 source for 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 practices, the Jayadratha测腻尘补濒补, describing charnel ornaments as 尘耻诲谤腻 though again, without being enumerated: First as ornaments for a 蝉腻诲丑补办补 (viz. siddha) who takes the form of Bhairava wearing earrings, bracelets, an ornament in the hair, a necklace and thread of hair; and elsewhere as the indication of a vow-holder with a skull ornament in the hair, charnel ornaments on the ears and limbs and with skull 尘腻濒腻, skull vessel and 办丑补峁璿腻峁単补.

[34]:

See Wedemeyer, op.cit, 157-8 and 253n81-83.

[35]:

Siddhas are moreover associated with ritualized sex by secondary sources after the fifth century, c.f. Davidson, Indian Esoteric Buddhism, 174.

[36]:

Hatley, op.cit., 157. See also David Gordon White on the kaula contributions to hatha yoga and tantric alchemy by N膩th siddhas, c.f., idem., The Alchemical Body, passim. The same author has explored the foundations of the kaula tradition through its reformed, internalized interpretation of sexual yoga in idem., Kiss of the Yogin墨: 鈥淭antric Sex鈥� in its South Asian Contexts (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003). Hatley, unlike White, does not recognize the kaula as a formal sectarian identity, but rather a tantric literary and liturgical tradition cultivated by a diversity of authors and communities (op.cit., 20).

[37]:

Sanderson credits the kaula tradition鈥攊ts authors, teachers and practitioners鈥攚ith the reform and popularization of 测辞驳颈苍墨 tantra and notes that 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 ritual methodologies are more prominent in earlier sources from the 惫颈诲测腻辫墨峁环补, i.e. the 叠谤补丑尘补测腻尘补濒补, c.f. idem., 鈥淭he 艢补颈惫补 age,鈥� 49 and idem., 鈥溑毑咕北咕辈醭� and the tantric tradition,鈥� 147ff. White moreover notes that the legendary ninth century kaula author and N膩th yogin Matsyendra was against the open use of charnel materials, idem., Kiss of the Yogin墨, 164. These reforms in gnostic ritual methodology and decreased reliance on charnel materials would be further developed in the Trika Kaula corpus by the eleventh century Abhinavagupta, resulting in the diminished popularity of Svacchandabhairava 办腻辫腻濒颈办补 practices, see Sanderson, 鈥淧urity and power,鈥� 204.

[38]:

Samuel, Origins of Yoga and Tantra, 270. Samuel moreover notes that before the tenth century, this practice of embodying the deity at the center of an array of 测辞驳颈苍墨 was more often referred to as kaula, rather than tantra.

[39]:

Wedemeyer, Making Sense of Tantric Buddhism, 138. Wedemeyer finds that it is primarily through yogic practice and observance (肠补谤测腻 and/or vrata) that socially and ritually impure materials like human remains are instrumentalized in Buddhist 尘补丑腻测辞驳补 and 测辞驳颈苍墨 tantra, and primarily in the latter. He moreover tabulates these behaviors in Buddhist sources in op.cit., 142.

[40]:

For a review of 测辞驳颈苍墨 temple sites鈥攔ound, open-roofed temples with numerous 测辞驳颈苍墨 and a central deity, constructed predominantly between the tenth and fourteenth centuries across south Asia鈥攕ee Vidya Dehejia, Yogini Cult and Temples: A Tantric Tradition, (New Delhi: National Museum, 1986). The number of 测辞驳颈苍墨 figures varies at these sites from approximately sixty to as many as eighty.

[41]:

Donaldson, Tantra and 艢膩kta Art of Orissa, 653.

[42]:

Shaman Hatley has explored this site in relation to the 艢补颈惫补 测辞驳颈苍墨 corpus and notes that the earlier 惫颈诲测腻辫墨峁环补 was more oriented toward solitary practice than the construction of communal spaces, idem., 鈥淕oddesses in text and stone: Temples of the 测辞驳颈苍墨s in light of tantric and pur膩峁噄c literature,鈥� in Material culture and Asian religions: Text, Image, Object, ed. Benjamin J. Fleming and Richard D. Mann (Abingdon: Routledge, 2014), 207.

[43]:

This is noted as well by Hatley in ibid., 214.

[44]:

Hatley observes that these monuments are inherently both 鈥渆xoteric and esoteric鈥�, and were suitable for the monumentalization of a ritual tradition which increasingly valued secrecy, 鈥淕oddesses in text and stone,鈥� 217.