painting; mandala; 繪畫(Chinese); 曼陀羅(Chinese) BM-1919-0101-0.55

Period:Tang dynasty Production date:8thC
Materials:hemp, 麻 (Chinese),
Technique:painted
Subjects:buddha bodhisattva 佛 (Chinese) 菩薩 (Chinese)
Dimensions:Height: 84 centimetres Width: 96 centimetres

Description:
Fragmentary painting of a maṇḍala of Avalokiteśvara, the central figure, in Indian style. Amitābha occupies the middle position at the top, wearing a red robe. Ink and colour on hemp.
IMG


Comments:EnglishFrom Whitfield 1983:Despite the very considerable damage and loss of pigment, enough remains of this painting on hemp cloth to show it to have been a beautiful work (see also Fig. 53). In style and execution it is very similar to the mandala of Amoghapasa in the Pelliot collection (Bannieres, No. 86), and must, like that work, date from the period of Tibetan control at Dunhuang or earlier. The plain background was originally turquoise or blue as in the Amoghapasa mandala, and the delicacy of the modelling also recalls that painting.Avalokitesvara, in the centre, is seated with right hand in vara-mudra. Since nearly all the surface colour has been lost, the extreme delicacy of the initial drawing in ink is clearly visible, especially in the face. The very narrow scarves that he wears were originally ornamented with spots of opaque white pigment, as seen in some other paintings of this period, but they too appear extremely delicate. Amitabha, the spiritual father of Avalokitesvara, occupies the central position at the top of the painting, wearing a red robe covering one shoulder; although of course the robe is undecorated, a single row of white dots borders the contour of his lotus seat within the double row of white petals, closely following the form of his crossed legs. The Bodhisattvas in the top corners have suffered more damage, but the four-armed one at the centre left (Fig. 54) is quite clear, the feet just crossed at the ankles. Of the remaining smaller Bodhisattvas enough can be seen to show that they are in varying postures like those in the Guimet painting, and set on a plain ground originally turquoise in colour (in the Guimet painting this is strewn with flowers, and precious utensils are set before the lowest figures).The style, as observed by Waley, is purely Indian. On the central figure the remains can be seen of a triple sacrificial thread dotted in white, behind the arm, and of a purple cloth around the loins; otherwise the figure is unclothed. The fine outlines are characterized by great precision; the petals of the lotus seat are strongly incurved, perhaps even more so than those of the Guimet picture. The same type of lotus pedestal can be seen on another hemp cloth painting in the Stein collection, the mandala of Avalokitesvara (Figs. 74,75), where the main figure is in a similar pose surrounded by a border of vajras, outside which is the parent figure of Amitabha immediately above and small Bodhisattvas alternating with emblems of Avalokitesvara all the way round. Both these paintings of Avalokitesvara are almost entirely Indian in style and must be relatively early in date, certainly no later than the eighth century.Although paintings on silk are greatly in the majority among those found in the sealed library by Stein and Pelliot, those on hemp cloth also occur in fair numbers: for instance, in the catalogue of the Pelliot collection 47 pieces are on hemp cloth, 141 on silk and 32 on paper. The Stein collection at the British Museum has only 22 pieces on hemp cloth, but a further 36 are in the Stein collection in New Delhi.In some cases, it seems obvious that hemp cloth was a cheaper alternative to silk, but certain paintings, such as the fragmentary square painting shown here, are finely woven and show a high artistic standard, with fine lines and colouring, showing that the material was greatly valued, as indeed is known also from its use for such masterpieces of eighth century Buddhist painting as the Hokkedo kompon mandara, now in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. ChineseFrom Whitfield 1983:儘管畫面殘損嚴重，顔料的脫落明顯，但看得出此麻繪是一件非常精美的作品（參照Fig.53的全圖）。由於樣式和表現手法與伯希和收集品《不空羂索觀音曼荼羅》（參照伯希和圖錄《敦煌幡和繪畫》篇圖版86圖）極接近，所以其年代應屬吐蕃佔領時期或稍早。其背景的顔色當時也和《不空羂索觀音曼荼羅》相同，是青綠或青色，底描模板的精細，也和後者相同。彩色圖版中所刊載的部分是中尊觀音，右手結觸地印而坐。表面的彩色幾乎全部脫落，浮現出極纖細的底描墨線，尤其是臉部非常明顯。當時，觀音身上纏繞的極窄天衣上，曾有過同時代其它作品中也可見的白點裝飾，現在只能見到極其模糊的痕迹。觀音正上方，畫面上段的中央部位，是偏袒右肩著紅衣而坐的阿彌陀如來。那衣物肯定無裝飾，但沿著結跏趺坐的腳線而繪的蓮華座，白色的蓮瓣卻是兩層重疊的，周圍用白點做邊。上段兩旁的菩薩像殘損嚴重，左側中尊位置的四臂像（參照Fig.54）保存良好，可清楚看出雙腿交叉而坐的姿勢。除此，圖中可見的幾身小菩薩，與集美收集品的《不空羂索觀音曼荼羅》中的相似，在青綠色的底子上，表現出各自不同的姿勢（集美收集品的繪畫中，背景中撒滿小花，在最下段諸尊的前面擺著金色佛具）。如Waley所述的那樣，此畫的形式是純粹印度的風格。除了見到中尊臂後有加白點的三條綬帶，以及腰周圍赤紫色布的痕迹外，那身上另外沒有任何衣物。線描端正優美，蓮華座的蓮瓣，比集美收集品畫中的更向內彎曲。在斯坦因收集品的麻布觀音曼荼羅（參照Figs.74、75）中，也見到同樣形狀的蓮華座。在那幅畫中，中尊坐姿與此畫相同，用并列的金剛杵框围在四周。框的外側，上邊中央配有阿彌陀佛，周圍環繞交錯排列的象徵觀音的標識和小菩薩。那觀音曼荼羅也和此圖一樣，完全是印度風格，兩者都年代較早，可確定不晚於8世紀。斯坦因和伯希和從藏經洞帶回的繪畫中，數量最多爲絹繪，麻繪也有一定數量。如在伯希和收集品目錄中所見收錄的繪畫，絹畫有141件，紙繪有32件，麻繪也有47件。斯坦因收集品的麻繪數目爲：大英博物館收藏22件，新德里國立博物館收藏36件。在很多场合，麻布被作爲高價絹的代用品使用，但其中也多有像此圖中的繪畫等，紡織精巧，無論如何也想象不到它價值低廉，畫的線描和色彩等美術水準也很高。被稱作8世紀佛教繪畫代表作的波士頓美術館收藏的《法華堂根本曼荼羅》，也是那類作品之一。