Roofs Of This Description
Are Called "Umbrellas," And Usually Shelter The Statues Of Buddha
And Of The Chinese Sages.
But, on the other hand, the worshippers
of Shiva, who possess the temple nowadays, assert that this low
building is nothing but a lingam of Shiva.
Besides, the carvings
of gods and goddesses cut out of the rock forbid one to think
that the temple is the production of the Buddhists. Fergusson
writes, "What is this monument of antiquity? Does it belong to
the Hindus, or to the Buddhists? Has it been built upon plans
drawn since the death of Sakya Sing, or does it belong to a more
ancient religion?"
That is the question. If Fergusson, being bound by facts existing
in inscriptions to acknowledge the anti-quity of Karli, will still
persist in asserting that Elephanta is of much later date, he
will scarcely be able to solve this dilemma, because the two styles
are exactly the same, and the carvings of the latter are still
more magnificent. To ascribe the temples of Elephanta and Kanari
to the Buddhists, and to say that their respective periods
correspond to the fourth and fifth centuries in the first case,
and the tenth in the second, is to introduce into history a very
strange and unfounded anachronism. After the first century A.D.
there was not left a single influential Buddhist in India. Conquered
and persecuted by the Brahmans, they emigrated by thousands to
Ceylon and the trans-Himalayan districts. After the death of King
Asoka, Buddhism speedily broke down, and in a short time was entirely
displaced by the theocratic Brahmanism.
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 78 of 357
Words from 21185 to 21454
of 96531
