Parshwanath Ni Ek Prachin Dhatupratima - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Parshwanath ni Ek Prachin Dhatupratima" by Dr. Umakant P. Shah:

This article, "An Ancient Metal Image of Parshvanatha," by Dr. Umakant P. Shah, discusses a bronze statue of Lord Parshvanatha housed in the Prince of Wales Museum in Mumbai. The statue, standing approximately nine inches tall, depicts the Tirthankara in the Kayotsarga mudra (a standing posture of detachment).

Key Observations and Analysis of the Statue:

Physical Description: The statue is in a standing posture. The original base is missing, and it is currently mounted on a temporary stand. The right hand, head, and the three frontal hoods of the serpent (Parshvanatha's iconic emblem) are broken. A five-hooded serpent is depicted behind the head, with its body curving down the back to the legs. The article includes three photographs: one showing the front view, another the back, and a close-up of the upper torso.
Origin: The exact provenance of the statue is unknown. It's speculated that the information about its origin was lost when it was sold to the museum, or the seller did not disclose it. However, based on its artistic style, the author concludes it is from North India, not South India.
Religious Affiliation and Antiquity: The statue is nude, but the author argues that this nudity does not exclusively place it within the Digambara sect. He posits that the statue predates the formal schism between the Svetambara and Digambara traditions. Attributing it solely to the Digambara sect based on nudity would be a disservice to the antiquity of Jainism itself.
Comparison with other Ancient Jain Sculptures: The author highlights the Lohanipur excavation near Patna, where a highly polished metal image of a Tirthankara was discovered. This Lohanipur statue is considered the most ancient Jain sculpture found in India and is attributed to the Mauryan period due to its high polish, a characteristic of Mauryan art. This statue, broken at the head and below the knees, is also in the Kayotsarga mudra and depicts an unclothed Tirthankara. The author emphasizes that nudity is inherent to the practice of Jain ascetics, including Tirthankaras, and thus such an image should be accepted by both Jain sects.
Dating the Parshvanatha Statue: The author places the Parshvanatha statue in the period following the Mauryan era, possibly around the time of the Samprati dynasty (around the 2nd century BCE). He draws parallels in the modeling of the torso, particularly the abdominal area, between the Parshvanatha statue and the Lohanipur torso. This stylistic similarity suggests that the Parshvanatha statue also followed Mauryan artistic conventions and could be as old as the 2nd century BCE or even older.
Stylistic Affinities: The statue's artistic style is described as extremely ancient, akin to the bronze dancing girl from Mohenjo-daro. Specific features like the oval face, wide cheekbones tapering to the chin, long nose, small but full lips, and almond-shaped eyes are compared to the Mohenjo-daro figure and ancient terracotta figurines of mothers found in Mathura and Hathras. This "primitive" style, characterized by applique art (where features are added onto a basic form, like clay coils for eyebrows), is evident in the statue. The author notes that while clay figures have added eyebrows, metal casting would incorporate this technique in the mold itself.
Body Proportions and Comparison with Mohenjo-daro: The slender and elongated limbs of the Parshvanatha statue are compared to the Mohenjo-daro dancing girl and a male terracotta figure from the same site. This contrasts with later sculptures from Mathura during the Kushana period, which exhibit broader shoulders and a more robust physique. The modeling of the chest and abdomen in the Parshvanatha statue also resembles ancient Yaksha sculptures and the polished Lohanipur Jina image.
Further Chronological Markers: The author acknowledges the significant time gap between Mohenjo-daro and the Mauryan/Shunga periods but emphasizes the discernible connection in the sculpting techniques. He suggests the Parshvanatha statue could be older than the 2nd century BCE, but current evidence is limited for such a definitive conclusion. The art of metal casting existed in India even before the Mohenjo-daro civilization, as evidenced by the dancing girl.
Comparison with Chausa Bronzes: The article mentions the discovery of several Jain metal images from Chausa, near Baksar, dating from the 1st to 4th century CE. These images are also of Tirthankaras and are nude. The author, who has published on one of these Rishabhadeva images, finds that the stylistic analysis of the Parshvanatha statue aligns with these Chausa bronzes.
Absence of Shrivatsa Symbol and Hair Arrangement: Notably, the Parshvanatha statue lacks the Shrivatsa symbol, suggesting it might have been a later innovation in Jain iconography. Some Chausa images do bear the Shrivatsa. The hair arrangement on the Parshvanatha statue consists of small, clockwise curls, which is a recognized characteristic of a great soul according to scriptures. This style of hair is also found in Kushana-era Mathura sculptures and 1st-century BCE Mauryan period sculptures from Bodh Gaya, further supporting the statue's ancient dating.

Conclusion:

Dr. Umakant P. Shah concludes that this metal image of Lord Parshvanatha has no connection to the Svetambara-Digambara sectarian divide, as it predates it. Excluding the prehistoric bronze dancing girl from Mohenjo-daro (around 2000 BCE), this Parshvanatha statue is arguably the most ancient historically documented cast metal image discovered in India. Its artistic style, meticulous craftsmanship, and comparative analysis with other ancient artifacts firmly establish its significant antiquity, likely dating back to the 2nd century BCE or even earlier.