The Hindu deity Viṣṇu reclining on the cosmic serpent Śeṣa, with his consort Lakṣmī. Brahma, the deity associated with creation, is revealed sitting on a lotus that emerges from Viṣṇu’s navel.
(My photograph taken in Rishikesh)
Like many people of my generation, I travelled to India in my early 20s. I knew nothing about the culture and religions of India, but found it to be both a bewildering and fascinating place. One of the aspects that I found most intriguing was the plethora of images of deities that were both exotic and strange. There are images of elephant headed deities, monkey gods, blue skinned gods, and angry goddesses with garlands of skulls. These images are ubiquitous – you find them not only in temples and wayside shrines, but in people’s homes, in cafes, on the dashboards of taxis, and in the middle of roundabouts. You find these images of deities in every visual medium and material that you can imagine: stone, brass, wood, plastic and print. These deities appear in Bollywood films, popular television series, posters, and comics. In many ways my fascination with the Hindu traditions was sparked by trying to make sense of this exuberant and colourful visual culture.
Iconography
Iconography literally means ‘writing in images’. Diana Eck observes:
Since India has ‘written’ prolifically in its images, learning to read its mythology and iconography is a primary task.
Eck 1985: 17
These are different iconographic representations of the popular deity Gaṇeśa (also known as Gaṇapati). Traditionally it is suggested that there are thirty-two different forms of Gaṇeśa Each form has slight differences: different numbers of arms, holding different objects and making different gestures. These variations symbolise different aspects of this deity. There is a visual or symbolic grammar to these variations, which convey slightly different meanings.
For example, this representation Tṛyakṣara Gaṇeśa portrays him holding a noose in one hand which signifies pulling a devotee towards the truth and a goad in his other that symbolises persuading devotees to avoid attachment to the material world.
Images from John A Grimes: Ganapati: Song of the Self. State University of New York Press
There is a reason that I have chosen to begin with the elephant headed deity Gaṇeśa. He is regarded as the remover of obstacles. For example, attachment to the material world is regarded as an obstacle to salvation and, as his goad symbolises, Gaṇeśa can help the aspirant develop non-attachment. On a more mundane level, Gaṇeśa is often worshipped at the start of a new venture, such as setting off on a journey, and consequently Gaṇeśa is associated with beginnings.
The other important point that Eck makes, in the short quotation above, is that the images of the deities are invariably linked to the mythic narratives of the Hindu traditions. When a Hindu sees an image they are often reminded of a narrative and when they hear a myth they envision an image.
An Abundance of Deities
There are numerous gods and goddesses in Hinduism . Tradition suggests that there are 330 million deities. Whilst this figure is mentioned in a Hindu text, it does not refer to an actual number. Nobody has catalogued or actually counted the deities. Some of these deities, such as Śiva and Viṣṇu, have a significance for most, if not all, Hindus whilst others are very local. The mythic narratives of most of the major deities of the Hindu pantheon can be found in a canon of texts known as the Purāṇas – ‘Ancient Tales’.
Many of the deities have different forms. For example, Śiva is traditionally said to have 108 different forms. Viṣṇu is represented in many different ways, but is most commonly associated with his avatāras, which translates as ‘descent’ and more or less means incarnations. It is generally accepted that there are ten avatāras of Viṣṇu.
The ten avatāras
Viṣṇū is depicted in the centre, surrounded anticlockwise from the top lefthand corner:
- Matsya – the fish
- Kūrma – the tortoise
- Varāha – the boar
- Narasimha – the man-Lion
- Vāmana – the dwarf
- Paraśurāma
- Rāma
- Kṛṣṇa
- Buddha
- Kalki – has not yet appeared, but will arrive on a white horse to announce the end of this cycle of time.
Iconographically Viṣṇu is frequently depicted holding a mace, a conch and a discus.
The mythic narratives associated with these avatāras are primarily associated with the restoration of dharma. This is a complex Hindu concept that has no equivalent term in English. Broadly it has connotations of righteousness, order, virtue and duty. Many of the narratives of Viṣṇu’s avatāras take the form of Viṣṇu defeating asuras (demons) who represent chaos and immorality (adharma). The most popular of the avatāras are Rāma and Kṛṣṇa.
Rāma
The story of Rāma is found in the mythic narrative The Rāmāyaṇa. This epic tale tells the story of how Rāma rescues his wife Sītā who has been kidnapped by the ten headed demon Rāvaṇa. Common iconographic representations of Rāma depict him with a bow and standing with his brother Lakṣmana and Sītā. The monkey god Hanumān, who helps Rāma defeat Rāvaṇa, kneels at their feet.
Hanumān, because he represents the ideal devotee, is frequently depicted with Rāma and Sītā in his heart.
Kṛṣṇa
My photo
I see you with no beginning, no middle, no end, infinite in power, with countless arms, with the sun and the moon for eyes, flaming fire for eyes, scorching this universe with your radiance.
Bhagavad Gītā 11:19
Tales of Kṛṣna can be found in a number of narratives, but is perhaps most widely known for his exploits in another epic called the Mahābhārata – which tells of a civil war between the evil Kauravas and the virtuous Pāṇdavas. In this epic narrative Kṛṣṇa is the charioteer for Arjuna – the chief of the Pāṇdavas. Before the decisive battle between the Pāndavas and the Kauravas commences, Arjuna requests Kṛṣṇa to take the chariot between the opposing armies. In this pause before combat, Kṛṣṇa explains to Arjuna why the battle must be fought.
This short didactic passage is known as the Bhagavad Gītā – ‘Song of God’. In this text, Arjuna, who has only encountered Kṛṣṇa in human form, requests him to reveal his divine form. The text describes Arjuna as being totally overwhelmed by Kṛṣṇa’s divine form, which is known as Viśvarūpa. This revelation of Kṛṣṇa’s divine form in chapters 10 and 11 of the Bhagavad Gītā is a fantastic description of what Rudolph Otto calls the numinous. It is recorded that J. Robert Oppenheimer quoted a verse from the Bhagavad Gītā in which Kṛṣna announces: ‘Now I have become Death, the Destroyer of worlds’ (Bhagavad Gītā 11:32), when the first trial of the atom bomb was exploded in the desert of New Mexico.
Iconographically Kṛṣṇa, as Viśvarūpa, is represented with multiple arms, and heads – including the identifiable heads of other deities, such as Śiva and Ganeśa. Often, there is also a much smaller representation of Arjuna and Kṛṣṇa in the chariot depicted in front of the overwhelming divine manifestation. In one shrine that I visited the image of Viśvarūpa was surrounded by mirrors, so that the multiple reflections appeared as extending infinitely.
There are many other iconographic depictions of Kṛṣṇa, derived from the many mythic narratives about him. For example, one of the most common depictions is Kṛṣṇa Gopāla – Kṛṣṇa the Cowherd.
Formal and Informal Images
There are both formal and informal images of deities. By formal, I mean images that are made according to strict conventions that indicate proportions, posture, number of arms and what sacred objects are held. These conventions are detailed in Hindu texts. One such text suggests:
Only an image made in accordance with the canon can be called beautiful; some may think that beautiful which corresponds to their own fancy, but that not in accordance with the canon is unlovely to the discerning eye.
Eck 1985: 51–52
Formal images (mūrti) of Kṛṣṇa and his consort Rādhā installed in a temple.
(My photo)
These formal images are installed in temples. Images that are ritually installed in temples are referred to as mūrti – this term literally means ‘form’. The implication is that the images are regarded as manifestations of the deity, and are not simply symbolic representations. Consequently, when Hindus go to the temple they describe it as darśan – this translates more or less as ‘sacred sight’. This concept suggests that the Hindu devotee both sees and is seen by the deity manifested in the image.
Whilst we can analyse the minutiae of the symbolism of Hindu iconography, most Hindus do not do this. The concept of darśan is much more significant than any analytic deconstruction of the symbolism of the image. I once went to a temple dedicated to a form of Vishnu known as Venkateswara or Balaji, which is one of the most visited temples in India. Between 40,000 and 80,000 pilgrims visit this temple every day. I waited in the queue for 5 hours to get to the main shrine but was in the temple for less than a couple of minutes, as eager pilgrims were pushing from behind. I was a bit disappointed, but realised that none of the devotees were disheartened, as they had had darśan of Balaji
Informal images tend to be much more rudimentary, and can simply be very roughly carved rocks painted in vermillion. These more informal images can be found in wayside shrines. However, just like the more formal temple images these are incorporated into the everyday religious practice of Hindus.
An image of Hanumān in a small shrine in Banares
(My photo)
Iconic and Aniconic Representations
The gods and goddesses of Hinduism are depicted in numerous ways. For example the most common representations of Śiva are:
Śiva as Lord of Yoga
Seated on a tiger skin and holding a trident and drum. The objects and the way in which Śiva is depicted represent renunciation of the material world.
Śiva’s Family
With his consort Pārvatī and sons Ganeśa and Skanda.
Also his mount the bull Nandi is frequently depicted in this representation of Śiva
Śiva as Lord of the Dance (Naṭarāja)
Here Śiva represents both creation and destruction. In his upper right hand he holds the drum which symbolises the beat of creation and in his upper left hand he holds a flame that signifies destruction. In other words this form of Śiva can be understood as a metaphysical diagram that visually illustrates the Hindu idea that there is a never ending cycle of the creation and destruction of the cosmos. See my post on Metaphysical Diagrams.
The images that I have discussed so far are often described as iconic as they are all figurative. That is they reference the real world. These iconic images are anthropomorphic (in human form), theriomorphic (in animal form) or composite (such as the image of Ganeśa). However, the sacred is also often represented in abstract or aniconic ways.
A shrine with Śiva liṅga. At the back is a poster with anthropomorphic representations of Śiva and Pārvatī juxtaposed with a liṅga. In other words this poster combines both the iconic and aniconic representations of Śiva and Śaktī
By far the most common representation of Śiva is a rounded pillar known as a liṅga.. You will find liṅga in all Śiva temples. These abstract images, of which the liṅga is the most common are described as aniconic. Other examples of aniconic representations of the sacred are the mandalas and yantras that I discussed in an earlier post.
The liṅga is actually a complex metaphysical diagram. It is composed of two parts – the pillar that represents the male principle (Śiva) and the pedestal (yoni) which represents the female principle (Śaktī). It is sometimes suggested that the liṅga is a phallic symbol. However, most Hindus do not see the liṅga as either a metaphysical diagram or a phallic symbol but perceive it to be a form of Śiva. The liṅga is also associated with a mythic narrative in which Śiva manifests as a pillar of light.
Yes, but how many gods really?
It is not uncommon to hear Hindus suggest that there is in fact only one god, but that this god has many different forms. The many deities, such as Śiva and Viṣṇu, are said to be the sacred ‘with attributes’ (saguṇa). However there is also an underlying sacred reality that transcends all forms (nirguṇa). This fundamental reality, which is regarded as the ground of all being is often referred to as Brahman – not to be confused with Brahmā, the creator deity. Brahman, both pervades yet also transcends all phenomenal existence. A common metaphor suggests that the relationship between Brahman and creation is analogous to the relationship between clay, which has no form, and particular things that are formed from clay. The great Hindu philosopher Śankara (8–9 century CE) suggests:
All modifications of clay, such as a jar, which are always accepted as the mind as real, are (in reality) nothing but clay. Similarly, this entire universe which is produced from the real Brahman, is Brahman itself and Nothing but That.
Cited in Jacobs 2010: 14
Another common idea is known as the Trimūrti – ‘three forms’. In this view Brahmā is associated with creation of the cosmos, Viṣṇu with its preservation and Śiva with destruction. Although Viṣṇu and Śiva are extremely popular deities, there are for example numerous representations and temples dedicated to both Śiva and Viṣṇu, there are only six temples dedicated to Brahmā in India. Furthermore, the most frequent depiction of Brahmā is of him revealed seated in a lotus that emerges from Viṣṇu’s navel. This suggests that Brahmā is secondary to Viṣṇu. Also, as we have seen with the image of Natarāja, Śiva is associated with both the manifestation and dissolution of the created cosmos.
The Trimūrti: Visṇu flanked by Śiva and Brahmā
There are far more temples and images to various forms of the goddess, commonly referred to as Devī, than to Brahmā. Consequently, many commentators suggest that this profusion of deities can be divided into three categories – deities associated with Viṣṇu, those connected with Śiva, and the various manifestations of Devī. However, the boundaries between these three categories are not clear cut. For example, goddesses are often represented as consorts, and therefore ancillary to the male deities.
Goddesses
Ardhanārīśvara:
There are also of various composite representations of male and female deities. For example, Ardhanārīśvara depicts Śiva and Pārvatī as a single figure – signifying that the sacred includes and transcends both genders
Goddesses are also portrayed as independent, and worshiped in their own right. Lakṣmī, also known as Śri, is often represented on her own and has her own temples. Lakṣmī is associated with wealth. She is often pictured as seated or standing on a lotus.
Lakṣmī is represented as a benevolent goddess. Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty identifies these auspicious and nurturing female deities as ‘goddesses of the breast’
Lakṣmī
Kālī
Doniger O’Flaherty contrasts these benevolent goddesses with the dangerous and erotic goddesses which she characterizes as ‘goddesses of the tooth’ (Doniger O’Flaherty 1982: 90–91). The exemplar of this fearsome category of goddesses is Kālī, depicted as black or blue skinned, with a lolling tongue, holding a decapitated head and wearing a skirt of severed arms. She is often depicted as standing on the body of Śiva. In this depiction Śiva is represented as inert and Kālī is the active feminine principle Śakti. This image reverses the polarity of the liṅgam as it represents the feminine principle as dominant.
It is all rather confusing!
Apart from the terminology and names, Hindu iconography can all seem rather bewildering and confusing. Certainly, I found this abundance of imagery rather baffling when I first travelled to India. Hindu iconography can be confusing in two interconnected ways – visually/aesthetically and philosophically/theologically.
Visual and Aesthetic Disparities
Hindu art has developed different conventions from western art. Although in the 19th century Western art conventions did influence the way that Hindu deities were depicted, particularly in the colourful print lithographs that became popular from the late 19th century. Early travellers, and even more recent appraisals often misconstrue Hindu visual culture.
In his fascinating exploration of European reactions to Indian Art – Partha Mitter observes that:
[European] travellers preferred to trust what they had been taught to expect instead of trusting their own eyes
Mitter 1977: 2
Europeans tended to dismiss Hindu iconography as idolatrous superstition at best, and often regarded the Hindu reverence for icons as devil worship.
Jörge Breu: The Idol of Calicut 1516. This woodcut by Breu, who never visited India, is based on an account by the Italian traveller Ludovico di Varthema (1470–1517), who described the significance of images in Hindu temples as ‘devil worship’. This image clearly does not portray any Hindu icon, but represents a European perception of a Hindu icon.
Philosophical and Theological Disparities
Hindu worldviews are very different to the worldviews that developed in Europe. Whilst this is rather an oversimplification Western world views run along a spectrum between ‘scientism’ and ‘religion’.
- Scientism is the belief that there is no transcendent reality. It emphasises notions of objectivity, observation, measurement, rationality and human ingenuity. Ultimately, with enough perseverance all phenomena can be explained scientifically.
- Religion in Europe is primarily monotheistic. This includes Judaism, Christianity and Islam. All of these traditions tend to focus on texts and words.
What both scientism and monotheistic traditions share is a linear concept of time. In ‘scientism’ this manifest as the idea of progress and in the monotheistic traditions this manifests as the notion of creation and a conception of end times.
Hinduism, because of its multiplicity of deities, seems to be a polytheistic tradition. However, we have to be very careful with this term as it tends to be used in a derogatory way and is often associated with idolatry. As we have seen with the philosophy of Śankara, not all forms of Hinduism can be classified as polytheistic. Also, many Hindus also interpret the many deities as different facets of one supreme God, and this could resemble monotheism. This challenge has led some scholars to coin new terms to describe the Hindu worldview. The renowned scholar Max Müller (1823–1900) suggested the term ‘henotheism’ which means a belief in multiple deities, but one of which is regarded as being the greatest. The image of Viśvarūpa seems to support Müller’s idea. However, ultimately all these terms are also problematic.
What really distinguishes the Hindu (and Buddhist) worldviews from Western worldviews is that it is based on a cyclical view of time. This cyclical worldview exists on:
- A cosmological level as the continuous succession of the manifestation and dissolution of the cosmos in vast cycles of time. This is iconographically represented by the image of Śiva Natarāj.
- The individual level as the cycle of life, death and rebirth.
Conclusion
An image of Śiva at a wayside shrine near Rishikesh
The proliferation of images in the Hindu traditions can seem bewildering as they are visual interpretations of very different worldviews to European ideas and visual culture. Nonetheless, we can learn a great deal about Hindu worldviews through a study of its images. However as well as analysing the symbolism of Hindu icons, we must also investigate the ways that these images are integrated into the everyday religious practices of Hindus. We also have to understand that Hindus themselves will interpret these images in a range of different ways.
References
Davis, R.H. (2012) Gods in Print: Masterpieces of India’s Mythological Art. San Rafael CA: Mandala Publishing
Doniger O’Flahery, W. (1982) Women, Androgynes, and Other Mythical Beasts. University of Chicago Press.
Eck, D. (1985) Darśan: Seeing the Divine Image in India. Chambersburg PA: Anima Books.
Grimes, J.A. (1995) Ganapati: Song of the Self. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Jacobs, S. (2010) Hinduism Today. London: Continuum.
Mitter, P. (1977) Much Maligned Monsters: A History of European Reactions to Indian Art. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Useful Sources
Blurton, T.R. (1992) Hindu Art. London: British Museum.
Whilst rather dated now, Blurton’s book is still useful. It takes an historical approach to Hindu iconography. There are some
wonderful illustrations.
Davis, R.H. (2012) Gods in Print: Masterpieces of India’s Mythological Art. San Rafael CA: Mandala Publishing.
This beautifully illustrated book explores the development of the colourful prints of the Hindu deities. There is a very useful
Introductory essay by Richard H. Davis.
Eck, D. (1985) Darśan: Seeing the Divine Image in India. Chambersburg PA: Anima Books.
This short book is still the definitive account of how images are incorporated in the religious lives of Hindus.
Elgood, E. (2000) Hinduism and the Religious Arts. London: Cassell.
Probably the best overview of Hindu iconography.
Flueckiger, J.B. (2015) Families of Deities. In Flueckiger Everyday Hinduism. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 18–45.
This chapter is a really comprehensive and accessible overview of the multiplicity of Hindu deities. Flueckiger’s book is an
excellent introduction to Hinduism
Waghorne, J.P. & Cutler, N. (eds.) (1996) Gods of Flesh, Gods of Stone: The Embodiment of Divinity in India. New York:
Columbia University Press.
A fascinating collection of essays on the Hindu perception of how the sacred manifests in images and people (gurus). The
essays on images discuss not only the use of images, but also the creation of sacred images. These ethnographic essays
provide specific examples of the ideas discussed in more general terms in Diana Eck’s book.
