A rare Kālabhairava sculpture is preserved in the Siva temple of Thirutturaippūṇḍi village in Tamil Nadu. It is a stone sculpture of Gajasamhāra mūrthi assignable to the time of Kulottuṅga Chola in circa 1200 CE. It has many rare features not noticed in sculptures of Tamil Nadu. The God is shown with three heads and ten arms standing with his right leg planted on the head of an elephant while the left leg is lifted to waist height and turned to the right almost in the pose of dancing. The front pair of arms are lifted high and hold the skin of the elephant and the next immediate pair of arms hold abhaya mudra with the right hand and the left in pose pointing down. The other three right arms hold a bow, a bell and a sword while the upper left arms hold damaru, gada and khatvānga. The god wears a long garland of bells. The skin of the elephant is being torn and what is seen coiled intestines of the animal. inside the leg are the ribs of the elephant. Beneath the ribs on the right side is seen the coiled intestines of the animal.The front central face has a sharp nose, protruding teeth, raised eyebrows, with the third eye which appears as a rounded ball. The right and left faces are like the front face except that they face the sides. The raised jaṭa maṇḍala is spread like a circular halo behind the head. There is nakra? kuṇḍala on the right and patra kuṇḍala on the left.An Image of seated Ganeśa with four arms and a four armed deity probably Subrahmaṇya are seen on the right and left of the elephant's skin on top. To the left of the skin by the side of the leg is seen goddess Pārvatī with a high Jaṭāmakuṭa and two arms. The goddess holds a flower in her right arm and a child on the left arm. In between the deity and the elephant is seen a Goddess seated on a pedestal with four arms who resembles Maheśvari. The head of the elephant is treated beautifully. To the right of the leg of the lord immediately close to the head of the elephant is seen a standing figure with four arms who looks like a Kshetrapāla with his dog standing behind him. A fairly depicted seen a figure with hands folded in añjali and his hair tied like a bun above the head. In between the folded hand and body is sword tucked in. The figure has a close resemblance to the portrait of the Chola king Kulottuṅga III known from elsewhere. This would suggest that the sculpture was a royal consecration.I may draw attention to a Tamil Tēvāram verse of Śaiva saint Appar (600 CE) which refers to the samhāra of the elephant demon Gajāśura by lord Śiva 4th book addressed to Thirucchērai. The verse refers to the skinning of the elephant demon. Śiva, wielding a terrifying sharp trident and bursting damaruka drum in his hand tore the elephant demon as Kāla Bhairava and as he noticed Pārvatī trembling with fear at the situation laughed as if his mouth will break. The verse makes it clear that the destroyer of the elephant demon was Kāla Bhairava Śiva, which has received the attention in South India.விரித்தபல்கதிர்கொள்சூலம், வெடிபடுதமருகம், கைதரித்துஓர்கோலகாலபயிரவன்ஆகி, வேழம்உரித்து, உமைஅஞ்சக்கண்டு, ஒண்திருமணிவாய்விள்ளச்சிரித்து, அருள்செய்தார் - சேறைச்செந்நெறிச்செல்வனாரே.viritta palkatir koḷ cūlam, veṭipaṭu tamarukam, kaitarittu ōr kōla kālapayiravaṉ āki, veḻamurittu, umai añcak kaṇṭu, oṇ tiru maṇivāy viḷḷaccirittu, aruḷceytār - ceṟaic cenneṟic celvaṉāreIn another verse also Appar refers to the same exploit of Śiva who tore the skin of the Elephant and even as blood was flowing he spreads out the skin and wore the same a garment. Umā looked at terrified and laughed (at Thiruppayarrur, 4 book) Evidently th form of Gajāśura vadha was well known in the south.In the northern part of India the Gajasamhāra episode is well known but it seems to a part of Andhkāśura vadha episode. In sculptural representation we find the main figure is shown as Andhakāśura samhara piercing the body of the Aśura with a relation. In such portrayals Śiva holds the Elephant in two of his upper hands. This suggest that the skin of the elephant preceded Andhakāśura vadha and so is connected with the exploits of seven mothers. When Śiva destroyed the elephant it was his amsa a part of power came out as Bhairava and killed the elephant. The Bhairava is said to have merged Śiva and then Śiva is said to have proceeded to annihilate Andhakāśura.
CHAPTER-20 The Kandariya Mahādeva Temple at Khajuraho:A Temple of theBhairava Śaiva School
This paper argues that the famous temple of Kandariya Mahādeva at Khajuraho (Fig. 1) followed theBhairavaschool of .aivism, in its lay out and philosophy, based on some salient features that tally with the Bhairava-tantra. This view is radically different from two prominent views suggested so far: one by Pramod Chandra1, who advocated that the temple followed the Kāpāla system, and the other by Devangana Desai2, who suggested that it followed the Siddhānta school. The latter view has the advantage of citing some textual basis for its identification while the former by Pramod Chandra does not cite any textual authority but is based on contextual impression alone.It is well known that theBhairavaschool was a very dominant sub-school among the six .aiva subschools, namely Śaivam, Vāmam, Pāśupatam, Bhairavam, Mahāvratam, and Kālāmukham mentioned in many Āgamas.3 The Ajitāgama, f or example, speaks of six systems of .aivam that are considered the inner group of Śaivism (Ābhyantaram).4śaivam pāśupatam vāmam bhairavam ca mahāvratam,kālāmukham iti khyātam antaḥ-samaya-ṣaṭakamAmong the six schools, Śaivam is classified as Śuddha Śaiva school (Pure Śaivam),5 (p.3) while other schools like Pāśupata are called impure Śaivam (Aśuddha Śaivam). A different classification was also known as in the case of the Kāpāla school which was originally considered a separate school, but was later on regarded as a branch of the Kālā-mukha school (and not as a separate school in the Ajitāgama).6The six systems, Vāma, Bhairava, Mahāvrata, Kālāmukha, Pāśupata, and Kāpāla were grouped into the “six systems” but of the impure class; the the Śaiva, which stood separate from all these, was the śuddha or saumya school (benign school) or what may be called Siddhānta Śaivam that followed texts like the Kāmikāgama. This school laid emphasis on pursuit of knowledge (jñāna) rather than on other methods and so was called Jñānānta like the Upaniṣadic school of the Vedāntins.TheBhairavaschool was also called Dakṣiṇa school with four branches. The following are the four tantras they followed and the deities which they propitiated with each.The Acintya-viśva-sā[sa?]dākhya-āgama gives the following divisions among the Śaivas. The Vāma school was divided into the Eastern school, the Western school, and the Beginningless school (Pūrva, Paścima, and Anādi). TheBhairavawas divided into four (as stated earlier). Then we have Mahāvrata, Kālāmukha, Kāpāla and Pāśupata, which are separate schools. Śaiva itself had four branches. Probably this refers to the four schools headed by four sages - Kāśyapa, Kauśika, Gautama, and Bharadvāja.7 The Siddhānta system had two branches, namely the Karmānta school emphasizing rituals, and the Jñānānta school emphasizing knowledge; the latter school is sometimes also called Vedānta Siddhānta Samarasa school.8vāmam tu trividham proktam anādiḥ pūrva paścimam,caturvidham dakṣiṇam syāt mahāvratam ataḥ paramkālāmukham ca kāpālam tadvat pāśupatam bhavetśaivam caturvidham proktam siddhāntam dvividham bhavetFrom these citations it is evident that generally the Śaiva system was divided into Raudra (wild) and Saumya (peaceful) schools - the former using meat, fish (matsya), drinks etc., the latter advocating pure vegetarian approach.Depending upon the texts used one may consider whether a temple belonged to the Siddhānta school or to the other school. If one is to accept Devangana Desai, who has argued in favour of the Siddhānta school, the Kandariya Mahādeva temple at Khajuraho should be brought under the Saumya branch9 (Desai 1996: 51-52).The present study takes four features of this temple and uses a well known text of theBhairavaschool to examine its affiliation. The following are the features examined in this case: (1) The distribution of the Saptamātṛkās on the base (adhiṣṭhāna) of niches; (2) The presence of two Bhairava sculptures in the inner ambulatory (āvaraṇa) of the temple; (3) The portrayal of three main images in the niches of the bhadra projections of the main sanctum; (4) the portrayal of a four-legged seated image with multiple heads identified as Sadāśiva Catuṣ-pāda-mūrti.The text I have taken up for a comparative study is the Svacchanda-Bhairava-tantra, also called Svacchanda-lalita-Bhairava-tantra, Svacchanda-Bhairava-mahā-tantra or simply Svacchanda-tantra10. It was a popular text and has a lovely commentary by Kṣemarāja, a disciple of the famous Abhinavagupta Ācārya of Kashmir. The text is therefore earlier than the 10th century.TheBhairavaschool is sometimes called Dakṣiṇa school and considered to be very close to the Vāma Siddhānta, so much so that there is some overlapping between these two schools. The Yāmala school which gives importance to the worship of the Saptamātṛkās is called a mixed school.vāmam hi śāmbhavam śāstram dakṣiṇam bhairavātmakam,miśram yāmalam ity uktam Saptamātṛ pradhānakam11The Suprabhedāgama holds that theBhairavaschool used madhu (wine), matsya (fish), māmsa (meat) etc., and was not admitted in the inner school of the Siddhāntins.vāmam ca dakṣiṇam caitad dvayor miśrakam tathā,śaivāḥ bāhyārtham ākhāyatāḥ śaivāḥ api na pūjitāµ12The Bhairava-tantra is believed to have emanated from the upper face of Īśāna, while .aiva emanated from the eastern face, Kālāmukha came out of the southern face; the western face taught the Pāśupata system and the northern face expounded the Mahā-vrata. The supremacy ofBhairavais thus established by claiming the top (ūrdhva) face. It is seen that all schools claim that their system was taught by the Īśāna face, that is the top face.MātṛkāsThe term Mātṛkā in theBhairavatheology is used in two senses. Mātṛkās are the phonetic syllables through which words and sentences are formed to convey meanings. Since phonetic syllables have powers to convey meaning, either by themselves or in combination with other syllables, they are said to possess powers potential śaktis; the basic śaktis make human beings understand. So the mātṛkā - syllables are called the primary śaktis like mothers from whom meanings are born. The alphabets and consonants in Sanskrit language are grouped into vargas (or gaṇas) such as “a” — varga, “ka” — varga, “ca” — varga, “ṭa” — varga, “tha” — varga, “pa” — varga, “ya” — varga, and “sa” — varga. There are thus eight groups which are also deified as śaktis and called mātṛkās.13The other meaning of the term mātṛkā stands for the deities, the seven goddesses (Saptamātṛkās) called Brāhmī, Māheśvarī, Kaumārī, Vaiṣṇavī, Vārāhī, Indrāṇī, and Cāmuṇḍā.14 To this list of seven is added Mahālakṣmī who is the eighth mother (aṣṭamātṛkās). The āgamas identify the śaktis of the phonetic syllables with the Saptamātṛkās.The Svacchanda-Bhairava-tantra begins the visualization of the Supreme principle, the Svacchanda Bhairava, with eight Mātṛkās as the base over which the whole divine imagery is built up. In doing so it lists Mahālakṣmī, Kamalodbhavā (Brāhmī), Māheśvarī, Kaumārī, Nārāyaṇī (Vaiṣṇavī), Vārāhī, Aindrī and Cāmuṇḍā. This circle of goddesses is invoked (like the alphabets which are the life force of verbal communication) in the worship of the Svacchanda-Bhairava. The “A” varga (alphabets) is identical with Mahālakṣmī, the supreme deity or parā devatā. The other seven are to be invoked in seven directions as Brāhmī (east), Māheśvarī in Īśāna (northeast), Kaumārī (northwest), Vaiṣṇavī (west), Vārāhī (southwest), Aindrī (south), and Cāmuṇḍā (southeast; Fig. 2). This assignment of different directions for the Saptamātṛkās in the Svacchanda-Bhairava is thus extremely important.The Saptamātṛkās are enshrined in the niches of the base (adhiṣṭhāna) in an order in the Kandariya Mahādeva, to indicate that they are the base of the edifice, namely the temple. The last varga of the syllables ends with “kṣa”. So, “kṣa-kāra”. that culminates the phonetic order is identified with Bhairavī., the Samhāra-rūpiṇī.15 This syllable construct is called vidyāpīṭha in the worship of Bhairava. The adhiṣṭhāna of the temple is the vidyāpīṭha.In the Kandariya Mahādeva the Saptamātṛkās are distributed on the base to form the vidyāpīṭha, the base of knowledge. They are found distributed and located in different directions and are not grouped and placed in one shrine or direction. The Saptamātṛkās are located in one sub-shrine in the southern direction in the southern part of India, particularly Tamilnadu (also in western India), as in the case of the Kailāsanātha temple of Kāñchipuram, the great temple of Tanjore, and several hundred temples spread over the region.The distribution of the Saptamātṛkās on the base of the temple as a pīṭha over which the supreme edifice is built seems to be an influence of the Svacchanda-tantra. Cāmuṇḍā, Indrāṇī and Vārāhī appear on the south of the temple; Nārāyaṇī appears on the west and Brāhmī, Māheśvarï and Kaumārī on the north of the Khajuraho temple of Kandariya. As north is the direction of Brahmā in the worship of the Svacchanda-Bhairava, Brāhmī takes her place in the north. Viṣṇu occupies the west and appropriately Nārāyaṇī is located in the western niche; Cāmuṇḍā, the Kālī-samhāra-rūpiṇī, takes her side on the south at the end (Fig. 2). The location of the Saptamātṛkās in different directions, described by earlier scholars as “reverse order”, is in fact the prescribed order in the Bhairava-tantra.It is known that the Viśvanātha temple of the same place built by Dhaṅga at Khajuraho is chronologically earlier than the Kandariya Mahādeva temple. The distribution of the Saptamātṛkās in the Viśvanātha temple exhibits the same pattern as in the Kandariya Mahādeva temple. They appear in niches on the base of the temple in different directions in order and constitute the “vidyāpīṭha”. of the Bhairava school, over which the body of the supreme is visualized.I may also mention that in the Viṣṇu temple of Lakṣmaṇa at the same place, a large number of images of goddesses in various manifestations are noticed. The following goddesses, namely (1) Caṇikā, (2) Pārvatī, (3) Tripurā, (4) Ambā, (5) Kṣemaṅkarī, (6) Mahiṣāsuramardinī, (7) Lakṣmī, (8) Gaurī, (9) Sarasvatī, are found in the ambulatory around the sanctum. In other words, the supreme manifestation of Viṣṇu is also visualized as surrounded by the manifestations of Parāśakti. The concept of Śakti is thus basic to the temple of Viṣṇu at Khajuraho; it also needs to be kept in mind while discussing the religious ethos of the site.To this list, I may add that the temple of 64 Yoginīs, which is considered the earliest at the site at Khajuraho, points to the overwhelming presence of the Bhairava-Śākta tradition in Khajuraho. Desai points out16 that the 64 Yoginī temple continued to be in active worship even in the 11th century (when the Lakṣmaṇa temple was built). That the Bhairava-Śākta philosophy was a part of the Khajuraho group of temples is unquestionable.Bhairavas in Khandariya TempleThe second point that requires attention is the occurrence of more than two Bhairava images in the ambulatory of the Kandariya Mahādeva temple. Two sculptures of Bhairava are found in situ in the niches of the ambulatory. Devangana Desai describes these two Bhairava (1996: figs. 18 and 24). A number of niches are also empty and some contain images of Śiva and Pārvatī identified as Umā-Maheśvara.Like the case of the syllabic mātrikās, the Svacchanda-Bhairava-tantra speaks of eight Bhairava as mantra-devatās.17 They are listed as Kapālīśa, Sikhivāhana, Krodharāja, Vikarāla, Manmatha, Meghanāda, Someśvara, and Vidyārāja. These eight Bhairavas are called Parivāras.18 As two Bhairavas are present, and a number of other niches enshrine either Śiva images with consorts or are empty, we may presume that there were originally eight Bhairavas around the ambulatory as Parivāras. Otherwise, the presence of two Bhairavas in the ambulatory cannot be properly explained.Manmatha BhairavaThere is an interesting image identified as Brahmā by Krishna Deva but as Sadyojāta by Devangana Desai. ABhairavaimage is found on the other side and in between is the image identified as Sadāśivacatuṣpāda (partly visible in Fig. 4). The image identified as Sadyojāta might represent one of the eight Bhairavas, named Manmatha, with his consort. The Aṣṭa Bhairavas are in a sense manifestations of the Supreme Bhairava himself in his reduced potency (Bhairava-raśmi-puñcānās [sic]).19 According to the Svacchanda-Bhairava-tantra they can all have five faces. In the present case the figure shows three faces, the fourth must be at the back as in the case of Brahmā and the fifth is not shown. It in all likelihood represents Manmatha Bhairava, one of the eight Bhairavas. He should face west according to the text.20A point of importance mentioned by the Svacchanda-Bhairava text is that the Lokapālas (Dikpālas) should all be visualized as Bhairavas.Three Samāra forms of ŚivaAnother point which probably suggests theBhairavacult association is the distribution of three samhāra aspects of Śiva in the three principal niches of the main sanctum wall of the Kandariya Mahādeva temple. The main niche in the south houses Andhakāśuravadha-mūrti (Fig. 3), which is a form of Bhairava, as is well known. At the back of the sanctum is the Samhāra-tāṇḍava of Śiva and on the northern side is the Tripura-samhāra form of Śiva. These three images of Samhāra-mūrtis reflect the personality of the main deity enshrined inside the sanctum - the Liṅga. It is thus clearly the samhāra aspect that is emphasized.This may be contrasted with most of the temples of Tamilnadu, where the saumya form of the Śaiva Siddhānta was preferred. The main niches around the sanctum portray Dakṣṇā-mūrti in the south, Liṅgodbhava or Viṣṇu (or occasionally Ardhanārī) at the back facing west, and Brahmā facing north. The Śaiva Siddhānta followed in the Tamil country emphasized Jñānānta Śaivam. The images are also saumya forms but since Khajuraho portrays the samhāra aspect, the form of the underlying philosophy was raudra in nature.Vidyārāja BhairavThe last important point that requires elucidation is the so-called Sadāśiva-catuṣpāda (Fig. 4). Devangana Desai has a long discussion on this image and holds that the form of the figure represents Saumya Siddhānta that was prevalent at Khajuraho and almost suggests that it is a crucial image for the identification of the cult at Khajuraho. As I have shown above that it was a raudra school and not a saumya school of Śaivam that was followed at Khajuraho, it is necessary to examine the Bhairava School, the Svacchanda-Bhairava-tantra, to seek identification of this particular sculpture.The sculpture has nine heads and topping all of them is a Liṅga as the crowning element. It has four legs, two in hanging position and two cross-legged in yoga pose. The image is in the northeastern position (Īśāna). I consider that it represents one of the important forms of eight Bhairavas named Vidyārāja, who is described as one with nine forms, who should be adored in the north east (Īśāna).kṣādiḥ yānta samopetaḥ hāntena ādho niyojitaḥbhrāntaḥ vādiḥ lakārāntaḥ ādyo adho-rudra-yojitaḥbindu antantu samāyukta nāda sakti samānvetaḥvidyārāja samākhyātaḥ mahā pātaka nāśanaḥ21Kṣemarāja, the commentator on the Svacchanda-Bhairava text, says:aṣṭam varṇa grahita nādādi vyāptāḥ binduḥ navamaḥ iti ayam navātmā22That Vidyārāja is to be in the northeast is mentioned by the text:vidyā-rājam tathaisānyām vinyaset tu subhāṣitaḥThere is a seated image of Śiva beneath this image which also needs identification. In the Svacchanda-Bhairava there is a reference to Rudra, beneath the Vidyārāja form, and this is mentioned as “bindu adho-rudra yojitaḥ”. Thus we find this rare image seems to correspond to the eighth Parivāra Bhairava called Vidyārāja.The adoration of the Bhairava-Vāma system incorporated the worship of Viṣṇu as Varāha, Narasimha, Kṛṣṇa, and Sudarśana as a part of their own cult especially for attainment of mystic powers (siddhis).Viṣṇu worship as a Tantric Cult in The Rudra-YāmalaThe Rudra-Yāmala is an ancient text dealing mainly with the adoration ofBhairavaand Bhairavī. It is presented as a dialogue between Bhairavī and Bhairava. In the midst of worship ofBhairavait speaks of Kṛṣṇa and Narasimha worship. It calls the chapter on worship of Kṛṣṇa as Kṛṣṇa-sādhana.23bhaktimān hi sādhakendro mahāviṣṇum bhajetyadiśiva tulyo bhavet nātha mama bhakto mahītaleśrī kṛṣṇam jagatīśvaram trijagatām ānanda mokṣātmakamparipūrṇam triguṇāvratam guṇadharma sattvādi daivam paramliṅgodhaṣṭhiti rājya-pāla-puruṣam pañcānana-shāyinamśrīviṣṇum śubhadam jana yadi bhajet lokaḥ sa śaktiīm labhetBy worshipping Kṛṣṇa ones erotic instinct is increased and he becomes the very seed of sexual urge in attractive women, according to this part.ādau kāman visargam kulavadhu niyutam kāma bījam visargam24................Ch.28. v.4The practitioner is said to become Kālikā-putraḥ25 and would be able to quench or eradicate great passion (mahāmoha haraḥ).The text also prescribes the Narasimha mantra in the middle of the dhyāna.26 This chapter is named Kṛṣṇa-sādhana. The practice would enchant all the three worlds (trailokyam mohayet). The next chapter of the text is also devoted to the same cult but interestingly it speaks about worshipping Bhairava as Kṛṣṇa:yo bhajet bhairavam bhuvane sarvago hi saḥkriyā dakṣo mahāvīra vīravallabha bhāvakaḥ27................ Ch.29. v.3The chapter describes Kṛṣṇa as Mukunda. The next chapter which is called Rukminī-melana (uniting with Rukminī) gives a very interesting name for Kṛṣṇa who is called Govinda-śambhu. A study of Viṣṇu’s role in the cult of Bhairava is vast and is fascinating; it shows that the later Caitanya school of Bengal is a direct descendent of the Rudrayāmala school. I confine myself here to the study of the Bhairava-Vāma cult and the Vaiṣṇava tradition. The presence of the Lakṣmaṇa temple and the Vaikuṇṭha cult in the midst of Khajuraho deserve to be viewed in that perspective.Not only the Rudra-yāmala but there are other texts also that confirm this position. For example, the Īśāna-gurudeva-paddhati, a decidedly Śaiva text, is called Tantra-sāra dealing with various forms of Śiva and his attendant deities. From a careful study it is evident that the work is more a collection of incantations to ward of evil diseases, failures etc., in the tantric mode. It also gives a large number of Śākta manifestations and their propitiations, for achieving worldly results, and has Śākta trends inbuilt into it. The author says at many places, the method prescribed in .aiva samaya should be adopted. Describing the Hari-Hara worship in the chapter on Viṣṇu, the author says all rituals should be done as per the Śaiva system.29iti harahari tantram samyak uktam samāsāttadiha sakalam ūhyam karma śaivānusārātI will take up very briefly three aspects from this Tantra. This Śaiva text deals with the worship of Kṛṣṇa like the Rudra-yāmala. Kṛṣṇa is called Gopāla-vigraha, not the child but the grown-up boy accompanied by cowherd girls. He is also called the protector of the three worlds (Trailokya rakṣaṇa).30 (v.19) Different kinds of protection or success are predicted for the worship of Kṛṣṇa in his specific forms. Chapter 34 that deals with this worship is called Aṣṭākṣara-gopāla-adhyāya.The next chapter deals with the worship of Narasimha, also called Nṛkesarī. The worship of Narasimha is meant for the protection of the king and the kingdom (rāja and rāṣtrādi rakṣaṇāya).31 (Ch.35 v.28)Those who pray for conquest in battles should offer special prayers to Narasimha. The chapter goes by the name Narasimha-rasāyanam. Several chants are prescribed which clearly indicate the ferocious nature (raudram) of this worship.Tantric worship of MahāvarāhaThe next but the most important worship prescribed in this Śaiva text is that of the Great Boar, Mahāvarāha, which should be visualized as standing on a lotus pedestal in the form of a boar encompassing within itself all the world, with his head slightly raised and lifting the earth by his spout.trailokya varṇa vapuṣam susthitam paṅkajāsanekiñcit uttāna pottrotta damṣṭra āsina vasundharām32.................Ch.26 v.78The worship of Varāha in the context of Bhairavais of utmost importance for understanding Khajuraho. The text says by worshipping the Varāharāja the devotee will obtain whatever land he wants to obtain. The chants for the worship of Mahāvarāha given in this text indicate the terrific nature of worship.“You Lord of invincible power, Lord of Lords, Nārāyaṇa, thou art the Creator, Protector, and Destroyer of the three worlds! Thou are adored by all the gods. Thou bestow all prayers. Thou destroy all sins! Thou destroy all evil spells let lose on us! Thou destroy all signs! Thou wieldeth all terrific weapons! Destroy all my enimies! Drive them, hit them, kill them, devour them, cut them to pieces! Afflict them, still their movements, destroy all impediments, remove all diseases Roar and Roar, etc., etc.,”“amogha śakte, devādideva, nārārāyana, tribhuvana utpatti, sthiti, laya kartre, sarva praharaṇa āyudhāya, surāśura pujitāya, sarva pāpa pranāśanāya, sarva mantra sphotanāya?, jvala jvala, prajvala, hana hana, chindhi chindhi, māraya māraya, sarva śatrūn vidvamsaya, nāgān modaya?, sarva viṣam daha, sarva rogam paca, trailokyam vasam ānaya, sarvān kāmān ānaya, parvatān cūrnaya, samudrān soṣaya, brahmāṇḍa vāpine, surāśuramayāya puruṣa, garja garja, hum phaṭ, ṭhaṭha ṭhaṭha, etc etc”33In addition, it includes chants addressed to Vāmana, Trivikrama, Narasimha, Vāsudeva and others indicating that the nature of worship of Mahāvarāha is of the terrific nature (raudra). It also shows that the Varāha image and the shrine in front of the Lakṣmaṇa temple at Khajuraho is an independent temple consecrated and worshipped not as a saumya edifice but for achievement of terrific victory. This independent temple thus assumes significance.I may also point out that Madhya Pradesh has many such Varāha temples34 which assume meaning as a result of this Bhairava cult worship. Even the great Varāha at Udayagiri seems to capture the terrific and forceful nature of this trend admirably and its proximity to the excavated Śiva temple with Durgā etc. is in conformity with this trend.Finally I would like to mention that the main images in the bhadra of the sanctum wall of the Lakṣmaṇa temple, which is a Viṣṇu temple, carry Varāha in the south, Narasimha in the west and Hayagrīva in the north. All these images are ferocious (raudra) manifestations indicating that the main image inside in the sanctum is a raudra deity and not a saumya deity. It is known that the Kapila form of Viṣṇu with the Varāha face on one side, the lion face on the other and Kapila at the back was also a ferocious (raudra) manifestation. Devangana Desai35 has mentioned that the temple seems to have been built for achieving victory and thus there is no doubt that it enshrined a raudra system of worship. Evidently the whole complex with the Varāha, Lakṣmaṇa, Viśvanātha, Mārtaṇḍa and Kandariya Mahādeva temples built in the proximity of the 64 Yoginī temple was based or influenced more by theBhairavasystem than the Saumya Śaiva Siddhānta system.From the above discussion it is more appropriate to hold that the Kandariya Mahādeva temple belonged to theBhairavacult. Lastly one word. A large number of temples in Central India (Madhya Pradesh) in close proximity, as at Naresvar, Survaya, Gwalior, Padavali, Badoh Pathari, Terahi, Bhatesvar, Gyaraspur and other places, were following theBhairavacult, the impact of which could not have escaped the region of Khajuraho.References
1.Pramod Chandra, The Kaula Kapalika cult at Khajuraho, Lalit Kala, 1-2, 1955-56
2.Devangana Desai, Religious imagery of Khajuraho, Project for Indian Cultural Studies, 2996
3.Jñānavarana-vilakkam and Mabhāshyam, Dharmapura Adheenam, Vol.I, 1957, p.8
4.Ajitāgama, cited by Velliambalavana tambiran, in Jñānāvarana Vilakkam, Dharmapuram, 1957, p.8 5.
5.Jñanāvarana Vilakkam and Mabhashyam, ibid, p.3
6.Ajităgama cited in Jñānavarana Vilakkam, ibid,
7.Nagaswamy, R., Art and Religion of the Bhairavas, Tamil Arts Academy, Chennai, 2006, Pp. 63-68
8.Nagaswamy, ibid, p.86
9.Devangana Desai, ibid, pp 51-52
10.Svacchanda Bhairava Tantra, with the commentary of Kshemaraja, 5 volumes, Sampurnanand Sanskri Visva Vidyalaya, Varanasi, 1992
11.Jñānāvarana Vilakkam, ibid, p.8
12.Jñānāvarana Vilakkam, ibid, p..49
13.Svacchanda bhairavam, ibid
14.Svacchanda Bhairavam, ibid
15.Svacchandam, ibid
16.Devangana Desai, Ibid, p. 37
17.Svacchandam, ibid, vol I, v.76-85
18.Svacchandam, ibid, vol I, v.86
19.Svacchandam, Vol. I 76
20.Svacchandam, Vol.2. 118
21.Svacchandam, vol. I. 84-86
22.Svacchandam, ibid. vol.II. 119
23.Rudra Yamalam, Ed by Jivananda Vidyasagara Bhattacharya, Calcutta, 1862, Ch 28
29.Īśānagurudeva paddhati, Pt. IV, chapter 54. v. 148
30.Ibid., v.19
31.Ibid., Ch.35.v.28
32.Ibid., Ch. 26. v.72
33.Rudrayamalam, ibid, Pt III, Ch 36, p.235
34.Haripriya Rangarajan, Depiction of Cosmology on Varaha at Khajuraho, in Foundations of Indian Art, Ed. Nagaswamy, R, Tamil Arts Academy, Chennai, 2002.
